Výuka molekulární biologie na gymnáziích: analýza současného stavu a možnosti její podpory

Vanda Janštová; Martin Jáč

doi:10.14712/18047106.145

Vol. 6 No. 1 (2015): sciED Research Reports

Teaching Molecular Biology at Grammar Schools: Analysis of the Current State and Potential of its Support

Vanda Janštová, ¹ Martin Jáč, ²

Přírodovědecká fakulta Univerzity Karlovy v Praze, Katedra učitelství a didaktiky biologie, Viničná 7, 128 43 Praha 2 a Pedagogická fakulta Univerzity Karlovy v Praze, Katedra biologie a environmentálních studií, M. D. Rettigové 4, 116 39 Praha 1
Pedagogická fakulta Univerzity Palackého v Olomouci, Katedra biologie, Purkrabská 2, 779 00 Olomouc Aktuální korespondenční adresa: Katedra biologie PdF UP, Teoretické ústavy LF UP, Hněvotínská 3, 775 15 Olomouc Telefon: 737 764 819

DOI: https://doi.org/10.14712/18047106.145

PDF (Czech)

How to Cite

Janštová, V., & Jáč, M. (2015). Teaching Molecular Biology at Grammar Schools: Analysis of the Current State and Potential of its Support. Scientia in Educatione, 6(1), 14-39. https://doi.org/10.14712/18047106.145

Download Citation

Abstract

Molecular biology is a very progressive field of science. Moreover, its methods and results are closely connected with our everyday lives. It is therefore crucial to implement this field into grammar school biology curriculum. The first aim of this study was to analyse how the molecular biology content is distributed into different years in School Education Programmes (SEPs) of Czech grammar schools and which molecular biology topics are included and how often. Another aim of the study was to test the comprehensibility and attractiveness of advanced molecular biology laboratory courses for grammar school students. The implementation of molecular biology topics into compulsory and optional biology and chemistry classes in the SEPs of 160 grammar schools was evaluated together with their distribution into different years. The data was analysed by a cluster analysis and subsequent chi-square test for independence. During years 2011–2013, we organized four different types of laboratory courses focused on molecular biology topics. The laboratory courses took place at the Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague or at participating grammar schools and were taught by a university lecturer or a grammar school biology teacher. Students who participated in the courses (n = 466) filled in an evaluation questionnaire at the end of the laboratory exercise. The data was analysed by the analysis of variance. The results indicate that molecular biology topics in the SEPs are mostly included in a single year (usually the last year of compulsory biology and chemistry education). Some of the topics were not included in the majority of compulsory classes and were found mainly in optional classes. The practical laboratory courses were rated very positively by students. Significant differences were found in ratings of different types of courses. Student ratings were also dependent on other variables (lecturer, site of the course). Based on the results, our conclusion is that molecular biology should be implemented in the grammar school curriculum much more with the support of advanced laboratory courses.

