Content analysis of Biology textbooks across selected educational boards of Asia for misconceptions and elements of conceptual change towards learning ‘Cell Structure’

Abstract

In the present study, text presentation in biology textbooks was analyzed with respect to misconception and elements of conceptual change towards the learning of “Cell Structure”. Content analysis of the lesson “Cell Structure” in five biology textbooks of Grades 11 and 12 across selected educational boards in Asia like the International Baccalaureate Diploma Program (IBDP), Cambridge Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level (AS-A Level), Advanced Placements Board (AP Board), Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and Tamil Nadu Board of Higher Secondary Education (TNBHSE) was carried out to identify the differences in text-presentation with respect to misconceptions and elements of conceptual change towards the learning of “Cell Structure”. Analysis for elements of conceptual change was carried out by applying “Posner’s Model of Conceptual Change” needed for the replacement of these misconceptions. The results of the analysis indicate that all four elements needed for conceptual change learning were found only in biology textbooks of international boards. The study further reports that the text presentation in these biology textbooks is non-expository with refutational characteristics fostering conceptual understanding by “reasoning and inquiry”. In contrast, text presentation in biology textbooks of Indian educational boards is expository, fostering conceptual understanding by “memorization”.

Keywords:

• content analysis
• conceptual change
• text presentation
• cell structure

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

Textbooks are ubiquitous learning tool that not only determine what is being taught and learnt in classrooms but also support learners in the learning process. Textbooks motivate learners by representing information, by guiding them to acquire knowledge and provide learning strategies along with self-assessments. The content of the textbooks and the presentation of contents in the textbooks have a direct impact on the student learning processes. A textbook will be optimally effective if the contents of the text are written and adapted in such a way that it allows most of the pupils to study and assimilate the subject knowledge and to develop the skills specified in the curriculum as measured by tests and examinations administered at different levels. In the present study, biology textbooks of different educational boards in Asia have been analyzed with respect to misconceptions and elements of conceptual change.

1. Introduction

It is obvious that the entire realm of biological phenomena and biological processes revolve around the cell. The cell is the most fundamental, structural, and functional unit of all living organisms. The branch of biology dealing with the study of cells is called “Cell Biology”. This important branch of biology is an integral component of the biology syllabi of all school educational curricula. Under the broad unit “Cell Biology” is a chapter on “Cell Structure”. Several research studies have reported that primary and secondary school students have developed conceptual problems in learning the structure and function of cells (Fernández & Jiménez Tejada, 2018; Flores et al., 2003; Lewis et al., 2000; Marbach-Ad & Stavy, 2000). Widespread learning difficulties concerning sizes, scales, magnification, and resolution (Fernández & Jiménez Tejada, 2018) have been reported. A review of the empirical investigations that collected students’ conceptions, before, during, and after a specific learning strategy and after students had been taught following their respective national curricula (e.g., Dreyfus & Jungwirth, 1988, 1989; Flores et al., 2003; Hackling & Treagust, 1984; Lewis et al., 2000; Marbach-Ad & Stavy, 2000; Zamora & Guerra, 1993) reveal many general and significant problems in learning cell biology namely (i) confusion about biological terms such as cell, cell wall, plasma membrane, nucleus, chromosome, gene, allele etc (e.g., Flores et al., 2003; Lewis & Wood-Robinson, 2000). (ii) problems in understanding the different levels of organization of multi-cellular organisms (e.g., Dreyfus & Jungwirth, 1988, 1989; Flores et al., 2003; Hackling & Treagust, 1984; Knippels, 2002; Schaefer, 1979; Verhoeff et al., 2008; Zamora & Guerra, 1993) (iii) problems in understanding cell processes such as mitosis and DNA replication (Lewis & Wood-Robinson, 2000; Marbach-Ad & Stavy, 2000) and (iv)use of an anthropomorphic view (Dreyfus & Jungwirth, 1988, 1989; Flores et al., 2003; Zamora & Guerra, 1993).

