A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Korean and American Science Teachers' Views of Evolution and The Nature of Science 453338 - 920456608

This article was downloaded by: On: 22 April 2011 Access details: Access Details: Free Access Publisher
Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 3741 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of Science Education
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713737283
A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Korean and American Science Teachers' Views of Evolution and the Nature of Science
Sun Young Kima; Ross H. Nehmb a Department of Science Education, The Pusan National University, Busan, Republic of Korea b College of Education and Human Ecology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA First published on: 30 March 2010
To cite this Article Kim, Sun Young and Nehm, Ross H.(2011) 'A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Korean and American
Science Teachers' Views of Evolution and the Nature of Science', International Journal of Science Education, 33: 2, 197 227, First published on: 30 March 2010 (iFirst) To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/09500690903563819 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690903563819
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
International Journal of Science Education Vol. 33, No. 2, 15 January 2011, pp. 197227
RESEARCH REPORT
A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Korean and American Science Teachers Views of Evolution and the Nature of Science
Sun Young Kima* and Ross H. Nehmb
of Science Education, The Pusan National University, Busan, Republic of Korea; bCollege of Education and Human Ecology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA
Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011
syk519@pusan.ac.kr Dr. 0000002010 Journal of Science Education 00 Sunand (print)/1464-5289 (online) Taylor & Report 2010 YoungKim Research Francis 0950-0693 Francis International 10.1080/09500690903563819 TSED_A_456857.sgm
aDepartment
Despite a few international comparisons of the evolutionary beliefs of the general public, comparatively less research has focused on science teachers. Cross-cultural studies offer profitable opportunities for exploring the interactions among knowledge and belief variables in regard to evolution in different socio-cultural contexts. We investigated the evolutionary worldviews of pre-service science teachers from Asia (specifically South Korea), a region often excluded from international comparisons. We compared Korean and American science teachers: (1) understandings of evolution and the nature of science, and (2) acceptance of evolution in order to elucidate how knowledge and belief relationships are manifested in different cultural contexts. We found that Korean science teachers exhibited moderate evolutionary acceptance levels comparable to or lower than American science teacher samples. Gender was significantly related to Korean teachers evolution content knowledge and acceptance of evolution, with female Christian biology teachers displaying the lowest values on all measures. Korean science teachers understandings of nature of science were significantly related to their acceptance and understanding of evolution; this relationship appears to transcend cultural boundaries. Our new data on Korean teachers, combined with studies from more than 20 other nations, expose the global nature of science teacher ambivalence or antipathy toward evolutionary knowledge.
Keywords: Biology education; Gender-related; Nature of science; Pre-service; Religion; Evolution; Cross-cultural; Nature of science
*Corresponding author. Department of Science Education, The Pusan National University, Busan, Republic of Korea. Email: syk519@pusan.ac.kr ISSN 0950-0693 (print)/ISSN 1464-5289 (online)/11/02019731 2011 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/09500690903563819
198 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm Introduction Worldwide celebrations commemorating the 150th anniversary of the publication of Darwins On the Origin of Species have been dampened by a growing body of research demonstrating consistently low levels of evolutionary knowledge, high levels of antievolutionary beliefs, and pervasive misconceptions about the nature of science (NOS) in the citizens and teachers from one of the worlds most scientifically advanced nationsthe USA (Miller, Scott, & Okamoto, 2006). Seventy years of published research on American science teachers have revealed a relatively consistent portrait of antievolutionism across geography and through time (Affannato, 1986; Burnett, 1941; Eglin, 1983; Fahrenwald, 1999; Firenze, 1998; Fisher, 1989; Groves, 1990; Johnson, 1991; Jorstad, 2002; Kraemer, 1995; Miller, 1990; Moore, 2008; Nehm, Kim, & Sheppard, 2009; Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007; Osif, 1997; Riddle, 1942; Shankar, 1989; Taylor, 1999; Trani, 2004; Troost, 1966; Zimmerman, 1987). These studies have investigated a wide range of topics that impact the teaching of evolution, including teacher beliefs, attitudes, religiosity, educational backgrounds, curricular emphasis on evolution, knowledge and understanding of the NOS, and external pressure not to teach evolution (Nehm, Kim, et al., 2009). While the results of these studies show a wide range of practices, beliefs, attitudes, and competencies, the teaching of creationism/intelligent design or the deliberate nonteaching of evolution (what we collectively term antievolutionism) is a major concern for American biology teachers (Moore & Kraemer, 2005). Nearly half of the science teachers sampled from New York City (Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007), Kansas (Aldrich, 1991), California (Strauss, 2008), and Indiana (Troost, 1966), for example, personally preferred that creationism or intelligent design be taught in public schools. These results do not differ markedly from those of the American public (Newport, 2009). Remarkably, nearly a quarter of science teachers in some American states continue to teach creationism (Moore & Kraemer, 2005). But is ambivalence or antipathy toward evolutionary knowledgein the public generally or in science teachers particularlya uniquely American issue, as some have suggested (e.g., Archer, 1987; Miller et al., 2006; Price, 1992; Scott, 2009; but for a contrasting view, see Kutschera, 2008)? Despite international comparisons of the evolutionary attitudes toward creationism in the general public using very simple measures (Miller et al., 2006), comparatively less international research has focused on science teachers (see Deniz, Donnelly, & Yilmaz, 2008). Moreover, little work has examined how teachers funds of science knowledge intersect with different cultural belief systems to generate evolutionary epistemologies (cf. Deniz et al., 2008). Cross-cultural comparisons offer profitable opportunities for exploring the interactions among knowledge and belief in different cultural contexts; generalizations of knowledge/belief interrelationships within one cultureor within one religious worldviewmay not hold among others. For example, while considerable work in the USA indicates that fundamentalist religiosity is the largest explanatory variable accounting for antievolutionary worldviews, recent work in Germany suggests that understanding of the NOS may be of greater importance (Graf, 2009).
Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 199 Likewise, research on creationist beliefs and their connections to Christianity in Scotland and Kenya revealed significantly different relationships among variables (Fulljames, Harry, Gibson, & Francis, 1991). Cross-cultural research studies, therefore, offer great promise for establishing more rigorous and contextually expansive explanatory models of evolutionary knowledge/belief relationships. Research Questions The overarching goal of our study is to compare Korean and American pre-service science teachers understandings of the NOS, evolution content knowledge, and acceptance of evolution. Specifically, we ask four interrelated questionsDo American and Korean pre-service science teachers differ in their: (1) degree of acceptance of the theory of evolution, (2) magnitude of evolutionary content knowledge, (3) magnitude of knowledge of evolution in relation to the NOS, and (4) degree of informed views about the NOS? We answer these questions by partitioning our dataset by teacher content specialization area (biology vs. non-biology), religion (Christian vs. non-Christian), and gender (male vs. female). Prior to presenting our new data on Korean science teachers, we examined previous research on the evolutionary views of teachers from around the world in order to situate our research questions within a broader international context and compare our findings to prior work. American Science Teachers Evolutionary Worldviews More research has been conducted on American science teachers evolutionary worldviews than any other region of the world. Although a comprehensive national survey remains to be completed, isolated studies suggest that large numbers of American science teachers include either creationism or intelligent design in their science classes or prefer its inclusion along with evolution in the curriculum (Berkman, Pacheco, & Plutzer, 2008; Plutzer & Berkman, 2008). Survey research employing different items and prompts reveals that approximately 30% of science teachers prefer to teachor do teachcreationism in schools (Aguillard, 1998; Eglin, 1983; Eve & Dunn, 1990; Fisher, 1989; Johnson, 1991; Miller, 1990; Roelfs, 1987; Tatina, 1989). Furthermore, approximately 50% of science teachers support the teaching of evolution alongside some form of creationism or intelligent design (Buckner, 1983; Nehm, Kim, et al., 2009; Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007; Strauss, 2008), although some studies suggest considerably higher percentages (Bergman, 1979; Van Koevering & Stiehl, 1989). Survey research also suggests that evolution is rarely taught as a unifying theme in biology classrooms (Brown, 2000; MaldonadoRivera, 1998; Weld & McNew, 1999) or with appropriate emphasis as a conceptual organizer (Nehm, Poole, et al., 2009). The factors that have been hypothesized to account for American science teacher antievolutionism are many, but few causal relationships have been rigorously established (reviewed in Donnelly & Boone, 2007). This is primarily a consequence of
200 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm survey research designs rather than quasi-experimental interventions (however, see Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007, for an example of the latter). Nevertheless, several patterns have been established: science teachers often do not want to teach evolution (Aguillard, 1998; Eve & Dunn, 1990; Shankar & Skoog, 1993), do not feel adequately prepared to teach it (Aguillard, 1999; Griffith & Brem, 2004; Plutzer & Berkman, 2008), or do not understand the legal precedents associated with evolution education (Moore, 2003). In addition, science teachers knowledge of evolution and the NOS are often low, and many teachers consequently harbor nave scientific worldviews (Crawford, Zembal-Saul, Munford, & Friedrichsen, 2005; Evans, 2005; Moore, 2008; Nehm, Kim, et al., 2009; Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007). Moreover, many state science standards remain weak with regard to the importance of evolutionary theory to the natural sciences (Lerner, 2000; Moore, 2003). Unsurprisingly, fundamentalist religiosity (and in some cases strong religious convictions) is associated with lower levels of evolutionary acceptance (Trani, 2004; however, see Nehm, Kim, et al., 2009). Finally, many communities, school boards, and parents, challenge teachers when they follow state and national standards and teach evolution (Chuang, 2003; Plutzer & Berkman, 2008; Tatina, 1989; Van Koevering & Stiehl, 1989). These and other contextual factors are not surprisingly associated with teachers emotional stress and negative perceptions regarding evolution (Brem, Ranney, & Schindel, 2003; Griffith & Brem, 2004). A few studies of science teacher antievolutionism have been completed in the US territory of Puerto Rico. They reveal a comparably dismal portrait of science teacher evolutionary views as documented on the mainland (Maldonado-Rivera, 1998; Soto Sonera, 2006). While evolution was part of the official curriculum in Puerto Rico, Maldonado-Rivera (1998) found that it was completely neglected largely as a consequence of teacher fundamentalist religiosity, lack of evolutionary knowledge and understanding of the NOS. Soto Sonera (2006) found that the official document Standards of Excellence omits the subject of biological evolution and incorporates a language that promotes and justifies the inclusion in the curriculum of the creationists [sic] positions. Like Maldonado-Rivera (1998), Soto Sonera (2006) found that in the classroom the topics of the [sic] biological evolution are not taught. Within American science student and teacher samples, understanding of the NOS has received increasing and focused attention as a variable with possible causal associations with evolutionary worldviews (e.g., Clough, 1994, 2006; Dagher & BouJaoude, 1997; Johnson & Peeples, 1987; Lombrozo, Thanukos, & Weisberg, 2008; Nehm, Kim, et al., 2009; Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007; Rutledge & Mitchell, 2002; Scharmann, 2005; Trani, 2004). Johnson and Peeples (1987), for example, found that students understanding of NOS was significantly correlated with the acceptance of evolutionary theory; as students increased their understanding of the NOS, they were more likely to accept the theory of evolution. Rutledge and Mitchell (2002) likewise found that there was a significant association between teachers acceptance of evolutionary theory and completion of a course in NOS. Rutledge and Warden (2000) similarly found a significant relationship between
Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 201 teachers acceptance of evolutionary theory and teachers understanding of both NOS and evolutionary theory. In contrast to these survey research results, an intervention study of science teachers by Nehm and Schonfeld (2007) found that significant evolutionary knowledge gains (including gains in NOS) were not associated with significant changes in evolutionary beliefs. The question remains as to whether the abundant research on American science teachers is representative of teachers internationally. Indeed, is ambivalence or antipathy toward evolution a uniquely American problem? International Research on Science Teachers Evolutionary Views In order to situate our empirical research on Korean science teachers evolutionary views within a broader international context, we review the comparatively few studies (relative to the USA) that have investigated science teachers acceptance and understanding of evolutionary theory around the world. Turkey, Lebanon, North Africa, and the Mediterranean Region Perhaps the most comprehensive international study of science teachers evolutionary worldviews is that of Deniz et al. (2008); they examined factors related to the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Turkish pre-service biology teachers. They found that biology teachers thinking dispositions (e.g., openness to belief change, cognitive flexibility, etc.), their understanding of evolutionary theory, and their parents educational level were positively (but very weakly) correlated with the acceptance of the theory of evolution (less than 10% of all variance). Measures of both knowledge and acceptance of evolution were very low in their sample, with average MATE (Measure of Acceptance of the Theory of Evolution) evolutionary acceptance scores of 51/80 (64%) and average evolutionary knowledge scores of 9.3/21 (<50%). More recently, reported results from Turkey (Curry, 2009) likewise indicate that nearly 75% of students rejected the theory of evolution. In Lebanon, Hokayem and BouJaoude (2008) qualitatively investigated 11 college students perceptions of science, religion, and the nature of causality according to the levels of students acceptance of the theory of evolution. Their results indicated students perceptions of the theory of evolution ranged from complete acceptance to uncertainty and complete rejection of evolution, and these perceptions of the theory of evolution were affected by students personal beliefs. Similarly, Dagher and BouJaoude (1997) explored Lebanese students views of the theory of biological evolution. Participants religious affiliations were primarily Christian or Islamic. The open-ended responses distinguished those students in support of evolution (48%), against evolution (34%), compromise (15%), or neutral (3%), and the study suggested that the opportunity to discuss students beliefs in relation to scientific knowledgeas well as teaching about the NOSfacilitated students evolutionary understanding.
202 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm Likewise, unpublished but recently reported work (Curry, 2009) indicates that over half of the biology teachers in Senegal, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia, and Algeria agreed with the statement: it is certain that God created life. However, these resultsapparently based upon the recent work by Clment, Quessada, Laurent, and Carvalho (2008)must be interpreted with caution, as it is not clear that the category biology teacher is equivalent among these and Western nations; university and government preparation requirements differ markedly. The results are, nevertheless, suggestive of ambivalence or antipathy toward evolutionary knowledge in teachers from these regions (Clment et al., 2008). Additional studies from southern Europe confirm that antievolutionism is a serious issue for many science teachers. In a study of 111 Greek secondary biology teachers, Prinou, Halkia, and Skordoulis (2005) found that while the majority of the teachers were supportive of the teaching of evolution in schools, 16% supported the exclusion of evolution from the curriculum. The study also found that those teachers prepared in biology did not display a greater understanding of evolution than those prepared in other disciplines (as was also found by Crawford et al., 2005 in a small sample of American science teachers).
Europe and the United Kingdom Research on the evolutionary beliefs of science teachers and the general public from Western Europe also suggests that ambivalence or antipathy toward evolutionary knowledge may be more widespread than is generally acknowledged (Kutschera, 2008; reviewed in Curry, 2009). The near failure of a vote in the Council of Europe attempting to adopt the position that it firmly opposes the teaching of creationism as a scientific discipline on an equal footing with the theory of evolution is suggestive of ambiguous views toward evolution in Western Europe (Curry, 2009). Indeed, empirical data are emerging that corroborate such conjecture: Kutschera (2008) found that approximately 40% of Germans were adherents to creationist doctrine (or that of intelligent design). Likewise, in a study of 1,228 German students planning to become teachers, Graf (2009) found that 20% of prospective biology teachers employed Lamarckian explanations for evolutionary change and less than 33% were able to answer questions regarding the key concepts of natural selection. (Approximately 20% of the general public in Germany harbors strictly creationist views; Curry, 2009.) Young earth creationists number approximately 21.8% in Switzerland, 20.4% in Austria, and 19.1% in Germany (Numbers, 2009). In Sweden, Zetterqvists (2003) study suggests that teachers there lack the ability to teach evolutionary biology to achieve deep conceptual understanding. Recent political debates regarding creationism in Italy are also suggestive of ambivalence toward evolution in Europe (Curry, 2009). Eastern Europe (e.g., Poland, Hungary, Romania, Serbia, Russia, and Ukraine), after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, has also dealt with creationist movements (Numbers, 2009). Notably, the minister of education in Serbia informed school teachers that their students do not need to read the chapter on Darwinism in the
Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 203 commonly used eighth-grade biology textbook (Numbers, 2009). But in general, little has been published about science teachers from these regions. Studies in England, Scotland, and Wales have revealed levels of evolutionary acceptance not appreciably different from those of the USA. A BBC poll in 2006 revealed that 40% of respondents thought that creationism should be taught in schools. In the same survey, only 48% of respondents considered evolution as the best explanation for the origin and development of life on earth. Cleaves and Toplis (2007), in a qualitative study of British science teachers, found that 31% of experienced and trainee teachers had encountered student creationist challenges. While the majority of the teacher sample was supportive of the teaching of evolution, several of the teachers interviewed considered evolution just a theory and eight of the 64 teachers preferred to present evolutionary ideas as controversial to students. A recent study of 923 teachers from England and Wales reported that 37% of the respondents agreed that creationism should be taught in schools alongside evolution. Among biology teachers from the same sample, 30% held the same view. In a study of Scottish biology students, Downie and Baroon (2000) asked whether evolution occurred on earth and whether they accepted or rejected evolution. They found a general tendency to associate evolutionary rejection with a literal interpretation of the Bible by Christians and that a high proportion of Muslim students rejected evolution. In Northern Ireland, studies have apparently been completed on pupils as well as pre-service science teachers, and these results corroborate previous work (Francis & Greer, 1999; McCrory & Murphy, 2009). Francis and Greer (1999) specifically found that 48% of 2,129 pupils accept the view that God created the world as described in the Bible. Interestingly, 30% of the respondents from Northern Ireland cited in Francis and Greer (1999) agreed with the statement Science disproves the Bible account of creation. McCrory and Murphy (2009) asked preservice teachers, What should be taught in science? About 21% of participants indicated a preference for evolution only, 8% of them selected either creationism or intelligent design, and 68% chose a middle-ground option. Papua New Guinea, Australia, and New Zealand Research in Papua New Guinea (PNG), a self-declared Christian country (Brunton & Colqhoun-Kerr, 1984), provides additional insight into the global teacher antievolutionism. As is the case in the USA, Science per se is often regarded as being antagonistic to religion, even by university science students (Vlaardingerbroek & Roederer, 1997, p. 364). Interestingly, in a study of PNG trainee teachers, Vlaardingerbroek and Roederer (1997) found that while a majority of teachers thought that basic evolutionary concepts should be introduced in school science, a majority also thought that the Biblical story of creation should be taught as a true scientific account in PNG schools. This study also found no significant correlation between teachers attitude scores toward evolution and their knowledge of evolution. Similar to many studies of American teachers, Vlaardingerbroek and Roederer