References

Adresář škol a školských zařízení – revize 121203 (2014). Praha: Ministerstvo mládeže, školství a tělovýchovy a Ústav pro informace ve vzdělávání. Dostupné z http://stistko.uiv.cz/registr/vybskolrn.asp Search in Google Scholar
Balgopal, M. & Bondy, C. (2011). Antigenic shift and drift. Science Teacher, 78(2), 42–46. Search in Google Scholar
Ben-Nun, B. S., Stolarsky, M. & Yarden, A. (2009). Learning molecular genetics in teacher-led outreach laboratories. Journal of Biological Education, 44(1), 19–25. Search in Google Scholar
Bowling, B., Zimmer, E. & Pyatt, R. E. (2014). Bringing next-generation sequencing into the classroom through a comparison of molecular biology techniques. The American Biology Teacher, 76(6), 396–401. Search in Google Scholar
Byrd, J. J. (2000). Teaching outside the (cereal) box: a molecular genetics activity. The American Biology Teacher, 62(7), 508–511. Search in Google Scholar
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education. New York: Routledge. Search in Google Scholar
Costenson, K. & Lawson, A. E. (1986). Why isn’t inquiry used in more classrooms? The American Biology Teacher, 48(3), 150–158. Search in Google Scholar
Donovan, J. & Venville, G. (2005). A concrete model for teaching about genes and DNA to young students. Teaching Science, 51(4), 29–31. Search in Google Scholar
Drits-Esser, D., Malone, M., Barber, N. C. & Stark, L. A. (2014). Beyond the central dogma. The American Biology Teacher, 76(6), 365–369. Search in Google Scholar
Falteisek, L., Černý, J. & Janštová, V. (2013). Simplified technique to evaluate human CCR5 genetic polymorphism. The American Biology Teacher, 75(9), 704–707. Search in Google Scholar
Franke, G. & Bogner, F. X. (2011). Conceptual change in students’ molecular biology education: tilting at wind mills? Journal of Educational Research, 104(1), 7–18. Search in Google Scholar
Gavora, P. (2010). Úvod do pedagogického výzkumu. Brno: Paido. Search in Google Scholar
Gallagher, S. R., Coon, W., Donley, K., Scott, A. & Goldberg, D. S. (2011). A First attempt to bring computational biology into advanced high school biology classrooms. PLoS Computational Biology, 7(10), e1002244. Search in Google Scholar
Gelbart, H., Brill, G. & Yarden, A. (2009). The impact of a web-based research simulation in bioinformatics on students’ understanding of genetics. Research in Science Education, 39(5), 725–751. Search in Google Scholar
Gelbart, H. & Yarden, A. (2006). Learning genetics through an authentic research simulation in bioinformatics. Journal of Biological Education, 40(3), 107–112. Search in Google Scholar
German, P. J. (1996). Analysis of nine school biology laboratory manuals: promoting scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(5), 475–499. Search in Google Scholar
Gormally, C., Brickman, P., Hallar, B. & Armstrong, N. (2009). Effects of inquiry-based learning on students’ science literacy skills and confidence. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 1–22. Search in Google Scholar
Imperial, S. & Boronat, A. (2005). Determination of the Rh factor: a practical illustrating the use of the polymerase chain reaction. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 33(1), 50–53. Search in Google Scholar
Janík, T., Knecht, P., Najvar, P., Pavlas, T., Slavík, J. & Solnička, D. (2010a). Kurikulární reforma na gymnáziích v rozhovorech s koordinátory pilotních a partnerských škol. Praha: Výzkumný ústav pedagogický v Praze. Search in Google Scholar
Janík, T., Janko, T., Knecht, P., Kubiatko, M., Najvar, P., Pavlas, T., Slavík, J., Solnička, D. & Vlčková, K. (2010b). Kurikulární reforma na gymnáziích – výsledky dotazníkového šetření. Praha: Výzkumný ústav pedagogický v Praze. Search in Google Scholar
Janík, T. & Slavík, J. (2007). Vztah obor–vyučovací předmět jako metodologický problém. Orbis scholae, 2(1), 54–66. Search in Google Scholar
Janštová, V., Pavlasová, L. & Černý, J. (2014). Inquiry based practical course focused on proteins. In Rusek, M. & Stárková, D. (Eds.). Projektové vyučování v přírodovědných předmětech. Praha: Pedagogická fakulta Univerzity Karlovy v Praze. Search in Google Scholar
Kidman, G. (2008). Biotechnology education: topics of interest to students and teachers. In Hamman, M., Reiss, M., Boulter, C. & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (Eds.). Biology in context: learning and teaching for the twenty-first century. London: Institute of Education, University of London. Search in Google Scholar
