摘要：In an effort to understand how to improve student learning about evolution, a focus of science education research has been to document and address students’ naive ideas.Less research has investigated how students reason about alternative scientific models that attempt to explain the same phenomenon (e.g., which causal model best accounts for evolutionary change?).Within evolutionary biology, research has yet to explore how non-adaptive factors are situated within students’ conceptual ecologies of evolutionary causation.Do students construct evolutionary explanations that include non-adaptive and adaptive factors? If so, how are non-adaptive factors structured within students’ evolutionary explanations? We used clinical interviews and two paper and pencil instruments (one open-response and one multiple-choice) to investigate the use of non-adaptive and adaptive factors in undergraduate students’ patterns of evolutionary reasoning.After instruction that included non-adaptive causal factors (e.g., genetic drift), we found them to be remarkably uncommon in students’ explanatory models of evolutionary change in both written assessments and clinical interviews.However, consistent with many evolutionary biologists’ explanations, when students used non-adaptive factors they were conceptualized as causal alternatives to selection.Interestingly, use of non-adaptive factors was not associated with greater understanding of natural selection in interviews or written assessments, or with fewer naive ideas of natural selection.Thus, reasoning using non-adaptive factors appears to be a distinct facet of evolutionary thinking.We propose a theoretical framework for an expert–novice continuum of evolutionary reasoning that incorporates both adaptive and non-adaptive factors, and can be used to inform instructional efficacy in evolutionary biology.