204 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm (1997) found that mainstream Christians often held a dual acceptance position, while approximately 60% of religious fundamentalists rejected it. In Australia, creationism was initially viewed as an insignificant and transient American import (Price, 1992), but its roots have since grown deep. Pervasive procreationist constituencies have influenced school education, most notably efforts to provide equal time for creationism and evolutionary biology (reviewed in Numbers, 2004). In terms of the NOS, in Queensland schools evolution was taught as only a theory (Numbers, 2004). Creationism was briefly a part of the Queensland syllabus for secondary schools, and its teaching flourished in private schools during the 1980s (Numbers, 2004). But the problem also extended to Australian teachers. According to the Australian Institute of Biology national poll, 12.6% of first-year biology students at Australian universities believed that God created man within the last 10,000 years (Price, 1992). Creationist frequencies were much higher in Sydney (20%) and less than 40% of a sample of 688 university science students considered evolutionary patterns to be devoid of supernatural causes (e.g., divine intervention). In this study, all Australian states and universities sampled contained young earth creationists (Price, 1992). While the frequencies of creationist beliefs in Australian university students are relatively high, they are much lower than those reported for the Australian general public; in 1986, a sample of 30,000 Australians revealed that 65% believed that God created the world in six days (Numbers, 2004). Numbers (2009) argues that creationism is similarly widespread in New Zealand. Asia In Singapore, Lee, Izard, and Yeoh (1998) studied 70 secondary school and junior college teachers knowledge and attitudes toward evolution. They found that lower ability teachers had greater difficulty answering questions about evolution relative to ecology; that a quarter of teachers felt that evolution was based on speculation and approximately 17% of teachers thought of evolution as purposeful striving along with other misconceptions. Lee et al. (1998) conclude that teachers displayed a fairly good understanding of the subject matter, even though their sample of Singaporean teachers average evolutionary knowledge scores were 69% (mean of 25 out of 36 items). To our knowledge, there are only a few studies that have examined teachers perceptions of the theory of evolution in East Asian countries such as Korea. While Miller et al.s (2006) study reported data from Japan and found high levels of evolutionary acceptance among the general public, there were no data reported from many Asian countries. Recently, however, a Korean broadcast poll revealed that 62.6% of the public believed in evolutionary theory, while 30.6% of the public did not (the remaining percentage of people said they were not sure). Although very little research concerning antievolutionism in Korea has been completed, according to Im, Cho, and Hong (2007), 49.2% of college students agreed that the theory of evolution counts as science and that creationism is a form of religion,
Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 205 whereas 25.6% did not. Similarly, Ha, Lee, and Cha (2006) reported that 41.4% of high school students agreed or strongly agreed that evidence supports the theory of evolution, while 20.4% of them disagreed or strongly disagreed (others were neutral). Even though many students tended to believe the evidence for evolution, both Korean students and teachers possessed evolutionary misconceptions. Ha and Cha (2009), for example, reported that Korean pre-service teachers commonly employed evolutionary explanations invoking scientifically inaccurate use and disuse explanatory models. Similarly, Lee and Lee (2006) examined students conceptions of evolution across grade levels (e.g., 9th, 12th, and pre-service teachers), and found that, regardless of grade levels, students often possessed Lamarckian explanatory models. Overall, this limited body of research suggests that Korean secondary students and teachers possess many of the evolutionary misconceptions documented in American samples (Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007) and that moderate percentages of the population display antievolutionary preferences. But no research to our knowledge has explored Korean science teachers evolutionary acceptance in relation to knowledge of evolution and the NOS and religiosity. Such knowledge would help science teacher educators more accurately conceptualize the purportedly unique problem of American science teacher antievolutionism as well as understand how knowledge and belief relationships are manifested in different cultural contexts. Our review of science teachers evolutionary knowledge and beliefs from around the world has revealed that disparate sampling methods, measurement instruments, analysis categories, and research foci make precise international comparisons nearly impossible. Indeed, while meaningful comparisons of samples require the use of standardized instruments and measures among nations and/or cultural contexts, the evolution education research community has largely failed to generate internationally agreed-upon measures. What we can concludealbeit tentativelyis that ambivalence or antipathy toward evolutionary knowledge is not merely an American problem (contra Miller et al., 2006); every region of the world that we reviewed is struggling with the issue of evolution education. Many regions and nations, however, remain to be studied. Our literature review has also revealed that remarkably little empirical research has targeted pre-service science teachers from Asia in general and South Korea in particular. Similarly, many Asian countries have been excluded from international comparisons of the evolutionary worldviews of the general public (e.g., Miller et al., 2006). In order to facilitate further international comparative work, we translate several of the most commonly used instruments for measuring evolutionary knowledge and acceptance in American science teachers into Korean. We explored whether American and Korean pre-service science teachers differ in their: (1) degree of acceptance of the theory of evolution, (2) magnitude of evolutionary content knowledge, (3) magnitude of knowledge of evolution in relation to the NOS, and (4) degree of informed views about the NOS. We answered these questions by partitioning our dataset by teacher content specialization area (biology vs. non-biology), religion (Christian vs. non-Christian), and gender (male vs. female). Finally, we situate
206 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm our findings on Korean science teachers within the broader international context revealed by our literature review. Socio-Cultural Context: South Korea South Korea is a small nationapproximately the size of the American state of Indianabut contains a population approaching 49 million (US Department of State, 2008). A highly literate nation (98%), Korea has experienced considerable economic growth in the past 30 years and has recently emerged as the 13th largest economy in the world. Culturally, Korea is one of the most ethnically and linguistically homogenous nations in the world, with most citizens sharing a common cultural and linguistic heritage (US Department of State, 2008). High religiosity and/or fundamentalist beliefs are closely tied to antievolutionary and creationist worldviews (Coyne, 2009), and so it is notable that only half of the Korean population actively practices religion. Among those practicing, Christianity (49%) and Buddhism (47%) comprise Koreas dominant religions. While only 3% of Koreans self-identify as Confucians, Korean society remains highly imbued with Confucian values and beliefs (US Department of State, 2008). In Korea, therefore, various religions (e.g., Buddhism, Christianity, and Confucianism) have coexisted together, representing a multi-religious tradition, and have contributed significantly to Korean society. This religious pluralism has enabled Korean society to adopt both Eastern and Western cultural traditions (Kim, 2002). In Korea, a secondary science teacher certificate is typically acquired through a four-year Bachelor of Education program or a Bachelor of Science program with an additional two-year Master of Education program. Even though the curriculum varies among universities, pre-service teachers typically take content knowledge courses (general biology/chemistry/physics/earth science), pedagogical content knowledge courses, and general education courses in a four-year Bachelor of Education program. Students complete additional in-depth content courses particular to their major (e.g., students enrolled in a biology education major may complete animal/plant physiology, genetics, microbiology, etc.). Students usually learn about evolution in general biology courses. Evolution is included in the Korean national curriculum (seventh edition) at both the middle and high school levels. Ninth-grade students are required to learn the evidence that supports the scientific concept of evolution and the theories explaining the causes and processes of evolution. At the high school level, students learn about the origin of species and evolution in greater depth. Particularly, the seventh Korean national curriculum mandates that creationism is not to be mentioned when dealing with evolution. Sample A total of 84 Korean pre-service teachers (49 men, 35 women) with a mean age of 22.94 (ranging from 18 to 31) who were enrolled in a college of education at a
Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 207 Korean university participated in this study. All the participants were in their second or third year of undergraduate studies and enrolled in a program specifically designed for secondary science teachers. Their majors were biology (n = 33), chemistry (n = 17), physics (n = 12), and earth science education (n = 22). Their religions were self-identified as Christian (n = 15), Buddhism (n = 9), and no religion (n = 54) (others did not respond). Data were collected in a general biology experiment course which is required for all teachers regardless of subject area specialization. Students in this course were engaged in various experiments (e.g., observations of bone structures, muscles, human blood; dissection of frogs; DNA extraction) to learn basic biology knowledge and basic experimental skills in order to use these skills and knowledge in secondary schools. The instruments were administered at the beginning of the course. Among those enrolled in the course, approximately 95% of teachers completed the survey sufficiently for analysis. Instruments and Measures
In addition to the collection of basic demographic variables, we administered four instruments (e.g., Measure of Acceptance of the Theory of Evolution [Rutledge & Warden, 1999]; Evolution Content Knowledge [Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007]; Evolution and the Nature of Science [Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007], and Views of the Nature of Science [Abd-El-Khalick, 1998]) that have been utilized in evolution education studies in the USA. These instruments were translated into Korean and reviewed for accuracy by two bilingual education specialists. We discuss the salient attributes of each instrument below. MATE (Measure of Acceptance of the Theory of Evolution) Korean pre-service teachers acceptance of evolution was assessed using Rutledge and Wardens (1999) MATE. This measure consists of 20 items on a five-point Likert scale (strongly agree, agree, undecided, disagree, strongly disagree). The instrument includes items such as There is a significant body of data that supports evolutionary theory, Evolutionary theory is supported by factual historical and laboratory data, Evolution is a scientifically valid theory, and Evolutionary theory generates testable predictions with respect to the characteristics of life. Rutledge and Warden (1999) reported that the content validity of the MATE was established by a committee of five university professors with expertise in the fields of evolutionary biology, science education, and philosophy of science. Cronbachs for our sample was 0.84, which is slightly lower than that reported in previous studies of American samples (Rutledge & Sadler, 2007; = 0.94). ECK (Evolution Content Knowledge) ECK is a composite variable designed to measure evolution content knowledge in science teachers (Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007). This measure consists of eight items
208 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm such as Fossil species have been found that are intermediate between humans and apes, Radiometric dating of rocks indicates that the earth is billions of years old, and Chance cannot be a key factor in the origin of complex organisms. Nehm and Schonfeld (2007) reported that the validity of ECK was established by examining the correlation of ECK scores with a separately administered exam essay that asked participants to explain the processes (mechanisms) that cause patterns of evolutionary change. The Cronbachs for our sample was 0.58, which is lower than that reported for American teacher samples (0.72 and 0.77; Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007). ENOS (Evolution and the Nature of Science) ENOS was developed by Nehm and Schonfeld (2007) and is a composite variable that was used to measure teachers knowledge about the NOS in relation to evolution. This measure consists of nine items such as Evolution is weak because it is a theory, Evolution cannot be observed because it is outside the realm of science, and Evolution cannot be refuted by any observation. The authors reported that the validity of this instrument was established by the significant correlation of ENOS scores with essay responses that evaluated participant knowledge of the NOS relating to evolution. The ENOS yielded the Cronbachs of 0.52 for our sample, which is much lower than that reported for American teacher samples (0.62; Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007). Further research should be devoted to the dimensionality of this construct given its moderate internal consistency measure. VNOS (Views of the Nature of Science) We used Abd-El-Khalicks (1998) VNOS-version C to measure Korean pre-service teachers views of the NOS. VNOS-C consists of 10 open-ended questions such as Is there a difference between a scientific theory and a scientific law? Illustrate your answer with an example, and After scientists have developed a scientific theory (e.g., atomic theory, evolutionary theory), does the theory ever change? A panel of experts established the face and content validity of the VNOS-C (Abd-El-Khalick, 1998). Even though there are some disagreements among science educators, scientists, and philosophers regarding the appropriate views of the NOS, there is consensus in the science education community (Abd-El-Khalick & Lederman, 2000). A coding scheme, based on informed views of NOS (Lederman, Abd-ElKhalick, Bell, & Schwartz, 2002), was used to code the VNOS data. Six categories of NOS views were delineated: (1) tentative (scientific knowledge is subject to change), (2) creative and imaginative (scientists utilize their creativity and imagination), (3) social and cultural (science is socially and culturally embedded), (4) theory laden (science is subjective), (5) inference (science is based on human inference), and (6) theory and law (the scientific differences between theories and laws) (Abd-El-Khalick & Lederman, 2000). These six categories were examined in order to determine whether or not students possessed informed views for each NOS category. Two independent coders made judgments regarding student responses. The
Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 209 initial agreement was about 92%. Disagreements were resolved through discussions between scorers. For the MATE, ENOS, and ECK, an ANOVA (analysis of variance) was performed to examine the score differences among genders, certification subject areas, and religions. In addition, the MannWhitney U-tests were utilized to investigate VNOS score differences among genders, subject areas (biology vs. nonbiology), and religions (Christian vs. non-Christian). Finally, Pearson correlation coefficients were used to examine the associations among VNOS, ENOS, ECK, and MATE scores. Results Our study explored Korean pre-service science teachers knowledge of evolution and the NOS, and their acceptance of evolution in relation to gender, religion, and science certification subject area, and compared these results to American science teachers. One of the most widely used measures of evolutionary acceptance is Rutledge and Sadlers (2007) MATE, which has five categories of acceptance: very high (89100), high (7688), moderate (6575), low (5364), and very low (<52). Korean Christian female biology teachers in our sample displayed low acceptance MATE scores, whereas Korean science teachers from the other certification subjects displayed moderate acceptances (Table 1, Figure 1). No group of Korean science teachers was found to display very high acceptance levels of evolution as measured by the MATE. The MATE scores of our Korean teacher sample were compared with MATE scores for American life science teacher samples from Indiana (Rutledge & Warden, 2000), Oregon (Trani, 2004), and Ohio (Korte, 2003), as well as samples of college undergraduates from Ohio (Figure 1). Our sample of Korean science teachers had
Table 1. Descriptive statistics of knowledge and belief measures for Korean science teachers MATE Christian vs. non-Christian Christian Non-Christian Non-biology Christian Non-Christian ENOS ECK
Teachers Biology
Gender Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
Mean 79.60 54.00 75.64 75.00 73.40 74.50 73.86 74.21
SD 3.66 5.79 2.47 2.11 3.66 5.79 1.75 2.19
Mean 28.40 24.00 31.18 30.07 26.20 27.00 28.00 26.93
SD 1.36 2.16 0.92 0.79 1.36 2.16 0.65 0.79
Mean 33.60 29.00 31.64 32.47 34.00 30.00 33.64 31.20
SD 1.53 2.42 1.03 0.88 1.53 2.42 0.73 0.88
Note. See the text for descriptions of the MATE, ENOS, and ECK measures. Biology (n = 33), Non-biology (n = 44), Christian (n = 14), Non-Christian (n = 63).
210 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm an average MATE score of 73.79 (SD = 9.2) which was very similar to the Indiana science teachers from Rutledge and Wardens study (mean = 77.59, SD = 19.8); both groups displayed moderate acceptance levels (Rutledge & Sadler, 2007). Korean science teachers displayed lower MATE scores than the high evolutionary acceptance values for biology teachers from Oregon and Ohio, however (Oregon mean MATE = 85.9, SD = 17.48; Ohio mean MATE = 87, SD = 17.24). MATE data from samples of college undergraduates from Ohio (J. Ridgway, personal communication, 2009) also revealed evolutionary acceptance levels comparable to or higher than our sample of Korean science teachers. A sample of 224 undergraduate biology majors had mean MATE values of 80.79 (SD = 15.80) and a sample of 374 undergraduate non-majors had mean MATE values of 77.90 (SD = 14.40). Finally, Deniz et al. (2008) also employed the MATE instrument in a sample of Turkish science teachers and found average values of 64. Overall, Korean science teachers appear to have levels of evolutionary acceptance comparable to or less than American science teachers but higher than Turkish science teachers.
teachers) data from Trani (2004); USA (Indiana biology teachers) data from Rutledge and subject areas andTurkey (teachers, total) data from Deniz et al. (2008) Figure 1. Average MATE scores compared among teachers and students from different Warden (2000); nationalities. Error bars represent one standard deviation. Data sources listed on the left (from top to bottom): Korea (all data were gathered in the present study, see Methods section); USA (Ohio non-majors and Ohio biology majors) data from Ridgway, personal communication, 2009; USA (Ohio biology teachers) data from Korte (2003); USA (Oregon biology
Figure 1. Average MATE scores compared among teachers and students from different subject areas and nationalities. Error bars represent one standard deviation. Data sources listed on the left (from top to bottom): Korea (all data were gathered in the present study, see Methods section); USA (Ohio non-majors and Ohio biology majors) data from J. Ridgway, personal communication, 2009; USA (Ohio biology teachers) data from Korte (2003); USA (Oregon biology teachers) data from Trani (2004); USA (Indiana biology teachers) data from Rutledge and Warden (2000); Turkey (teachers, total) data from Deniz et al. (2008)
Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 211 In addition to the overall MATE scores, Table 2 displays specific item responses for Korean and American (Indiana, from Rutledge & Warden, 2000) science teachers.1 Several similarities and differences between the samples are noteworthy. For example, while only 6.3% of American biology teachers agreed that much of the scientific community doubts if evolution occurs, approximately 40% of Korean biology teachers agreed with this statement. Similarly, about 80% of American biology teachers agreed that most scientists accept evolutionary theory to be scientifically valid, whereas approximately 60% of Korean teachers responded similarly. Overall, Korean science teachers appear to be more likely to believe that the scientific community is uncertain about the validity of evolutionary theory. In contrast to the American science teachers, Korean teachers appear more likely to dispute strictly biblical accounts of creation. Specifically, very few of the Korean biology teachers (as well as Korean non-biology teachers) agreed that The theory of evolution cannot be correct since it disagrees with the Biblical account of creation (<3%), whereas more than 10% of American biology teachers did (Table 2). Likewise, 15.6% of American biology teachers agreed that With few exceptions, organisms on earth came into existence at about the same time, while only 3% of Korean biology teachers responded similarly. In addition, none of the Korean teachers (biology or non-biology) agreed that The age of the earth is less than 20,000 years old in contrast to 12.5% of American biology teachers. Overall, then, our sample of Korean science teachers displays moderate evolutionary acceptance levels that are comparable to or less than some American samples; reports considerable doubt regarding the acceptance of evolution by the scientific community; and differs from American samples in the near absence of acceptance of some of the tenants of young earth creationism. We examined the effects of gender, religion, and science certification area on Korean teacher MATE scores using an ANOVA. The ANOVA revealed that there was a significant main effect of gender on MATE scores (F[1, 68] = 5.47, p < 0.05), indicating that males MATE scores were significantly higher than females scores. In contrast, there were no significant main effects for religion (Christian vs. nonChristian; F[1, 68] = 2.640, p > 0.05), or certification subject area (biology vs. nonbiology; F[1, 68] = 1.228, p > 0.05). Significant interaction effects were found between gender and religion (F[1, 68] = 5.224, p < 0.05), as well as among gender, religion, and certification area (F[1, 68] = 5.890, p < 0.05; see Figures 2 and 3). Overall, these analyses indicate that gender was one of the most significant associations with Korean pre-service teachers magnitudes of evolutionary acceptance as measured by the MATE. In terms of Korean science teachers evolution content knowledge as measured by ECK, there was again a significant main effect of gender (F[1, 69] = 5.321, p < 0.05), with male ECK scores higher than female ECK scores (Figures 2 and 3). For example, male students presented higher mean scores than females in the items such as Radiometric dating of rocks indicated that the earth is billions of years old, Fossil species have been found that are intermediate between humans and apes, and so on. However, there were no significant main effects of religion (F[1, 69] =
Figure 2. Korean pre-service teachers score differences by gender and religion (Christian vs. non-Christian)
212 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm

Table 2. Comparison of MATE score of Korean and American teachers % of (agree + strongly agree) Biology teachers (Rutledge & Warden, 2000) (n = 551552) 75.0 76.3 Korean biology teachers (n = 33) 81.8 60.6 Korean non-biology teachers (n = 51) 80.4 76.5
Question 1. Evolution is a scientifically valid theory. 2. Organisms existing today are the result of evolutionary processes that have occurred over millions of years. 3. The theory of evolution is based on speculation and not valid scientific observation and testing. 4. Modern humans are the product of evolutionary processes that have occurred over millions of years. 5. There is a considerable body of data that support evolutionary theory. 6. Most scientists accept evolutionary theory to be a scientifically valid theory. 7. The theory of evolution is incapable of being scientifically tested. 8. The theory of evolution cannot be correct since it disagrees with the Biblical account of creation. 9. With few exceptions, organisms on earth came into existence at about the same time. 10. The age of the earth is less than 20,000 years. 11. The theory of evolution brings meaning to the diverse characteristics and behaviors observed in living things. 12. Evolutionary theory generates testable predictions with respect to the characteristics of life. 13. Organisms exist today in essentially the same form in which they always have. 14. Evolution is not a scientifically valid theory. 15. Much of the scientific community doubts if evolution occurs. 16. Current evolutionary theory is the result of sound scientific research and methodology. 17. Evolutionary theory is supported by factual, historical, and laboratory data. 18. Humans exist today in essentially the same form in which they always have. 19. The age of the earth is approximately 45 billion years. 20. The available evidence is ambiguous as to whether evolution actually occurs.
13.6 68.1 77.0 79.3 17.6 12.1 15.6 12.5 76.1
36.3 48.5 72.7 60.6 24.3 3.0 3.0 0.0 84.8
29.4 76.4 54.9 62.7 23.5 2.0 0.0 0.0 78.4
61.8 15.1 12.7 6.3 71.0 70.7 19.9 69.7 17.6
60.6 21.2 15.1 42.4 84.8 69.7 21.2 87.9 21.3
56.8 17.6 7.8 37.2 70.6 68.6 17.6 82.3 39.2
Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 213
Figure 2.
Korean pre-service teachers score differences by gender and religion (Christian vs. Non-Christian)
0.280, p > 0.05) or subject area (F[1, 69] = 0.232, p > 0.05) on ECK scores (Figures 2 and 3). Finally, no significant interaction effects were found among gender, religion, and subject area (F[1, 69] = 8.954, p > 0.05). Overall, female Korean Christian biology teachers displayed the lowest ECK scores among all groupings (Table 1). We used two instruments to measure Korean science teachers knowledge of the NOS: the closed response ENOS and the open response VNOS (see Instruments and Measures section). Our ANOVA of ENOS scores uncovered a significant main effect for religion (Christian vs. Non-Christian) (F[1, 69] = 7.213, p < 0.01). Specifically, the Non-Christian group displayed higher mean ENOS scores than the Christian group (see Figure 3), although there were no significant main effects of gender (F[1, 69] = 2.153, p > 0.05) or certification subject (biology vs. non-biology) (F[1, 69] = 1.959, p > 0.05) on ENOS scores. Finally, no significant interaction effects were found among gender, religion, or subject area (F[1, 69] = 15.894, p > 0.05). As
Figure 3. Korean pre-service teachers score differences by certification subject area (biology vs. non-biology) and religion (Christian vs. non-Christian)
Figure 3.
Korean pre-service teachers score differences by certification subject area (Biology vs. Non-biology) and religion (Christian vs. non-Christian)
we found with ECK scores (see above), female Korean Christian biology teachers displayed the lowest ENOS scores among groups. The VNOS instrument was also used to measure Korean science teachers perspectives on the NOS. Table 3 provides exemplars of what our raters coded as informed and nave views of NOS from our teacher participants. MannWhitney U-tests demonstrated that there were no significant differences between teachers understandings of NOS by subject area (biology vs. non-biology) (U = 736.00, p > 0.05), religion (Christian vs. non-Christian) (U = 426.00, p > 0.05), or gender (male vs. female) (U = 602.50, p > 0.05). Notably, biology teachers scores on inference were higher than non-biology teachers scores (e.g., B26 mentioned that The structure of the atom cannot be directly observed through our senses. We cannot actually see them, so scientists use indirect evidences to conjecture the structure of atom), whereas non-biology teachers scores on theories and laws were higher than biology teacher scores. These biology teachers are more likely to think that a theory is a guess, while a law is a proved truth.
Table 3. Exemplars of Korean science teachers informed and nave views of the nature of science Nave view Scientists are sure about the structure of the atom. They observed it using microscopes. (E13)
Informed view
Inference
Theories and laws Tentative
Scientists conjectured the structure of atom through experiments. Rutherfords gold foil experiment with alpha particle made it possible to predict the existence of an atomic nucleus. (C15) A scientific theory explains the phenomena, while a scientific law generalizes phenomena through experiments. (C15) A scientific theory is changeable due to the development of technology. For example, atomic theory has changed so far A scientific theory will never be perfect. (P7)
Creative and imaginative
To scientists, creativity and imagination are essential elements. Creating new ideas is very important during investigation so that they discover new ones. (C4)
Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution
Subjective and theory laded Social and cultural
Even though the same data are used, scientists viewpoints differ when scientists analyze data. (E21)
Science reflects social/cultural values. Every country or society has different interest areas. According to social/cultural values, the degree of scientific development differs. For example, since every society has different ethical criteria, stem cell research could produce different scientific results. (C6)
A scientific theory is only a guess without evidence, while a law is an evident truth. (B23) A scientific theory has evidence that could be believable. For example, plate tectonics has visible evidence related to plate movements and plate boundaries. Therefore the scientific theory reflects truth and cannot be changed. (E10) Scientists do not use creativity and imagination. Experiments and investigations are a process which produces objective data to prove a hypothesis. If scientists use creativity or imagination, a process to prove a hypothesis is not rational due to their subjective thinking. (B2) Due to lack of data. Since it was long time ago, we dont have enough data to predict the circumstances. Therefore, there is a limitation in a close examination. (B11) Science is universal. Science is independent of social, cultural, and political value. Science is effective in everything; every time and every place. (E5)
215
216 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm We compared Korean pre-service science teachers ENOS and ECK scores to two groups of American biology teachers from Nehm and Schonfelds (2007) study: Teacher group 1 (those who preferred students to be taught evolution exclusively in school) and Teacher group 2 (those who preferred students to be taught both creationism and evolution in school). ENOS and ECK scores for the two groups of American teachers were collected both before and after the completion of a 14-week course on evolution and the NOS. Korean Non-Christian science teachers demonstrated slightly higher ENOS scores than Korean Christian teachers (means 28.8 vs. 26.8, respectively), whereas no differences were noted in ECK scores between Christian and Non-Christian teachers (Table 4). Overall, these comparisons revealed that ENOS measures from Korean Non-Christian teachers and post-test ENOS measures from American Group 1 teachers were very similar, whereas for ECK measures, Korean science teachers (both Christian and Non-Christian) demonstrated higher average scores than American science teachers. VNOS results for Korean science teachers were compared to those of a comparable American sample (from Abd-El-Khalick, 2005). Since the Korean pre-service science teachers in our sample had already completed a course on the philosophy of science (e.g., covering the ideas of Kuhn, Popper, and Lakatos; scientific methodology; empiricism vs. realism; and the development of scientific knowledge), our results were compared to the post-instruction scores of Abd-El-Khalicks (2005) American sample. As shown in Table 5, Korean pre-service teachers appear to harbor less informed views of NOS relative to American pre-service teachers in the categories of theories and laws and creative and imaginative aspects of NOS. In contrast, a greater percentage of Korean than American pre-service science teachers responded with what have been termed informed views of NOS in the categories of tentative and theory-laden NOS. Regarding the category of inferential, social, and cultural aspects of NOS, comparable percentages of Korean and American science teachers displayed informed views of NOS (Table 5). Finally, we explored the interrelationships among our knowledge and belief measures in Korean science teachers. Specifically, Pearson correlation coefficients quantified the associations among VNOS, ENOS, ECK, and MATE (see Table 6). The strongest correlation (r = 0.51, p < 0.01) was found between
Table 4. Comparison of ENOS and ECK scores of Korean and American teachers ENOS mean Group 1 Pre Post Group 2 Pre Post Christian Non-Christian 25.53 28.60 17.46 16.26 26.79 28.79 ECK mean 28.58 29.15 16.28 15.78 32.57 32.43
American (Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007) Korean (Current study)