Kočárek, E. (2004). Genetika. Praha: Scientia. Search in Google Scholar
Lewis, J. & Wood-Robinson, C. (2000). Genes, chromosomes, cell division and inheritance — do students see any relationship? International Journal of Science Education, 22(2), 177–195. Search in Google Scholar
Malacinski, G. M. & Zell, P. W. (1996). Manipulating the “invisible”: learning molecular biology using inexpensive models. The American Biology Teacher, 58(7), 428–432. Search in Google Scholar
Miller, K. R. & Levine, J. S. (2010). Biology (student edition). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. Search in Google Scholar
Ministerstvo školství, mládeže a tělovýchovy České republiky (1999). Učební dokumenty pro gymnázia. Praha: Nakladatelství Fortuna. Search in Google Scholar
National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, D. C.: National Research Council, National Academy Press. Search in Google Scholar
Nurse, P. (2003). The great ideas of biology. Clinical Medicine, 3(6), 560–568. Search in Google Scholar
Offner, S. & Pohlman, R. F. (2010). Visualizing proteins & their Evolution. The American Biology Teacher, 72(6), 373–376. Search in Google Scholar
Ondřej, V. & Dvořák, P. (2012). Bioinformatics: A history of evolution “in silico”. Journal of Biological Education, 46(4), 252–259. Search in Google Scholar
Papáček, M. (2010). Badatelsky orientované přírodovědné vyučování – cesta pro vzdělávání generací Y, Z a alfa? Scientia in educatione, 1(1), 33–49. Search in Google Scholar
Rámcový vzdělávací program pro gymnázia (2007). Praha: Výzkumný ústav pedagogický v Praze. Dostupné z http://www.vuppraha.cz/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/RVPG-2007-07 final.pdf Search in Google Scholar
Rejstřík škol a školských zařízení – verze 2.39 (2014). Praha: Ministerstvo mládeže, školství a tělovýchovy. Dostupné z http://rejskol.msmt.cz/ Search in Google Scholar
Scharfenberg, F. J. & Bogner, F. X. (2013a). Instructional efficiency of tutoring in an outreach gene technology laboratory. Research in Science Education, 43(3), 1 267–1 288. Search in Google Scholar
Scharfenberg, F. J. & Bogner, F. X. (2013b). Teaching gene technology in an outreach lab: students’ assigned cognitive load clusters and the clusters’ relationships to learner characteristics, laboratory variables, and cognitive achievement. Research in Science Education, 43(1), 141–161. Search in Google Scholar
Srinivasan (1998). Exploring the limitations of the ‘DNA as a videotape’ analogy. Journal of Biological Education, 33(1), 42–44. Search in Google Scholar
Šmarda, J. (2003). Genetika pro gymnázia. Praha: Nakladatelství Fortuna. Search in Google Scholar
Tsui, C.-Y. & Treagust, D. (2003). Learning genetics with computer dragons. Journal of Biological Education, 37(2), 96–98. Search in Google Scholar
Tsui, C.-Y. & Treagust, D. (2007). Understanding genetics: Analysis of secondary students’ conceptual status. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 205–235. Search in Google Scholar
van den Berg, E. (2013). Didaktická znalost obsahu v laboratorní výuce: od práce s přístroji k práci s myšlenkami. Scientia in educatione, 4(2), 74–92. Search in Google Scholar
Vařejka, P. (2012). Maturitní témata z molekulární biologie. Brno: Gymnázium, třída Kapitána Jaroše 14. Search in Google Scholar
Venville, G. & Donovan, J. (2006). Analogies for life: a subjective view of analogies and metaphors used to teach about genes and DNA. Teaching Science: The Journal of the Australian Science Teachers Association, 52(1), 18–22. Search in Google Scholar
Vidal, M. (2009). A unifying view of 21st century systems biology. FEBS Letters, 583(24), 3 891–3 894. Search in Google Scholar
Wefer, S. H. & Anderson, O. R. (2008). Identification of students’ content mastery and cognitive and affective percepts of a bioinformatics miniunit: a case study with recommendations for teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19(4), 355–373. Search in Google Scholar
Wefer, S. H. & Sheppard, K. (2008). Bioinformatics in high school biology curricula: a study of state science standards. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 7(1), 155–162. Search in Google Scholar
Wood, L. & Gebhardt, P. (2013). Bioinformatics goes to school – new avenues for teaching contemporary biology. PLoS Computational Biology, 9(6), e1003089. Search in Google Scholar
Woody, S. & Himelblau, E. (2013). Understanding & teaching genetics using analogies. The American Biology Teacher, 75(9), 664–669. Search in Google Scholar