Students find no difficulty with respect to “defining a cell”, “writing the cell theory”, “in differentiating a prokaryotic cell from a eukaryotic cell”, in differentiating a plant cell from an animal cell’, “in explaining the construction of a light microscope and an electron microscope”, “in describing the structure of cell organelles”. However, they encounter a lot of difficulties related to application of certain core conceptual areas such as “the relationship between cell surface area and cell volume”, “in relating resolution and magnification of microscopes”, “in relating resolution of microscopes with wave length of light used in microscopes” “in manipulating stage micrometer and ocular scale”, “in calculating magnification of photomicrographs”, “in calculating magnification from scale bar” and “in calculating real size from magnification” and lastly “in drawing of anatomical parts showing tissues and cells”. Apart from these difficulties, students carry misconceptions such as “Cell Theory is applicable to all cells”, “all cells are capable of cell division”, “all cells are microscopic”, “all plant cells do photosynthesis”, “all eukaryotic cells have a nucleus”, “all cells are spherical in shape”, “animal cells without centrosomes do not divide”, “larger the size of the cell, greater is its efficiency”, “cell division and cell differentiation are the same”, “cells grow to be efficient”, “cytoplasm is the liquid part of the cell”, “all microscopic cells and organisms are about the same size”, “nucleus is always found at the centre of the cell”, “Nucleoid is the nucleus of prokaryotes”, “nucleus and other cell organelles float in cytoplasm”, “chromatin and chromosomes are one and the same”, “pH of lysosomes and pH of cytoplasm are identical”, “vesicles and vacuoles are the same”, “vesicles swim in the cytoplasm”, “mitochondrion creates energy for the cell to function”, “greater the magnification, greater is the resolution of a microscope”, “resolution and wavelength of light are independent”, etc., In the light of these learning difficulties and student-misconceptions in “Cell Structure”, the author analyzed the text presentation in biology textbooks of different educational boards in relation to misconceptions and elements of conceptual change.

1.1. Textbooks and learning

Textbooks not only determine what is being taught and learnt in classrooms (Abd-El-Khalick et al., 2008) but also support learners in the learning process (García-Barros et al., 2005) by motivating them to learn, by representing information, by guiding them to acquire knowledge and learning strategies and by providing self-assessments (Mikk, 2000). The content of the textbooks and the way of presentation of contents in the textbooks have a direct impact on the student learning processes (Robitaille & Travers, 1992). A textbook will be optimally effective if the contents of the text are written and adapted in such a way that it allows most of the pupils (during the time available to them and with or without the guidance of a good teacher) to study and assimilate the subject knowledge and to develop the skills specified in the curriculum as measured by tests and examinations administered at different levels (Johnsen, 1993). The quality of a textbook can be judged by the extent to which attributes present in the textbook will facilitate learners to acquire the desired learning outcomes (Swanepoel, 2010). A good quality textbook is a “good learning tool” (Chambliss & Calfee, 1989); it makes the learners achieve the intended learning outcomes (Bernier, 1996) and enhances their ability to deal effectively with skills, concepts, and content of the subject (Nitsche, 1992). The quality of the textbooks has great impact on the quality of instruction (Lemmer et al., 2008) and it is imperative that teachers use the best science textbooks available (Roseman et al., 2010).

1.2. Textbook evaluation

Evaluation of textbook resulted in increasing learning achievement (Brandt, 2005; Taylor, 2008). Evaluation of textbook contributes to the professional development of teachers (Malcolm & Alant, 2004) and implementation of curriculum (Davis, 2003; Izsák & Sherin, 2003). In recent years, the number of publications on textbook evaluation in science has been increasing rapidly and these have focused on different attributes of textbooks (Vojíř & Rusek, 2019) such as scientific methodology (Binns & Bell, 2015), representation of nature of science (Abd-El-Khalick et al., 2008; Chiappetta & Fillman, 2007; Niaz & Maza, 2011; Ramnarain & Chanetsa, 2016; Ramnarain & Padayachee, 2015; Vesterinen et al., 2011), different levels of inquiry in the science textbooks (Dunne & Owen, 2013), on visual representations (Gilbert, 2006; Khine & Liu, 2016; Kragten et al., 2012; Liu & Treagust, 2013), the role of questions in inquiry-based learning (Kahveci, 2009) and on knowledge representation and reasoning requirements (Chaudhri et al., 2014). In biology education, research on biology textbooks is significant in developed countries. For example, the weakness and strengths of textbook chapters of Chinese high school biology textbooks have been evaluated by Liang and Cobern (2013) using the textbook standards of American Association for the Advancement of Science. A method for analyzing coherence of high school biology textbooks has been given by Roseman et al. (2010). Five high school biology textbooks used in the USA have also been analyzed for inclusion of the nature of science themes by Chiappetta and Fillman (2007). Riemeier et al. (2008) feel that learning materials in Biology are published without a thorough evaluation of the impacts on learners’ knowledge and even if the impact of learning is evaluated, it is usually focused on the learning outcomes. So in order to identify the learning difficulties students encounter, they suggest a process oriented evaluation of the learning materials. Jiménez (1994) analyzed treatment of “evolutionary theory” in secondary biology textbooks in the light of a specified model of learning that would result in “functional” knowledge that is, the ability to apply evolutionary theory to new contexts.