Table 5. Comparison of VNOS of Korean American pre-service teachers Korean American (Abd-El-Khaklick, 2005) % of informed views of NOS group post-instruction 53.6 58.9 71.4 60.7 35.7 60.7
NOS aspect Theories vs. laws Tentative Inferential Creative and imaginative Theory laden Social and cultural
% of informed views 26.2 92.9 71.4 14.3 71.4 69.0
ENOS and MATE; the pre-service teachers with higher scores of knowledge about the NOS in relation to evolution were more likely to accept the theory of evolution. Compared to the relationship between ENOS and MATE, there was a significant but low association between ECK scores and MATE scores (r = 0.22, p < 0.05); thus, evolution content knowledge was less associated with acceptance of the theory of evolution than knowledge about NOS in relation to evolution. Overall, there were significant relationships among most of the variables we measured: between ENOS and MATE, ECK and MATE, VNOS and MATE, and ENOS and ECK, even though the magnitudes of correlation coefficients were low in several cases (Table 6). Our data clearly demonstrate that Korean science teachers knowledge of the NOS is significantly related to their acceptance of evolutionary theory.
Table 6. Pearson correlation coefcients and signicance values among measured knowledge and attitude measures (VNOS, ENOS, ECK, and MATE; see Instruments and Measures section for details on these measures) VNOS VNOS ENOS ECK MATE Pearson correlation Significant (two-tailed) Pearson correlation Significant (two-tailed) Pearson correlation Significant (two-tailed) Pearson correlation 1 ENOS .192 .088 1 ECK .121 .285 .231* .036 1 MATE .237* .036 .510** .000 .223* .045 1
*Correlation is signicant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed). **Correlation is signicant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed). Note. VNOS, Views of the Nature of Science; ENOS, Evolution and the Nature of Science; ECK, Evolution Content Knowledge; MATE, Measure of Acceptance of the Theory of Evolution.
218 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm Discussion A burgeoning literature on evolution education in the USA has revealed widespread antipathy or ambivalence toward evolution, pervasive misconceptions, and staunch resistance to the teaching of evolution in schools, students, and science teachers alike (Nehm, Kim, et al., 2009; Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007). Such antievolutionism has been described as a particularly American phenomenon (Miller et al., 2006; Scott, 2009) despite a paucity of research on many important populationsincluding science teachersfrom different regions of the world (such as Korea). Additionally, recent international work has begun to suggest that antievolutionary thinking is a more global problem than has been widely appreciated (e.g., Clment et al., 2008; Curry, 2009; Kutschera, 2008). This raises two important questions: (1) Are American science teachers in fact unique in their evolutionary worldviews relative to the rest of the world? (2) Do the evolutionary knowledge and belief interrelationships documented in American teachers characterize other populations? Our study addressed these questions by performing a literature review of teachers evolutionary views from around the world and empirically investigating a sample of preservice science teachers from South Korea using comparable instruments and measures as those used on American science teachers (i.e., MATE, ENOS, ECK, and VNOS).
Acceptance of Evolution Our study of Korean pre-service science teachers revealed that they had lower levels of evolutionary acceptance than all the samples of American science teachers and undergraduate science (and non-science) students that have been collected using the MATE instrument. While Korean science teachers MATE scores fell within Rutledge and Sadlers (2007) moderate acceptance level, and all of our American samples fell within the high acceptance level, the variation among samples indicates that the two groups do not differ appreciably in their degree of evolutionary acceptance (Figure 1). Although Turkish science teachers MATE scores were not directly comparable to other samples because of an altered Likert scale (i.e., for an unknown reason only fourrather than the typical fivechoices were used). Nevertheless, Korean science teachers did have higher re-scaled average MATE scores than the Turkish science teachers from Deniz et al. (2008). While it is impossible to directly compare the results from the more than 20 other nations that we reviewed because of different measures, samples, and survey methods (see Introduction section), it is clear that science teacher antipathy or ambivalence toward evolution is by no means a problem restricted to the USA (Clment et al., 2008; Curry, 2009; Deniz et al., 2008; Downie & Barron, 2000; Fulljames et al., 1991; Ha et al., 2006; Hokayem & BouJaoude, 2008; Kutschera, 2008; Lee et al., 1998; Lee & Lee, 2006; Maldonado-Rivera, 1998; Prinou et al., 2005; Vlaardingerbroek & Roederer, 1997; Zetterqvist, 2003). Further cross-cultural studies using comparable measuressuch as the MATEwould bolster science teacher educators efforts to
Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 219 characterize and combat this global problem (Curry, 2009). Efforts to develop, validate, and implement an evolutionary knowledge and belief instrument that is agreeable to the international research community should be supported. Gender Despite considerable emphasis on gender-related issues within the American science education community (e.g., Barton, 1998; National Science Teachers Association [NSTA], 2003), remarkably few cross-cultural studies of evolutionary knowledge and belief relationships have attended to gender (Cao, Forgasz, & Bishop, 2007). Recently, Brotman and Moore (2008) comprehensively reviewed studies regarding gender and science attitudes. They found that while in general most studies found that females attitudes toward science were less positive than those of males, in regard to science achievement, gender differences were not consistent from study to study. They went on to suggest that contextual factors (e.g., ethnicity, ability level) may explain some of the gender difference patterns they reviewed. Furthermore, Greenfield (1996) found that ethnicity accounted for more variance in science attitude and achievement differences than did gender. Notably, little work has explored associations among religious worldviews, gender, and science attitudes. For this reason, further studies of gender relationships in evolution education should incorporate both ability-level and ethnicity measures. Because gender roles and socially mediated gender constructs differ significantly across cultures and nations, one might hypothesize varying degrees of influence. Regardless of its cause, however, some research suggestslike our findings in Korean pre-service science teachersthat females as a group may possess greater ambivalence toward evolution than males. Kutschera (2008), for example, also found greater acceptance rates for creationism and intelligent designand lower acceptance rates of naturalistic evolutionamong women than men across several regions of Germany. Similarly, Francis and Greer (1999) also found a gender effect in their work in the UK: being a young female (along with being a devout church attendee) was associated with higher levels of creationist belief. Likewise, female Christian Korean pre-service science teachers in our sample displayed significantly greater preferences for creationist or antievolutionary perspectives than males. Additionally, Clment et al.s (2008) study of biology teachers (whose science content preparation was difficult to surmise but appeared remarkably low) also found that women appeared to be less knowledgeable about evolutionary processes than men. Moreover, our study found that gender was of greater significance than religion when accounting for Korean pre-service teachers evolution content knowledge. Unfortunately, most studies investigating evolutionary knowledge and belief relationships have not attended to gender associations. Clearly, accounting for the impact of gender in different cultural contexts is a profitable avenue for further empirical and theoretical work. Whether these patterns are robust or widespread and the reasons responsible for themremain to be established.
220 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm Religion In Korea, among the approximately half of the citizenry practicing religion, Christianity and Buddhism dominate nearly equally (see Socio-Cultural Context section). In our sample, pre-service teachers mostly self-identified as Christians or as having no religious affiliation. Korean pre-service teachers did not exhibit differences in understanding of NOS by religious group (as measured by VNOS). We did, however, find differences between religious groups in knowledge about the NOS in relation to evolution (as measured by ENOS). Christians demonstrated less knowledge about the NOS in relation to evolution than NonChristians. This result suggests that these Christian Korean pre-service teachers seem to understand evolution content knowledge but tend not to deepen their understanding of NOS aspects of evolutionary theory. The finding of no difference of VNOS results further indicates that the theory of evolution may be unique compared to other scientific theories in that religion should not be ignored when students learn the theory of evolution (Meadow, Doster, & Jackson, 2000). Religious beliefs, however, do not appear to be strongly associated with diminished evolution content knowledge. In other words, understanding of evolution is not significantly related to religious belief. Similar results were reported by Nehm, Kim, et al., (2009). These findings further support earlier studies that have highlighted the tenuous relationship between evolutionary knowledge and belief (Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007; Southerland & Sinatra, 2003). Indeed, Nehm and Schonfeld (2007) argued that knowledge gain alone is unlikely to solve the problem of science teachers antipathy or ambivalence toward evolutionary ideas. The present study likewise suggests that religion needs to be addressed in science teacher preparation (and perhaps when teaching evolution as well). How this realistically can be achieved is a difficult issue, but recent work employing NOS readings, reflections, and activities (Clough, 2006; Lombrozo et al., 2008; Scharmann, 2005) has been found to diminish personal conflict about religion and science (Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007).
Nature of Science Knowledge Many authors have noted that a weak understanding of the NOS may constrain evolutionary understanding (e.g., Clough, 1994, 2006; Dagher & BouJaoude, 1997; Lombrozo et al., 2008; Scharmann, Smith, James, & Jensen, 2005). Along this line of reasoning, explicit NOS instructioncoupled with opportunities for meaningful reflectionappears to enhance or facilitate students learning of evolution (Dagher & BouJaoude, 1997; Scharmann et al., 2005). Similarly, Clough (1994) maintains that increasing student understanding of the NOS decreases resistance to evolutionary theory (note that resistance and the absence of knowledge are two often related but different issues). Like Scharmann et al. (2005), Clough (2006) went on to argue for the importance of including discussions of context when teaching about scientific knowledge and the NOS.
Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 221 In the present study, we found a stronger correlation between ENOS and MATE scores than VNOS and MATE scores. In addition, the ECK scores were more strongly correlated to ENOS scores than VNOS scores (see Table 6). Since the ENOS comprises context-specific items (in this case, evolution), it is reasonable that its constituent scores display a stronger relationship to the MATE. Within contextspecific situations (e.g., in this study, biological evolution), it is necessary for students to have an opportunity to reflect upon how specific scientific knowledge was generated as well as how the scientific community has come to reach consensus regarding the acceptance of particular forms of knowledge. Providing opportunities for students to discuss the scientific validity of evolutionary theoryin particular, how evolutionary theory effectively explains natural phenomena (Aroua, Coquide, & Abbes, 2009)would be one useful instructional strategy. Similarly, Dagher and BouJaoude (1997) emphasized the need for classroom discussions of scientific knowledge in relation to students beliefs and worldviews, which they argued should foster deeper understanding of the theory of evolution. In line with much of this workand similar to the recent empirical results of Lombrozo et al. (2008)we found that indeed there was a significant association between Korean pre-service science teachers knowledge about evolution in relation to the nature of science (ENOS) and their acceptance of the theory of evolution (MATE) (r = 0.510, p < 0.01). Interestingly, this correlation coefficient was stronger than the correlation coefficient between teachers NOS knowledge as measured using the VNOS (see Instruments and Measures section); nevertheless, in both the cases the relationship was significant, bolstering previous theoretical and empirical work establishing a strong connection between acceptance of evolution and knowledge of the NOS. While in hindsight it may not be surprising that this relationship established primarily from research with American samplesalso exists in Korean teachers, it is useful and important to have evidence to validate such conjecture. In other international contexts, Aroua et al. (2009) also argued for the importance of including NOS instruction along with teaching evolution to Tunisian Muslim students. In summary, our findingsalong with previously published work from around the worldsupport the perspective that understanding NOS may facilitate evolutionary understanding (in addition to American contexts; Scharmann, 2005). Limitations of the Study and Further Research This study has several limitations. First, some of our measures (i.e., ENOS and ECK) were characterized by marginal Cronbachs values. Alpha values for (ENOS + ECK) were higher than the respective individual variable scores (combined = 0.67, excluding one of the items), but we chose not to combine the scores because Pearson correlation coefficients indicated that ENOS and ECK scores were not highly correlated for the overall sample (r = 0.231); this suggests that the two measures may be capturing different constructs. Further work should be devoted to improving these measuressuch as investigating instrument dimensionality and item propertiesor employing alternatives. Second, although we
222 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm expended considerable effort in having the translated instruments reviewed by several experts, it is difficult to ensure that the interpretations of items across cultural contexts were, in fact, identical (e.g., Cao et al., 2007). Nevertheless, instrument standardization is a worthy first step if we hope to better understand the evolutionary worldviews of teachers across cultural boundaries. Furthermore, comparing the results of measures requires sample standardization by age, gender, content background, and other variables. While the Korean teachers in our sample were most similar to those in Nehm and Schonfelds (2007) study, they differed from the American samples of Rutledge, Trani, and Korte (see above) in that the Korean sample was slightly younger, had little or no teaching experience, and had variable content preparation. Thus, our comparisons should be interpreted with caution. Finally, many of our quantitative measures attempted to capture constructs that are remarkably complex and amorphous; additional qualitative interviews would likely enrich our results and lend greater validity to the interpretations. For example, the science teachers in our sample provided very limited characterizations of their religious beliefs and yet magnitudes of religiosity are known to matter. Nevertheless, our quantitative measures revealed a relatively consistent portrait of Korean science teachers that calls into question the assumption that American science teacher attitudes toward evolution are unique from an international perspective and bolsters the strong connection between NOS understanding and acceptance of evolution in Korean science teachers. Conclusions A literature review of science teachers evolutionary worldviews from more than 20 nations challenges the purported uniqueness of American science teachers ambivalence and antipathy toward evolution. It also revealed that comparatively little work has explored Asian teachers evolutionary worldviews in general or Korean science teachers in particular. Our empirical work filled this gap by focusing on Korean preservice science teachers. As indicated by the widely used MATE instrument, Korean science teachers displayed moderate levels of evolutionary acceptance comparable to samples of American science teachers from Indiana, lower scores than Oregonian and Ohioan science teachers, and lower scores than American undergraduate biology students. While gender has received minimal attention in evolution education research, we found it to be significantly associated with Christian Korean pre-service teachers evolution content knowledge and acceptance of the theory of evolution. Several international studies that we reviewed also make note of significant gender effects on evolutionary acceptance, highlighting a potential cross-cultural pattern worthy of further investigation. Finally, as documented in American science teachers, Korean science teachers understanding of the NOS was significantly related to their acceptance and understanding of evolution. This relationship appears to be robust and transcends cultural boundaries.
Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 223 Acknowledgments We thank Minsu Ha for help with literature and translations, Judy Ridgway for access to data, and David Haury for constructive reviews of the manuscript.
Note
1. Trani (2004) and Korte (2003) did not publish MATE item response data suitable for comparisons.
References
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (1998). The influence of history of science courses on students conceptions of the nature of science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Oregon State University. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2005). Developing deeper understandings of the nature of science: The impact of a philosophy of science course on preservice science teachers views and instructional planning. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 1542. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 10571095. Affannato, F. E. (1986). A survey of biology teachers opinions about the teaching of evolutionary theory and/or the creation model in the United States in public and private schools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa. Aguillard, D. (1998). An analysis of factors influencing the teaching of biological evolution in Louisiana public secondary schools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College. Aguillard, D. (1999). Evolution education in Louisiana public schools: A decade following Edwards v. Aguillard. The American Biology Teacher, 61(3), 182188. Aldrich, K. J. (1991). Teachers attitudes towards evolution and creationism in Kansas biology classrooms. Kansas Biology Teacher, 8, 2021. Archer, M. (1987). Evolution as science: One aspect of a very large universe. In D. R. Selkirk & F. J. Burrows (Eds.), Confronting creationism: Defending Darwin (pp. 1426). Kensington: New South Wales University Press. Aroua, S., Coquide, M., & Abbes, S. (2009). Overcoming the effect of the socio-cultural context: Impact of teaching evolution in Tunisia. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2, 474478. Barton, A. C. (1998). Feminist science education. New York: Teachers College Press. Bergman, J. (1979). The attitude of university students toward the teaching of creation and evolution in the schools. Origins, 6, 6070. Berkman, M. B., Pacheco J. S., & Plutzer, E. (2008). Evolution and creationism in Americas classrooms: A national portrait. Public Library of Science Biology, 6(5), e124. Brem, S. K., Ranney, M., & Schindel, J. E. (2003). The perceived consequences of evolution: College students perceive negative personal and social impact in evolutionary theory. Science Education, 87, 181206. Brotman, J. S., & Moore, F. M. (2008). Girls and science: A review of four themes in the science education literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 9711002. Brown, J. A. (2000). Unifying concepts in the high school biology curriculum, one or many: An investigation of rural, suburban, and urban schools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington. Brunton, B., & Colquhoun-Kerr, D. (1984). The annotated constitution of Papua New Guinea. Papua New Guinea: University of Papua New Guinea Press.

