Cladogram misreading of undergraduate students in understanding evolutionary

Authors

  • Sa'diatul Fuadiyah Department of Biology Education, Universitas Negeri Padang http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3821-1105
  • Topik Hidayat Department of Biology Education, School of Post Graduates, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
  • Didik Priyandoko Department of Biology Education, School of Post Graduates, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v7i2.12360

Keywords:

Misreading

Abstract

The student's ability to understand evolutionary studies is determined by representing a phylogenetic tree or cladogram. This study aims to determine the tree thinking ability, especially the students' reading ability in interpreting the cladogram. This descriptive study involved 29 students as subjects. Students are selected by purposive random sampling, only students who have attended and studied evolution courses. The data collection instrument used tests and interview guidelines. The test questions consist of 20 multiple choice questions with five answer choices. The difficulty level of the questions used includes understanding, applying, analyzing, and evaluating. The phylogenetic tree interpretation refers to four indicators, including the most recent common ancestor (MRCA), monophyletic group, branch proximity, contemporary descendant, and counting the branch or nodes position. The data obtained were analyzed using Microsoft Excel 2013 and Anates-V4, then presented in percentage form. The results showed that many students misinterpreted the cladogram. Furthermore, errors in cladogram interpretation occurred in monophyletic group indicators (38%), most common ancestor (59%), branch proximity (41%), contemporary ancestry (39%), and branch position calculations (53%). These results indicate that misreading of analysis in cladogram interpretation is moderate to high, so it is necessary to formulate the most appropriate way to teach phylogenetic studies in evolution.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Baum, D. A., Smith, S. D. W., & Donovan, S. S. S. (2005). The tree-thinking challenge. Perspectives, 310(5750), 979–980. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1117727

Bokor, J. R., Landis, J. B., & Crippen, K. J. (2014). High school students’ learning and perceptions of phylogenetics of flowering plants. CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(4), 653–665. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-04-0074

Dees, J., Momsen, J. L., Niemi, J., & Montplaisir, L. (2014). Student interpretations of phylogenetic trees in an introductory biology course. CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(4), 666–676. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.14-01-0003

Dunk, R. D. P., Barnes, M. E., Reiss, M. J., Alters, B., Asghar, A., Carter, B. E., Cotner, S., Glaze, A. L., Hawley, P. H., Jensen, J. L., Mead, L. S., Nadelson, L. S., Nelson, C. E., Pobiner, B., Scott, E. C., Shtulman, A., Sinatra, G. M., Southerland, S. A., Walter, E. M., … Wiles, J. R. (2019). Evolution education is a complex landscape. Nature Ecology and Evolution, 3(3), 327–329. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0802-9

Eddy, S. L., Crowe, A. J., Wenderoth, M. P., & Freeman, S. (2013). How should we teach tree-thinking? An experimental test of two hypotheses. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 6(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1936-6434-6-13

Gibson, J. P., & Cooper, J. T. (2017). Botanical Phylo-Cards: A tree-thinking game to teach plant evolution. The American Biology Teacher, 79(3), 241–244. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2017.79.3.241

Gibson, J. P., & Hoefnagels, M. H. (2015). Correlations between tree thinking and acceptance of evolution in introductory biology students. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 8(15). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12052-015-0042-7

Gregory, T. R. (2008). Understanding evolutionary trees. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 1(2), 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-008-0035-x

Halverson, Kristy L., Pires, C. J., & Abell, S. K. (2011). Exploring the complexity of tree thinking expertise in an undergraduate systematics course. Science Education, 95(5), 794–823. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20436

Halverson, Kristy Lynn. (2011). Improving tree-thinking one learnable skill at a time. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 4(1), 95–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-010-0307-0

Hiatt, A., Davis, G. K., Trujillo, C., Terry, M., French, D. P., Price, R. M., & Perez, K. E. (2013). Getting to evo-devo: Concepts and challenges for students learning evolutionary developmental biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 12(3), 494–508. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-11-0203

Hidayat, T., & Pancoro, A. (2016). Kajian filogenetika molekuler dan peranannya dalam menyediakan informasi dasar untuk meningkatkan kualitas sumber genetik anggrek. Jurnal AgroBiogen, 4(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.21082/jbio.v4n1.2008.p35-40