1.3. Rationale and purpose

The major aim of this study is to identify the gap between traditional and modern biology textbooks with respect to misconceptions and elements of conceptual change pertaining to the lesson “Cell Structure”. Knowing the components of cells and how cells work is fundamental to all biological sciences including genetic engineering, biotechnology, environmental science etc. Thus, learning cell biology at the school level is very important in the human society. The successfulness of teaching and learning of this important subject depends upon well-designed curriculum and textbooks. Biology textbooks of Indian and International School Boards for grade 11 and 12 levels from Asia were compared to identify the differences in text presentation of the lesson “Cell Structure” in relation to misconceptions and elements of conceptual change related to Posner’s Model of Conceptual Change. The study was carried out by content analysis of manifest content of the lesson “Cell Structure” in five biology textbooks to answer the following research questions.

1. To what extent does the text presentation differ among the five biology textbooks in relation to misconceptions pertaining to the lesson “Cell Structure”? and

2. To what extent does the text presentation differ among the five biology textbooks in relation to conceptual change elements namely dissatisfaction, intelligibility, plausibility, and fruitfulness needed for the replacement of certain common misconceptions?

The results of the present study will help curriculum developers and textbook writers in improving the quality of biology textbooks.

1.4. Theoretical foundation

The primary focus of this study was on the text presentation of the lesson “Cell Structure” in different biology textbooks in relation to misconceptions and elements of conceptual change.

1.4.1. Theoretical foundation with respect to text presentation

Science education across many national educational boards follows the “mile-wide, inch-deep” approach. In this approach, students have extensive knowledge on a host of concepts, but with limited depth of understanding of any given science concept and its connection with broader ideas and principles (National Center for Education Statistics, 2004). In “mile-wide, inch-deep” science education approach, traditional biology textbooks have presented text (or content) as a series of related but fairly discrete topics (e.g. plants, animals, and cells). The priority of these textbooks is the coverage of many concepts (in-breadth) at the expense of in-depth coverage of certain focal concepts (Mikkilä & Olkinuora, 1994; Roth, 1990). This kind of text presentation in these textbooks is called expository, non-refutational text. There has been wide-scale criticism about the inability of these textbooks to promote high-quality learning, such as conceptual change (Roth, 1990). Knowledge organization and lack of explanatory coherence are also seen in these textbooks (Beck et al., 1991). However, in non-expository, refutational style of text presentation, the text explicitly states and refutes the misconception (the belief that conflicts with currently accepted scientific explanations). Such a text design systematically points out the differences between possible misconceptions and the scientific knowledge to be learnt and this helps the learners to construct relevant mental models concerning a particular subject which thereby facilitates conceptual change (Mikkilä-Erdmann (2002). “Misconception” is a term that refers to a belief that conflicts with currently accepted scientific explanations. Misconceptions prevail in almost every subject and more prevalent in Science (Maria, 2000). Although misconceptions are hard to change (Dole & Smith, 1989), they can however be transformed during the process of conceptual change (Posner et al., 1982).