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

[1] Adresář škol a školských zařízení – revize 121203 (2014). Praha: Ministerstvo mládeže, školství a tělovýchovy a Ústav pro informace ve vzdělávání. Dostupné z http://stistko.uiv.cz/registr/vybskolrn.asp Search in Google Scholar

[2] Balgopal, M. & Bondy, C. (2011). Antigenic shift and drift. Science Teacher, 78(2), 42–46. Search in Google Scholar

[3] Ben-Nun, B. S., Stolarsky, M. & Yarden, A. (2009). Learning molecular genetics in teacher-led outreach laboratories. Journal of Biological Education, 44(1), 19–25. Search in Google Scholar

[4] Bowling, B., Zimmer, E. & Pyatt, R. E. (2014). Bringing next-generation sequencing into the classroom through a comparison of molecular biology techniques. The American Biology Teacher, 76(6), 396–401. Search in Google Scholar

[5] Byrd, J. J. (2000). Teaching outside the (cereal) box: a molecular genetics activity. The American Biology Teacher, 62(7), 508–511. Search in Google Scholar

[6] Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education. New York: Routledge. Search in Google Scholar

[7] Costenson, K. & Lawson, A. E. (1986). Why isn’t inquiry used in more classrooms? The American Biology Teacher, 48(3), 150–158. Search in Google Scholar

[8] Donovan, J. & Venville, G. (2005). A concrete model for teaching about genes and DNA to young students. Teaching Science, 51(4), 29–31. Search in Google Scholar

[9] Drits-Esser, D., Malone, M., Barber, N. C. & Stark, L. A. (2014). Beyond the central dogma. The American Biology Teacher, 76(6), 365–369. Search in Google Scholar

[10] Falteisek, L., Černý, J. & Janštová, V. (2013). Simplified technique to evaluate human CCR5 genetic polymorphism. The American Biology Teacher, 75(9), 704–707. Search in Google Scholar

[11] Franke, G. & Bogner, F. X. (2011). Conceptual change in students’ molecular biology education: tilting at wind mills? Journal of Educational Research, 104(1), 7–18. Search in Google Scholar

[12] Gavora, P. (2010). Úvod do pedagogického výzkumu. Brno: Paido. Search in Google Scholar

[13] Gallagher, S. R., Coon, W., Donley, K., Scott, A. & Goldberg, D. S. (2011). A First attempt to bring computational biology into advanced high school biology classrooms. PLoS Computational Biology, 7(10), e1002244. Search in Google Scholar

[14] Gelbart, H., Brill, G. & Yarden, A. (2009). The impact of a web-based research simulation in bioinformatics on students’ understanding of genetics. Research in Science Education, 39(5), 725–751. Search in Google Scholar

[15] Gelbart, H. & Yarden, A. (2006). Learning genetics through an authentic research simulation in bioinformatics. Journal of Biological Education, 40(3), 107–112. Search in Google Scholar

[16] German, P. J. (1996). Analysis of nine school biology laboratory manuals: promoting scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(5), 475–499. Search in Google Scholar

[17] Gormally, C., Brickman, P., Hallar, B. & Armstrong, N. (2009). Effects of inquiry-based learning on students’ science literacy skills and confidence. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 1–22. Search in Google Scholar

[18] Imperial, S. & Boronat, A. (2005). Determination of the Rh factor: a practical illustrating the use of the polymerase chain reaction. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 33(1), 50–53. Search in Google Scholar

[19] Janík, T., Knecht, P., Najvar, P., Pavlas, T., Slavík, J. & Solnička, D. (2010a). Kurikulární reforma na gymnáziích v rozhovorech s koordinátory pilotních a partnerských škol. Praha: Výzkumný ústav pedagogický v Praze. Search in Google Scholar

[20] Janík, T., Janko, T., Knecht, P., Kubiatko, M., Najvar, P., Pavlas, T., Slavík, J., Solnička, D. & Vlčková, K. (2010b). Kurikulární reforma na gymnáziích – výsledky dotazníkového šetření. Praha: Výzkumný ústav pedagogický v Praze. Search in Google Scholar

[21] Janík, T. & Slavík, J. (2007). Vztah obor–vyučovací předmět jako metodologický problém. Orbis scholae, 2(1), 54–66. Search in Google Scholar

[22] Janštová, V., Pavlasová, L. & Černý, J. (2014). Inquiry based practical course focused on proteins. In Rusek, M. & Stárková, D. (Eds.). Projektové vyučování v přírodovědných předmětech. Praha: Pedagogická fakulta Univerzity Karlovy v Praze. Search in Google Scholar

[23] Kidman, G. (2008). Biotechnology education: topics of interest to students and teachers. In Hamman, M., Reiss, M., Boulter, C. & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (Eds.). Biology in context: learning and teaching for the twenty-first century. London: Institute of Education, University of London. Search in Google Scholar

[24] Kočárek, E. (2004). Genetika. Praha: Scientia. Search in Google Scholar

[25] Lewis, J. & Wood-Robinson, C. (2000). Genes, chromosomes, cell division and inheritance — do students see any relationship? International Journal of Science Education, 22(2), 177–195. Search in Google Scholar

[26] Malacinski, G. M. & Zell, P. W. (1996). Manipulating the “invisible”: learning molecular biology using inexpensive models. The American Biology Teacher, 58(7), 428–432. Search in Google Scholar

