Why ask why? Toward coordinating knowledge of proximate and ultimate explanations in physiology

IF 1.7 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Advances in Physiology Education Pub Date : 2024-05-02 DOI:10.1152/advan.00057.2022
Matthew Lira, Kal Holder, Stephanie M. Gardner
{"title":"Why ask why? Toward coordinating knowledge of proximate and ultimate explanations in physiology","authors":"Matthew Lira, Kal Holder, Stephanie M. Gardner","doi":"10.1152/advan.00057.2022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In physiology education, students must learn to recognize and construct causal explanations. This proves difficult, in part, because causal explanations in biology manifest in different varieties. Unlike other natural sciences, causal mechanisms in physiology support physiological functions and reflect biological adaptations. Therefore, students must distinguish between questions that prompt a proximate or an ultimate explanation. In the present investigation, we aimed to determine how these different varieties of students' knowledge coordinate within students' written explanations. Prior research in science education demonstrates that students present specific challenges when distinguishing between proximate and ultimate explanations-students appear to conflate the two or construct other non-mechanistic explanations. This investigation, however, demonstrates that analytic frameworks can distinguish between students' proximate and ultimate explanations when students are provided explanatory scaffolds that contextualize questions. Moreover, these scaffolds and prompts help students distinguish between physiological functions and the cellular and molecular mechanisms that underpin them. Together, these findings deliver insight into the context-sensitive nature of student knowledge in physiology education and offer an analytic framework for identifying and characterizing student knowledge in physiology.","PeriodicalId":50852,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Physiology Education","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Physiology Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00057.2022","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In physiology education, students must learn to recognize and construct causal explanations. This proves difficult, in part, because causal explanations in biology manifest in different varieties. Unlike other natural sciences, causal mechanisms in physiology support physiological functions and reflect biological adaptations. Therefore, students must distinguish between questions that prompt a proximate or an ultimate explanation. In the present investigation, we aimed to determine how these different varieties of students' knowledge coordinate within students' written explanations. Prior research in science education demonstrates that students present specific challenges when distinguishing between proximate and ultimate explanations-students appear to conflate the two or construct other non-mechanistic explanations. This investigation, however, demonstrates that analytic frameworks can distinguish between students' proximate and ultimate explanations when students are provided explanatory scaffolds that contextualize questions. Moreover, these scaffolds and prompts help students distinguish between physiological functions and the cellular and molecular mechanisms that underpin them. Together, these findings deliver insight into the context-sensitive nature of student knowledge in physiology education and offer an analytic framework for identifying and characterizing student knowledge in physiology.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为什么要问为什么?协调生理学中近似解释和终极解释的知识
在生理学教育中,学生必须学会识别和构建因果解释。事实证明这很困难,部分原因是生物学中的因果解释有不同的表现形式。与其他自然科学不同,生理学中的因果机制支持生理功能并反映生物适应性。因此,学生必须区分问题是提示近似解释还是最终解释。在本次调查中,我们旨在确定这些不同类型的学生知识在学生的书面解释中是如何协调的。先前的科学教育研究表明,学生在区分近似解释和终极解释时面临特定的挑战--学生似乎会混淆两者或构建其他非机理解释。然而,这项调查表明,如果为学生提供解释性支架,将问题情境化,分析框架就能区分学生的近似解释和终极解释。此外,这些支架和提示有助于学生区分生理功能和支持生理功能的细胞和分子机制。这些发现共同揭示了生理学教育中学生知识的情境敏感性,并为识别和描述生理学中的学生知识提供了一个分析框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
19.00%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Physiology Education promotes and disseminates educational scholarship in order to enhance teaching and learning of physiology, neuroscience and pathophysiology. The journal publishes peer-reviewed descriptions of innovations that improve teaching in the classroom and laboratory, essays on education, and review articles based on our current understanding of physiological mechanisms. Submissions that evaluate new technologies for teaching and research, and educational pedagogy, are especially welcome. The audience for the journal includes educators at all levels: K–12, undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs.
期刊最新文献
Assembling a physical model helps students grasp human somatosensory pathways. 11th Annual Michigan Physiological Society Meeting: June 24-25, 2024. Open and cautious toward the application of generative AI in physiology education: embracing the new era. The upside to depression: undergraduates benefit from an instructor revealing depression in a large-enrollment physiology course. Accuracy and reliability of large language models in assessing learning outcomes achievement across cognitive domains.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1