Buckner, E. M. (1983). Professional and political socialization: High school science teacher attitudes on curriculum decisions, in the context of the scientific creationism campaign. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University. Burnett, W. R. (1941). Science teachers opinions on social issues. Curriculum, 4, 175177. Cao, Z., Forgasz, H., & Bishop, A. (2007). Doing surveys in different cultures. In B. Atweh, M. Borba, A. C. Barton, N. Gough, & C. Keitel (Eds.), Internationalisation and globalisation in mathematics and science education (pp. 303320). Dordrecht: Springer. Chuang, H. C. (2003). Teaching evolution: Attitudes and strategies of educators in Utah. The American Biology Teacher, 65(9), 669674. Cleaves, A., & Toplis, R. (2007). In the shadow of intelligent design: The teaching of evolution. Journal of Biological Education, 42(1), 3035. Clment, P., Quessada, M. P., Laurent, C., & Carvalho, G. (2008, September 2126). Science and religion: Evolutionism and creationism in education. A survey of teachers conceptions in 14 countries. Submitted to XIII IOSTE Symposium, Izmir, Turkey, 115. Clough, M. P. (1994). Diminish students resistance to biological evolution. The American Biology Teacher, 56, 409415. Clough, M. P. (2006). Learners responses to the demands of conceptual change: Considerations for effective nature of science instruction. Science Education, 15, 463494. Coyne, J. A. (2009). Seeing and believing. Retrieved January 15, 2010, from http://www.tnr.com/ article/books/seeing-and-believing Crawford, B., Zembal-Saul, C., Munford, D., & Friedrichsen, P. (2005). Confronting prospective teachers ideas of evolution and scientific inquiry using technology and inquiry based tasks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(6), 613637. Curry, A. (2009). Creationist beliefs persist in Europe. Science, 323(27), 1159. Dagher, Z. R., & BouJaoude, S. (1997). Scientific views and religious beliefs of college students: The case of biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(5), 429445. Deniz, H., Donnelly, L. A., & Yilmaz, I. (2008). Exploring the factors related to acceptance of evolutionary theory among Turkish preservice biology teachers: Toward a more informative conceptual ecology for biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(4), 420443. Donnelly, L. A., & Boone, W. J. (2007). Biology teachers attitudes toward and use of Indianas evolution standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 236257. Downie, J. R., & Barron, N. J. (2000). Evolution and religion: Attitudes of Scottish first year biology and medical students to the teaching of evolutionary biology. Journal of Biological Education, 34(3), 139147. Eglin, P. G. (1983). Creationism vs. evolution: A study of the opinions of Georgia science teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University. Evans, E. M. (2005). Teaching and learning about evolution. In J. Diamond (Ed.), The virus and the whale: Explore evolution in creatures small and large (pp. 2540). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press. Eve, R. A., & Dunn, D. (1990). Psychic powers, astrology, and creationism in the classroom? Evidence of pseudoscientific beliefs among high school biology life science teachers. The American Biology Teacher, 52(1), 1021. Fahrenwald, C. R. (1999). Biology teachers acceptance and understanding of evolution and the nature of science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of South Dakota. Firenze, R. F. (1998). The identification, assessment, and amelioration of perceived and actual barriers to teachers incorporation of evolutionary theory as a central theme in life science classes through a two-week institute and follow-up studies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, SUNY Binghampton. Fisher, R. T. (1989). The effects of education on creationist beliefs among high school science teachers. Unpublished masters thesis, University of Texas.