1.4.2. Theoretical foundation with respect to conceptual change learning

Learning in science education primarily happens by conceptual change. Conceptual change can be defined as the restructuring of the existing knowledge. Duit and Treagust (2003) have reviewed and discussed the development of conceptual change over the past three decades and stressed it as a powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. Conceptual change is influenced by many factors such as culture and society (Vosniadou, 1994), emotions (Gregoire, 2003), epistemological beliefs (Windschitl, 1997), motivation (Pintrich et al., 1993), personal practices and beliefs (Chi, 2009) cognitive and developmental factors. Apart from these, textbooks also have an influence on conceptual change (Mikkilä-Erdmann, 2002). In this study biology textbooks were analyzed in the light of conceptual change pertaining to the learning of concepts in the lesson “Cell Structure”. The theoretical foundation behind this study is the Model of Conceptual Change proposed by Posner et al. (1982). According to this model, for conceptual change learning to happen, four conditions must be fulfilled. They are 1. The prior knowledge that learners possess must be identified as inadequate to solve a given problem, 2. The new knowledge must be understandable, 3. The new knowledge must be useful in solving the current problem and 4. The new knowledge must appear to be useful in solving future problems. These four conditions or elements have been respectively termed as “dissatisfaction”, “intelligibility”, “plausibility” and “fruitfulness”. In the present study, biology textbooks of five different educational boards were analyzed for the presence of the above four elements of conceptual change needed for the replacement of some common existing misconceptions in “Cell Structure” such as “resolution of light microscopes can be improved by enhancing the design of the light microscope”, “dimensions of objects in the microscopic world can never be measured” and “exchange of organic molecules between the cell and its environment is a function that depends on cell surface area and not cell volume”.

2. Methodology

2.1. Sample

The population for the present study includes biology textbooks of different educational boards in Asia prescribed for the students of Grades 11 and 12. The sample for the study includes five biology textbooks and the descriptions about these textbooks are presented in Table 1. The reason behind choosing these textbooks is their wide scale usage by students and teachers in the Indian subcontinent as well as in many Asian countries.

Table 1. Descriptions about the Biology textbooks used in the study

S.No	Name of the Education Board	Grades	Name of the Textbook	Name of the Author(s)	Name of the Publisher	Number of Volumes	Number of Pages	Approach of presenting Biology content
1.	International Baccalaureate (IB) (previously International Baccalaureate Organization – IBO)	11 and 12	Biology Course Companion	Andrew Allot and David Mindorff	Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom	One	719	Non Segregated Approach (Biology content is not bifurcated into Botany and Zoology and the content is studied in an integrated manner
2.	Cambridge Assessment International Examination (CAIE) (previously Cambridge International Examinations – CIE)	11 and 12	Biology Course Book	Mary Jones, Richard Fosbery, Jennifer Gregory, Dennis Taylor	Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom	One	696
3.	Advanced Placements (AP) – The College Board	11 and 12	Biology for Advanced Placements	Julianne Zedalis, John Eggebrech	Open Stax, Rice University, Houston, Texas	One	1802
4.	Central Board of Secondary Education, India (CBSE)	11 and 12	Biology Textbook for Class XI	NCERT Team of writers	NCERT, New Delhi, India	Two	342
			Biology Textbook for Class XII				286
5.	Tamil Nadu State Board of Education (TN)	11 and 12	Biology – Botany for Higher Secondary First Year	SCERT Team of writers	SCERT, Tamil Nadu, India	Two	320	Segregated Approach (Biology content is bifurcated as Biology-Botany and Biology-Zoology and the content is studied separately)
			Biology – Zoology for Higher Secondary First Year				280
							264
			Biology – Botany for Higher Secondary SecondYear			Two
			Biology – Zoology for Higher Secondary Second Year				256

2.2. Methods used

The present study is based on a non-experimental research design and was carried out using content analysis. Content analysis is a research technique for making replicable and valid inferences from texts to the contexts of their use (Krippendorff, 2004).

2.3. Analysis procedure

Content analysis of the lesson “Cell Structure” involved a thorough and systematic sentence by sentence reading of the manifest content by the researcher and the mentor. Content analysis was carried out to identify misconceptions and conceptual change elements namely dissatisfaction, intelligibility, plausibility, and fruitfulness (Shiland, 1997). Each element of conceptual change in the Posner’s et al. (1982) Model of Conceptual Change was operationalized for content analysis as given below

2.3.1. Dissatisfaction

Dissatisfaction is analyzed in terms of statements showing inadequacy or delimits or disadvantages. Here the author exposes the learners to phenomena that the current conceptions cannot explain.

