Death and Science: The Existential Underpinnings of Belief in Intelligent Design and Discomfort with Evolution

The present research examined the psychological motives underlying widespread support for intelligent design theory (IDT), a purportedly scientific theory that lacks any scientific evidence; and antagonism toward evolutionary theory (ET), a theory supported by a large body of scientific evidence. We tested whether these attitudes are influenced by IDT's provision of an explanation of life's origins that better addresses existential concerns than ET. In four studies, existential threat (induced via reminders of participants' own mortality) increased acceptance of IDT and/or rejection of ET, regardless of participants' religion, religiosity, educational background, or preexisting attitude toward evolution. Effects were reversed by teaching participants that naturalism can be a source of existential meaning (Study 4), and among natural-science students for whom ET may already provide existential meaning (Study 5). These reversals suggest that the effect of heightened mortality awareness on attitudes toward ET and IDT is due to a desire to find greater meaning and purpose in science when existential threats are activated

Short Lesson Plan Associated with Increased Acceptance of Evolutionary Theory and Potential Change in Three Alternate Conceptions of Macroevolution in Undergraduate Students

Undergraduates commonly harbor alternate conceptions about evolutionary biology; these alternate conceptions often persist, even after intensive instruction, and may influence acceptance of evolution. We interviewed undergraduates to explore their alternate conceptions about macroevolutionary patterns and designed a 2-h lesson plan to present evidence that life has evolved. We identified three alternate conceptions during our interviews: that newly derived traits would be more widespread in extant species than would be ancestral traits, that evolution proceeds solely by anagenesis, and that lineages must become more complex over time. We also attempted to measure changes in the alternate conceptions and levels of acceptance of evolutionary theory in biology majors and nonmajors after exposure to the lesson plan. The instrument used to assess understanding had flaws, but our results are suggestive of mixed effects: we found a reduction in the first alternate conception, no change in the second, and reinforcement of the third. We found a small, but significant, increase in undergraduate acceptance of evolutionary theory in two trials of the lesson plan (Cohen's d effect sizes of 0.51 and 0.19). These mixed results offer guidance on how to improve the lesson and show the potential of instructional approaches for influencing acceptance of evolution

Active Learning Not Associated with Student Learning in a Random Sample of College Biology Courses

Previous research has suggested that adding active learning to traditional college science lectures substantially improves student learning. However, this research predominantly studied courses taught by science education researchers, who are likely to have exceptional teaching expertise. The present study investigated introductory biology courses randomly selected from a list of prominent colleges and universities to include instructors representing a broader population. We examined the relationship between active learning and student learning in the subject area of natural selection. We found no association between student learning gains and the use of active-learning instruction. Although active learning has the potential to substantially improve student learning, this research suggests that active learning, as used by typical college biology instructors, is not associated with greater learning gains. We contend that most instructors lack the rich and nuanced understanding of teaching and learning that science education researchers have developed. Therefore, active learning as designed and implemented by typical college biology instructors may superficially resemble active learning used by education researchers, but lacks the constructivist elements necessary for improving learning