Francis, L. J., & Greer, J. E. (1999). Attitudes towards creationism and evolutionary theory: The debate among secondary pupils attending Catholic and Protestant schools in Northern Ireland. Public Understanding of Science, 8, 93103. Fulljames, P., Harry, M., Gibson, L., & Francis, J. (1991). Creationism, scientism, Christianity and science: A study in adolescent attitudes. British Educational Research Journal, 17(2), 171190. Graf, D. (2009). Noahs Arc or the Beagle? Creationism, the theory of evolution, and education. Retrieved January 15, 2010, from http://www.goethe.de/ges/phi/dos/her/mod/en2850820.htm Greenfield, T. A. (1996). Gender, ethnicity, science achievement, and attitudes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), 901933. Griffith, J., & Brem, S. (2004). Teaching evolutionary biology: Pressures, stress, and coping. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 791809. Groves, F. H. (1990). A qualitative study of the beliefs and professional backgrounds of secondary level science teachers in a public school and a protestant Christian school in Colorado. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado at Boulder. Ha, M., & Cha, H. (2009). Pre-service teachers synthetic view on Darwinism and Larmarckism. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, California. Ha, M., Lee, J., & Cha, H. (2006). A cross-sectional study of students conceptions on evolution and characteristics of concept formation about it in terms of the subjects: Human, animals and plants. Journal of Korea Association for Research in Science Education, 26(7), 813825. (In Korean) Hokayem, H., & BouJaoude, S. (2008). College students perceptions of the theory of evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(4), 395419. Im, E., Cho, J., & Hong, H. (2007). College students views about origins of life and evolution. Journal of Science Education, 31, 1126. (In Korean) Johnson, K. L. (1991). Factors affecting curriculum decisions of San Diego seventh and eighth-grade science teachers regarding the creationevolution issue. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona University. Johnson, R. L., & Peeples, E. E. (1987). The role of scientific understanding in college: Student acceptance of evolution. The American Biology Teacher, 49, 9396. Jorstad, S. (2002). An analysis of factors influencing the teaching of evolution and creation by Arizona high school biology teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Arizona. Kim, C. (2002). Religious pluralism of Korea today. Seoul Journal of Korean Studies, 15, 153175. Korte, S. E. (2003). The acceptance and understanding of evolutionary theory among Ohio secondary science teachers. Unpublished master of education thesis, Ohio University. Kraemer, K. A. (1995). A comparative study of Minnesota teachers attitudes toward the teaching of evolution and creationism. Unpublished master of education thesis, Bemidji State University. Kutschera, U. (2008) Creationism in Germany and its possible cause. Evolution Education and Outreach, 1, 8486. Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497521. Lee, M., & Lee, K. (2006). Analysis of student conceptions in evolution based on science history. Journal of Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 26(7), 813825. (In Korean) Lee, Y. J., Izard, J., & Yeoh, O. C. (1998). Teacher knowledge of biological evolution from the perspectives of classical test and item response theory. Unpublished research report, ERIC Clearinghouse No. ED440110. Lerner, L. S. (2000). Good science, bad science: Teaching evolution in the states. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. Lombrozo, T., Thanukos, A., & Weisberg, M. (2008). The importance of understanding the nature of science for accepting evolution. Evolution Education and Outreach, 1, 290298. Maldonado-Rivera, J. G. (1998). An examination of the factors affecting the teaching and learning of evolution. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University.

