Evidence for the Efficacy of Conflict-reducing Practices in Undergraduate Evolution Education in a Randomized Controlled Study.

IF 4.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Rahmi Q Aini, Baylee A Edwards, Alexa Summersill, Casey Epting, Yi Zheng, Sara E Brownell, M Elizabeth Barnes
{"title":"Evidence for the Efficacy of Conflict-reducing Practices in Undergraduate Evolution Education in a Randomized Controlled Study.","authors":"Rahmi Q Aini, Baylee A Edwards, Alexa Summersill, Casey Epting, Yi Zheng, Sara E Brownell, M Elizabeth Barnes","doi":"10.1187/cbe.24-05-0157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Conflict-reducing practices during evolution instruction have been recommended to increase students' perceived compatibility between evolution and religion, increase evolution acceptance, and decrease stereotypes about religious students in science. However, the efficacy of these practices has not been demonstrated in a randomized controlled design making it uncertain whether they are causing the effects reported in less controlled studies. Further, we do not know the extent to which the religious identities of instructors may impact their effectiveness. In this study, we randomly assigned 2623 undergraduate students in 19 biology courses across different states to receive an evolution video with 1) no conflict-reducing practices, 2) conflict-reducing practices implemented by a non-religious instructor, or 3) conflict-reducing practices implemented by a Christian instructor. We found that the evolution videos with conflict-reducing practices led to decreased conflict, increased compatibility, and increased acceptance of human evolution compared with the video without conflict-reducing practices. Further, the Christian and non-religious instructor conditions were equally effective at improving all student outcomes, except the non-religious instructor was more effective for increasing perceived compatibility between religion and evolution among atheist students. These results illustrate that conflict-reducing practices, implemented by either Christian or non-religious instructors, can be effective in a controlled study.</p>","PeriodicalId":56321,"journal":{"name":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","volume":"24 2","pages":"ar27"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.24-05-0157","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Conflict-reducing practices during evolution instruction have been recommended to increase students' perceived compatibility between evolution and religion, increase evolution acceptance, and decrease stereotypes about religious students in science. However, the efficacy of these practices has not been demonstrated in a randomized controlled design making it uncertain whether they are causing the effects reported in less controlled studies. Further, we do not know the extent to which the religious identities of instructors may impact their effectiveness. In this study, we randomly assigned 2623 undergraduate students in 19 biology courses across different states to receive an evolution video with 1) no conflict-reducing practices, 2) conflict-reducing practices implemented by a non-religious instructor, or 3) conflict-reducing practices implemented by a Christian instructor. We found that the evolution videos with conflict-reducing practices led to decreased conflict, increased compatibility, and increased acceptance of human evolution compared with the video without conflict-reducing practices. Further, the Christian and non-religious instructor conditions were equally effective at improving all student outcomes, except the non-religious instructor was more effective for increasing perceived compatibility between religion and evolution among atheist students. These results illustrate that conflict-reducing practices, implemented by either Christian or non-religious instructors, can be effective in a controlled study.

在一项随机对照研究中,本科生进化教育中减少冲突实践的有效性证据。
在进化论教学中减少冲突的实践被推荐用于增加学生对进化论和宗教之间的感知兼容性,增加进化论的接受度,并减少对宗教学生在科学方面的刻板印象。然而,这些做法的有效性尚未在随机对照设计中得到证明,因此不确定它们是否会导致较少对照研究中报告的效果。此外,我们不知道教师的宗教身份可能影响其有效性的程度。在这项研究中,我们随机分配了来自不同州的19门生物学课程的2623名本科生,让他们观看一段进化视频,视频中有1)没有减少冲突的做法,2)由非宗教导师实施的减少冲突的做法,或3)由基督教导师实施的减少冲突的做法。我们发现,与没有减少冲突的视频相比,带有减少冲突实践的进化视频减少了冲突,增加了兼容性,并增加了对人类进化的接受度。此外,基督教和非宗教导师条件在改善所有学生成绩方面同样有效,除了非宗教导师在提高无神论学生的宗教与进化论之间的感知兼容性方面更有效。这些结果表明,在对照研究中,由基督教或非宗教教师实施的减少冲突的做法都是有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cbe-Life Sciences Education
Cbe-Life Sciences Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
13.50%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: CBE—Life Sciences Education (LSE), a free, online quarterly journal, is published by the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB). The journal was launched in spring 2002 as Cell Biology Education—A Journal of Life Science Education. The ASCB changed the name of the journal in spring 2006 to better reflect the breadth of its readership and the scope of its submissions. LSE publishes peer-reviewed articles on life science education at the K–12, undergraduate, and graduate levels. The ASCB believes that learning in biology encompasses diverse fields, including math, chemistry, physics, engineering, computer science, and the interdisciplinary intersections of biology with these fields. Within biology, LSE focuses on how students are introduced to the study of life sciences, as well as approaches in cell biology, developmental biology, neuroscience, biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, genomics, bioinformatics, and proteomics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信