[27] Miller, K. R. & Levine, J. S. (2010). Biology (student edition). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. Search in Google Scholar

[28] Ministerstvo školství, mládeže a tělovýchovy České republiky (1999). Učební dokumenty pro gymnázia. Praha: Nakladatelství Fortuna. Search in Google Scholar

[29] National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, D. C.: National Research Council, National Academy Press. Search in Google Scholar

[30] Nurse, P. (2003). The great ideas of biology. Clinical Medicine, 3(6), 560–568. Search in Google Scholar

[31] Offner, S. & Pohlman, R. F. (2010). Visualizing proteins & their Evolution. The American Biology Teacher, 72(6), 373–376. Search in Google Scholar

[32] Ondřej, V. & Dvořák, P. (2012). Bioinformatics: A history of evolution “in silico”. Journal of Biological Education, 46(4), 252–259. Search in Google Scholar

[33] Papáček, M. (2010). Badatelsky orientované přírodovědné vyučování – cesta pro vzdělávání generací Y, Z a alfa? Scientia in educatione, 1(1), 33–49. Search in Google Scholar

[34] Rámcový vzdělávací program pro gymnázia (2007). Praha: Výzkumný ústav pedagogický v Praze. Dostupné z http://www.vuppraha.cz/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/RVPG-2007-07 final.pdf Search in Google Scholar

[35] Rejstřík škol a školských zařízení – verze 2.39 (2014). Praha: Ministerstvo mládeže, školství a tělovýchovy. Dostupné z http://rejskol.msmt.cz/ Search in Google Scholar

[36] Scharfenberg, F. J. & Bogner, F. X. (2013a). Instructional efficiency of tutoring in an outreach gene technology laboratory. Research in Science Education, 43(3), 1 267–1 288. Search in Google Scholar

[37] Scharfenberg, F. J. & Bogner, F. X. (2013b). Teaching gene technology in an outreach lab: students’ assigned cognitive load clusters and the clusters’ relationships to learner characteristics, laboratory variables, and cognitive achievement. Research in Science Education, 43(1), 141–161. Search in Google Scholar

[38] Srinivasan (1998). Exploring the limitations of the ‘DNA as a videotape’ analogy. Journal of Biological Education, 33(1), 42–44. Search in Google Scholar

[39] Šmarda, J. (2003). Genetika pro gymnázia. Praha: Nakladatelství Fortuna. Search in Google Scholar

[40] Tsui, C.-Y. & Treagust, D. (2003). Learning genetics with computer dragons. Journal of Biological Education, 37(2), 96–98. Search in Google Scholar

[41] Tsui, C.-Y. & Treagust, D. (2007). Understanding genetics: Analysis of secondary students’ conceptual status. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 205–235. Search in Google Scholar

[42] van den Berg, E. (2013). Didaktická znalost obsahu v laboratorní výuce: od práce s přístroji k práci s myšlenkami. Scientia in educatione, 4(2), 74–92. Search in Google Scholar

[43] Vařejka, P. (2012). Maturitní témata z molekulární biologie. Brno: Gymnázium, třída Kapitána Jaroše 14. Search in Google Scholar

[44] Venville, G. & Donovan, J. (2006). Analogies for life: a subjective view of analogies and metaphors used to teach about genes and DNA. Teaching Science: The Journal of the Australian Science Teachers Association, 52(1), 18–22. Search in Google Scholar

[45] Vidal, M. (2009). A unifying view of 21st century systems biology. FEBS Letters, 583(24), 3 891–3 894. Search in Google Scholar

[46] Wefer, S. H. & Anderson, O. R. (2008). Identification of students’ content mastery and cognitive and affective percepts of a bioinformatics miniunit: a case study with recommendations for teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19(4), 355–373. Search in Google Scholar

[47] Wefer, S. H. & Sheppard, K. (2008). Bioinformatics in high school biology curricula: a study of state science standards. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 7(1), 155–162. Search in Google Scholar

[48] Wood, L. & Gebhardt, P. (2013). Bioinformatics goes to school – new avenues for teaching contemporary biology. PLoS Computational Biology, 9(6), e1003089. Search in Google Scholar

[49] Woody, S. & Himelblau, E. (2013). Understanding & teaching genetics using analogies. The American Biology Teacher, 75(9), 664–669. Search in Google Scholar

Scientia in educatione

Abstract

References

Downloads

License