Klucevsek, K. M., & Brungard, A. B. (2016). Information literacy in science writing: how students find, identify, and use scientific literature. International Journal of Science Education, 38(17), 2573–2595. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1253120

Kummer, T. A., Whipple, C. J., & Jensen, J. L. (2016a). Prevalence and persistence of misconceptions in tree thinking. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 17(3), 389–398. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v17i3.1156

Kummer, T. A., Whipple, C. J., & Jensen, J. L. (2016b). Prevalence and persistence of misconceptions in tree thinking. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 17(3), 389–398. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v17i3.1156

Mattsson, J.-E., & Mutvei, A. (2015). How to teach evolution. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 167, 170–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.658

McCullough, E. L., Verdeflor, L., Weinsztok, A., Wiles, J. R., & Dorus, S. (2020). Exploratory activities for understanding evolutionary relationships depicted by phylogenetic trees: United but diverse. American Biology Teacher, 82(5), 333–337. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2020.82.5.333

Meir, E., Perry, J., Herron, J. C., & Kingsolver, J. (2007). College students’ misconceptions about evolutionary trees. The Ameri, 549–550. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374984-0.00504-0

Meisel, R. P. (2010). Teaching tree-thinking to undergraduate biology students. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 3(4), 621–628. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-010-0254-9

Morrison, D. A. (2012). Tree Thinking: An introduction to phylogenetic biology. David A. Baum and Stacey D. Smith. In Systematic Biology. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syt026

Novick, L. R., & Catley, K. M. (2007). Understanding phylogenies in biology: The Influence of a gestalt perceptual principle. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.13.4.197

Novick, L. R., & Catley, K. M. (2014). When relationships depicted diagrammatically conflict with prior knowledge: An investigation of students’ interpretations of evolutionary trees. Science Education, 98(2), 269–304. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21097

Novick, L. R., & Catley, K. M. (2016). Fostering 21st-Century evolutionary reasoning: Teaching tree thinking to introductory biology students. CBE Life Sciences Education, 15(4), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-06-0127

Novick, L. R., & Catley, K. M. (2018). Teaching tree thinking in an upper level organismal biology course: Testing the effectiveness of a multifaceted curriculum. Journal of Biological Education, 52(1), 66–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2017.1285804

Novick, L. R., Stull, A. T., & Catley, K. M. (2012). Reading phylogenetic trees: The effects of tree orientation and text processing on comprehension. BioScience, 62(8), 757–764. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2012.62.8.8

Padian, K. (2008). Trickle-down evolution: An approach to getting major evolutionary adaptive changes into textbooks and curricula. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 48(2), 175–188. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/icn023

Phillips, B. C., Novick, L. R., Catley, K. M., & Funk, D. J. (2012). Teaching tree thinking to college students: It’s not as easy as you think. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 5(4), 595–602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-012-0455-5

Sa’adah. (2017). Undergraduate students’ initial ability in understanding phylogenetic tree. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 824(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/755/1/011001

Saputra, A. (2017). Persepsi mahasiswa calon guru biologi tentang pembelajaran materi evolusi di SMA: Studi kasus mahasiswa Pendidikan Biologi FKIP Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta. Bioeducation Journal, 1(1), 1–9. http://ejournal.unp.ac.id/index.php/bioeducation/article/view/7085

Schramm, T., Jose, A., & Schmiemann, P. (2021). Seeing the woods for the trees again: Analyzing evolutionary diagrams in German and US university-level textbooks. Education Sciences, 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080367

Whitfield, J. B. (2012). Phylogenetic networks: Concepts, algorithms and applications. In Systematic Biology (Vol. 61, Issue 1). https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syr055

Downloads

Published

2021-07-31

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 2 (2021): JULY

Section

Academic Achievement and Learning Difficulties

License

Copyright (c) 2021 Sa'diatul Fuadiyah

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia) agree to the following terms:

  1. For all articles published in JPBI, copyright is retained by the authors. Authors give permission to the publisher to announce the work with conditions. When the manuscript is accepted for publication, the authors agree to automatic transfer of the publishing right to the publisher.
  2. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  4. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.