2.3.2. Intelligibility

Intelligibility is measured by determining the number of pages required to present the theory or the concept. In the light of Posner’s Model, intelligibility refers to the learner’s ability to represent an idea (Posner et al., 1982). In content analysis of textbook, this could be taken as the author’s description of a theory or a concept to the learner. It should be understood that when greater the number of pages is needed to describe a theory or concept, it becomes more difficult to construct a representation of the theory or the concept.

2.3.3. Plausibility

Plausibility is analyzed in terms of the statements which provide evidences that the new conception helps to solve problems the old concepts could not.

2.3.4. Fruitfulness

Fruitfulness is analyzed in terms of the examples related to the additional application of the new conception.

2.4. Method of categorization of the textbooks

In this study, the different textbooks of biology were categorized into Expository Textbooks, Non-Expository Textbooks and Refutational Textbooks based on well defined criteria.

2.4.1. Expository Textbooks

Textbooks that provide knowledge of biology in the form of facts are categorized as “Expository Textbooks”. These textbooks provide no opportunity for active engagement and inquiry for the learner. Expository textbooks follow “mile-wide, inch-deep approach” where extensive knowledge on a host of concepts with limited depth or conceptual clarity. “Expository Textbooks” generally follow an “encyclopedic approach” of presentation of the manifest content (Osborne, 2010; Tippett, 2010).

2.4.2. Non-Expository Textbooks

The textbooks which provide opportunities for active engagement and inquiry for the learner are called “Non-Expository Textbooks”. In these textbooks, the content of biology is provided through a well motivated introduction, well planned activities for active inquiry with cross-thematic concepts clarified through inductive and deductive reasoning with analogies. “Non-Expository Textbooks” strictly avoid encyclopedic coverage of content and misconceptions are clarified but not to the level of “refutational textbook” (Osborne, 2010; Tippett, 2010).

2.4.3. Refutational Textbooks

Textbooks that explicitly state and refute misconceptions with well established scientific explanations are called “Refutational Textbooks” (Sinatra et al., 2011; Tippett, 2010; Vosniadou & Mason, 2012). These textbooks point out the differences between possible misconceptions and the scientific knowledge to be learnt. The refutational textbooks provide opportunities for learners to construct relevant mental models concerning a particular subject which thereby facilitates conceptual change. Refutational textbooks are also called conceptual-change texts that generally engage, challenge and remediate common misconceptions (Tippett, 2010).

2.5. Reliability of the Study

To establish reliability, the present study was done by two evaluators in a parallel fashion. The first evaluator was the researcher himself and the second evaluator was the mentor. Based on a self-developed coding scheme for each of the dimensions studied, the two evaluators independently analyzed the manifest content of the lesson “Cell Structure” in four cycles (each cycle corresponds to a particular dimension studied) and their level of consistency among them was determined by comparing their classifications with each other. Reliability analysis was conducted using the formula Reliability = $\frac{\mathrm{A}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{t}}{\mathrm{A}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{t}+\mathrm{D}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{s}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{t}}$ X 100. The reliability score for this study was 98.5%. A study is said to be reliable if the level of consistency among two or more experts (raters or evaluators) is greater than or equal to 90% (Miles & Huberman, 1994).

3. Results

Content analysis of the lesson “Cell Structure” pertaining to biology textbooks of five different educational boards were performed with respect to misconceptions and elements of conceptual change pertaining to “Cell Structure”. The results of the study are presented and discussed below.