McCrory, C., & Murphy, C. (2009). The growing visibility of creationism in Northern Ireland: Are new science teachers equipped to deal with the issues? Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2, 373385. Meadow, L., Doster, E., & Jackson, D. F. (2000). Managing the conflict between evolution and religion. The American Biology Teacher, 62, 102107. Miller, E. (1990). Attitudes of Alabama biology teachers toward the teaching of evolution and creationism. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alabama. Miller, J. D., Scott, E. C., & Okamoto, S. (2006). Science communication: Public acceptance of evolution. Science, 313, 765766. Moore, R. (2003). Legal issues surrounding evolution and creationism. The Science Teacher, 70(8), 6869. Moore, R. (2008). Creationism in the biology classroom: What do teachers teach and how do they teach it? The American Biology Teacher, 70(2), 7984. Moore, R., & Kraemer, K. (2005). The teaching of evolution and creationism in Minnesota. The American Biology Teacher, 67(8), 457466. National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (2003). Position statement on gender equity in science. Retrieved March 18, 2009, from http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/genderequity.aspx Nehm, R. H., Kim, S., & Sheppard, K. (2009). Academic preparation in biology and advocacy for teaching evolution: Biology versus non-biology teachers. Science Education, 93(6), 11221146. Nehm, R. H., Poole, T. M., Lyford, M. E., Hoskins, S. G., Carruth, L., Ewers, B. E., et al. (2009). Does the segregation of evolution in biology textbooks and introductory courses reinforce students faulty mental models of biology and evolution? Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2, 527532. Nehm, R. H., & Schonfeld, I. S. (2007). Does increasing biology teacher knowledge of evolution and the nature of science lead to greater preference for the teaching of evolution in schools? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(5), 699723. Newport, F. (2009). On Darwins birthday, only 4 in 10 believe in evolution. Retrieved March 18, 2009, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/Darwin-Birthday-Believe-Evolution.aspx Numbers, R. L. (2004). Creationists and their critics in Australia: An autonomous culture or the USA with kangaroos? In S. Coleman & L. Carlin (Eds.), The culture of creationism: Anti-evolutionism in English-speaking countries (pp. 109124). Aldershot: Ashgate. Numbers, R. L. (2009). That creationism is a uniquely American phenomenon. In R. L. Numbers (Ed.), Galileo goes to jail and other myths about science and religion (pp. 215223). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Osif, B. A. (1997). Evolution and religious beliefs: A survey of Pennsylvania high school teachers. The American Biology Teacher, 59(9), 552556. Plutzer, E., & Berkman, M. B. (2008). Trends: Evolution, creationism and the teaching of human origins in schools. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(3), 540553. Price, B. (1992). The AIB national poll of first year biology students in Australian. The Skeptic, 12, 2631. Prinou, L., Halkia, L., & Skordoulis, C. (2005). Teaching the theory of evolution: Secondary teachers attitudes, views and difficulties. Retrieved March 18, 2009, from http://www.ihpst2005.leeds. ac.uk/papers/Prinou_Halkia_Skordoulis.pdf Riddle, O. (1942). Preliminary impressions and facts from a questionnaire on secondary school biology. The American Biology Teacher, 3(5), 151159. Roelfs, F. C. (1987). Academic factors affecting the status of the teaching of evolution in Arkansas and Missouri. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia. Rutledge, M. L., & Mitchell, M. A. (2002). High school biology teachers knowledge structure, acceptance, and teaching of evolution. The American Biology Teacher, 64, 2127. Rutledge, M. L., & Sadler, K. C. (2007). Reliability of the measure of acceptance of the theory of evolution (MATE) instrument with university students. The American Biology Teacher, 51, 275280.

