Filipino Students’ Common Mısconceptıons in Bıology: Input for Remedial Teaching

Öz

Misconceptions are threats that impede successful learning of scientific conepts and phenomena.   Correcting the students’ misconceptions can lead to the development of inquisitive and scientific-mined students. This study sought to find out the common misconceptions in Biology among Filipino junior high school students in a public secondary school in Zambales, Philippines as an input in crafting a remedial teaching program. This descriptive-survey research involved 100 Grade 10 students. The study revealed that the level of misconception of students is high in genetics (55.00%); and moderate in ecology (43.50%), botany (44.10%), and zoology (38.30%). The remedial teaching program contains suggested activities to correct student misconceptions. The study recommends that Science teachers may gauge the prior understanding of the students in the important concepts in biology during the teaching-learning process so they can check the misconceptions and strengthen the students’ conceptual understanding through fun and innovative approaches. Teachers may likewise integrate the proposed remedial teaching program in the actual delivery of the lesson or may conduct after-class remediation to the students who have held misconceptions in important concepts in biology. Future researchers may consider students from other grade levels as respondents in a parallel study.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• misconceptions in biology,remedial teaching program,descriptive-survey research

Kaynakça

1. Allen, M. (2010). Misconceptions in Primary Science. Glasgow: McGraw-Hill.
2. Asshoff, R., & Hammann, M. (2008). Content analysis of the ERIDOB proceedings and 431 comparison with the International Journal of Science Education. In A selection of papers presented at the VIIth Conference of European Researchers in Didactics of Biology (ERIDOB) (pp. 431-446).
3. Bennett, J. (2003). Teaching and Learning Science: A Guide to Recent Research and İts Application. London: Continuum.
4. Brown, M. H., and R. S. Schwartz. (2009). Connecting Photosynthesis and Cellular Respiration: Preservice Teachers’ Conceptions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 46, 791–812.
5. Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P. & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making sense of Secondary Science. London: Routledge.
6. Duit, R., and D. F. Treagust. (2003). Conceptual Change: A Powerful Framework for Improving Science Teaching and Learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25 (6), 671–688.
7. Eshach, H. (2014). Development of a student-centered instrument to assess middle school students’ conceptual understanding of sound. Physical review special topics-physics education research, 10(1), 1-14.
8. Kinchin, I. M. (2000). Concept Mapping in Biology. Journal of Biological Education, 34 (2), 61–68.

9. Kubisch, F., & T. Heyne. (2016). Students’ Alternative Conceptions about the Lotus Effect: To Confront or to Ignore? Journal of Biological Education 50, (1), 86–100.
10. Kumandaş, B., Ateskan, A., & Lane, J. (2018). Misconceptions in biology: a meta-synthesis study of research, 2000–2014. Journal of Biological Education, 1-15.
11. Larkin, D. (2012). Misconceptions about Misconceptions: Preservice Secondary Science Teachers’ Views on the Value and Role of Student Ideas. Science Education, 96 (5), 927–959.
12. Lewis, J., & Kattmann, U. (2004). Traits, genes, particles and information: re‐visiting students’ understandings of genetics. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 195-206.
13. 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.
14. Liu, S., & Lee, G. (2013). Using a Concept Map Knowledge Management System to Enhance the Learning of Biology. Computers & Education, 68,105–116.
15. Lucero, M. M., & Petrosino, A. J. (2017). “A Resource for Eliciting Student Alternative Conceptions: Examining the Adaptability of a Concept Inventory for Natural Selection at the Secondary School Level.” Research in Science Education 47 (4): 705–730.
16. Mintzes, J. J., Trowbridge, J. E., Arnaudin, M. W., & Wandersee, J. H. (1991). Children's biology: Studies on conceptual development in the life sciences. The psychology of learning science, 179-202.
17. Modell, H, Michael, J., & Wenderoth, M.P. (2005). Helping the learner to learn: The role of uncovering misconceptions. Am Biol Teach, 67, 20-26.Munson, B. H. (1994). Ecological misconceptions. The Journal of Environmental Education, 25(4), 30-34.
18. Pugh, K., Koskey, K., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2014). High School Biology Students’ Transfer of the Concept of Natural Selection: A Mixed-Methods Approach. Journal of Biological Education, 48(1), 23–33.
19. Raymundo, A.K. (Ed). (2008). Biology education: Gaps, Issues, and Concerns. Proceedings of the Round table Discussion on Biology Education. National Academy of Science and Technology (NAST) Philippines, Manila.
20. Rotbain, Y., Marbach-Ad, G. & Stavy, R. (2008). “Using a Computer Animation to Teach High School Molecular Biology.” Journal of Science Education and Technology 17 (1): 49–58.
21. Sesli, E., & Kara, Y. (2012). Development and Application of a Two-Tier Multiple-Choice Diagnostic Test for High School Students’ Understanding of Cell Division and Reproduction. Journal of Biological Education, 46, 214–225.
22. Sunggod, M. A. (2016). Issues-Oriented Approach: Effects on Students’ Concept Reconstruction and Achievement in Biology. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 15(4), 32-41.
23. Tekkaya, C., Ozkan, O. and S. Sungur. (2001). Biology Concepts Perceived as Difficult by Turkish High School Students. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21, 145–150.
24. Wynn, A. N., Pan, I. L., Rueschhoff, E. E., Herman, M. A., & Archer, E. K. (2017). Student Misconceptions about Plants–A First Step in Building a Teaching Resource. Journal of microbiology & biology education, 18(1).
25. World Economic Forum. (2018). The Global Competitiveness Report 2017–2018. Geneva: World Economic Forum.