Rutledge, M. L., & Warden, M. A. (1999). Development and validation of the measure of acceptance of the theory of evolution instrument. School Science and Mathematics, 99, 1318. Rutledge, M. L., & Warden, M. A. (2000). Science and high school biology teachers: Critical relationships. The American Biology Teacher, 62, 2331. Scharmann, L. C. (2005). A proactive strategy for teaching evolution. The American Biology Teacher, 67, 1216. Scharmann, L. C., Smith, M. U., James, M., & Jensen, M. (2005). Explicit reflective nature of science instruction: Evolution, intelligent design, and umbrellology. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16(1), 2741. Scott, E. C. (2009). American antievolutionism: Retrospect and prospect. In M. Ruse & J. Travis (Eds.), Evolution: The first four billion years (pp. 237255). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Shankar, G. (1989). Analysis of factors influencing the teaching of evolution and creationism in Texas public high school biology classes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech University. Shankar, G., & Skoog, G. (1993). Emphasis given evolution and creationism by Texas high school biology teachers. Science Education, 77(2), 221233. Soto Sonera, J. (2006). Implicaciones educativas de las creencias religiosas de las docentes de ciencia en la enseanza del tema evolucin biolgica: un estudio de caso. [Educational implications of the religious beliefs of science teachers at the 15th year of the subject biological evolution: A case study]. Disertacin doctoral, Facultad de Educacin, Universidad de Puerto Rico, Ro Piedras. Southerland, S., & Sinatra, G. (2003). Learning about biological evolution: A special case of intentional conceptual change. In G. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 317345). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Strauss, J. (2008). Preservice teachers: Future first responders in the evolution versus intelligent design battle. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Claremont Graduate University. Tatina, R. (1989). South Dakota high school biology teachers and the teaching of evolution and creationism. The American Biology Teacher, 51(5), 275280. Taylor, K. (1999). The teaching of evolution in North Carolina: A study of teacher beliefs and curriculum decision-making. In L. P. McCoy (Ed.), Studies in teaching 1999 research digest (ERIC Document: ED443814) Winston Salem, NC: Wake Forest University. Trani, R. (2004). I wont teach evolution: Its against my religion. The American Biology Teacher, 66, 419427. Troost, C. J. (1966). An analysis of factors influencing the teaching of evolution in the secondary schools of Indiana. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University. US Department of State. (2008). Republic of Korea. Retrieved March 18, 2009, from http:// travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_1018.html Van Koevering, T. E., & Stiehl, R. B. (1989). Evolution, creation and Wisconsin biology teachers. The American Biology Teacher, 51, 4200202. Vlaardingerbroek, B., & Roederer, C. J. (1997). Evolution education in Papua New Guinea: Trainee teachers views. Educational Studies, 23(3), 363375. Weld, J., & McNew, J. C. (1999). Attitudes toward evolution. The Science Teacher, 66, 2731. Zetterqvist, A. (2003). mnesdidaktisk kompetens i evolutionsbiologi. En intervjuunderskningmed no/biologilrare [Didactic expertise in evolutionary biology]. Gteborg Studies in Educational Sciences, 197. Gteborg, Sweden: ACTA Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Zimmerman, M. (1987). The evolutioncreation controversy: Opinions of Ohio high school biology teachers. Ohio Journal of Science, 87(4), 115125.

A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Korean and American Science Teachers' Views of Evolution and The Nature of Science 453338 - 920456608

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Korean and American Science Teachers' Views of Evolution and The Nature of Science 453338 - 920456608

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

This article was downloaded by: On: 22 April 2011 Access details: Access Details: Free Access Publisher

International Journal of Science Education

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Gender Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female

Mean 79.60 54.00 75.64 75.00 73.40 74.50 73.86 74.21

SD 3.66 5.79 2.47 2.11 3.66 5.79 1.75 2.19

Mean 28.40 24.00 31.18 30.07 26.20 27.00 28.00 26.93

SD 1.36 2.16 0.92 0.79 1.36 2.16 0.65 0.79

Mean 33.60 29.00 31.64 32.47 34.00 30.00 33.64 31.20

SD 1.53 2.42 1.03 0.88 1.53 2.42 0.73 0.88

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

212 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm

13.6 68.1 77.0 79.3 17.6 12.1 15.6 12.5 76.1

36.3 48.5 72.7 60.6 24.3 3.0 3.0 0.0 84.8

29.4 76.4 54.9 62.7 23.5 2.0 0.0 0.0 78.4

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

61.8 15.1 12.7 6.3 71.0 70.7 19.9 69.7 17.6

60.6 21.2 15.1 42.4 84.8 69.7 21.2 87.9 21.3

56.8 17.6 7.8 37.2 70.6 68.6 17.6 82.3 39.2

Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 213

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

214 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Theories and laws Tentative

Creative and imaginative

Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution

Subjective and theory laded Social and cultural

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

American (Nehm & Schonfeld, 2007) Korean (Current study)

Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 217

% of informed views 26.2 92.9 71.4 14.3 71.4 69.0

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

224 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 225

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

226 S. Y. Kim and R. H. Nehm

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

Korean and American Teachers Views of Evolution 227

Downloaded At: 18:11 22 April 2011

S-ar putea să vă placă și