3.1. Misconceptions

Table 2 shows some of the learners’ common misconceptions that have been clarified by the five biology textbooks. Of the total 29 misconceptions considered, the “Biology for Advanced Placements (AP Board)” clarified 75.8%, the “Biology Course Book for Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level (AS-A Level)” clarified 37.9%, the “Biology Course Companion for International Baccalaureate Diploma Program (IBDP)” and “Biology Textbook for the Tamil Nadu Board of Higher Secondary Education (TN Board)” clarified 24.1% each and lastly the “Biology Textbook for Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE)” clarified only 13.8% misconceptions respectively. In the “Biology Textbook for the Tamil Nadu Board of Higher Secondary Education (TN Board)”, apart from content-overload due to the expository nature of the topics, there is a lack of clarifications on misconceptions in large areas of the lesson. In this textbook, even before the throwing clarity on the concepts of protoplasm and cytoplasm, concepts like “protoplasm theory” and “physical properties of protoplasm” have been discussed under the section “Cell Theory”. The concept of cytoplasm is introduced only after the discussion of protoplasm, cell wall, cell membrane, fluid-mosaic model, cell transport, signal transduction (in that order). The points of misconception here are with regard to the description of cytoplasm and protoplasm and about the electrical conductivities of protoplasm and cytoplasm. In the textbook, the cytoplasm is described as the “….semifluid gelatinous substance that fills the cell” and protoplasm is also described as the “….living content of the cell that is surrounded by plasma membrane’. These two statements do not help in differentiating the protoplasm and cytoplasm thereby resulting in misconceptions. Likewise, scientific reasons have not provided for the scientific truths such as: “…….the cytoplasm is a very good conductor of electricity and the protoplasm is neither a good conductor nor bad conductor of electricity”. Here the misconceptions arise because if the cytoplasm is a part of protoplasm then how do both cytoplasm and protoplasm have different electrical conductivities? Apart from misconceptions, in the “Biology Textbook for the Tamil Nadu Board of Higher Secondary Education (TN Board)” there are evidences of plagiarism of scientific facts. As an example, under the section “protoplasm theory”, the physical properties of protoplasm have been discussed and the descriptions about the properties namely cohesiveness, contractility, surface tension has been incorporated directly from: https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/biology/protoplasm-physical-and-chemicalnature-of protoplasm-biology/5147. The remaining four biology textbooks showed no evidence of plagiarism.

Table 2. Common misconceptions in learners clarified in the five Biology textbooks

Common Misconceptions in Learners	Correct Concepts	Page Numbers showing the Correct Concepts
		Book 1	Book 2	Book 3	Book 4	Book 5
Cell Theory is applicable to all cells.	Cell Theory has its exceptions. Cell theory cannot be applied to striated muscle fibers, coenocytic hyphae, one cell algae Acetabularia and viruses.	174	-	2–3	-	-
All cells are capable of cell division.	Majority of the cells undergo cell division, except certain cells like nerve cells, heart muscle cells and fat cells.	-	-	-	-	-
All cells are microscopic.	Majority of the cells are microscopic except egg cells of birds	-	126	-		154
All plant cells do photosynthesis.	Plant cells with chloroplasts alone do photosynthesis.	-	134	-	6	172
All cells have lysosomes.	Lysosomes are present in animal cells and absent in plant cells.	189	-	-	16	164, 172
All cells have centrosomes.	Centrosomes are present in animal cells and absent in plant cells.	-	138		18	163–164
All eukaryotic cells have a nucleus.	Majority of the eukaryotic cells have nucleus. Matured RBC, Xylem Vessels do not have nucleus.	-	-	-	-	-
All cells are spherical in shape.	Not all cells are spherical in shape but most tend to approximate a sphere.	-	-	-	-	154–155
Animal cells without centrosomes do not divide.	Animal cells divide even when centrioles are removed.	-	-	-	-	164
Bigger the size of the cell greater is its efficiency.	Bigger sized cells have smaller cell surface area to volume ratio and therefore less efficient.	-	-	9	-	154–155
Cell division and cell differentiation are the same.	Cell division is the process by which a parental cell divides into two or more daughter cells whereas differentiation refers to the development of cells in different ways to carry out specific functions.	-	-	11	-	-
Cells in a tissue are fused with one another.	Cells in a tissue are held by extracellular matrix called proteoglycans.	-	-	-	-	179
Cells grow to be efficient.	As cells grow they become less efficient whereas cells divide to be efficient.	-	-	-	-	155
Cytoplasm Is the liquid part of the cell.	Cytoplasm is a semi-fluid gelatinous substance found in the cell.	184	-	-	5	160–161
Cytoplasm is the transport medium within the cell	Cytoskeleton in cells helps in transportation within the cells.	-	-	-	-	173–174
Cytoplasm of one cell is not continuous with the adjacent cell.	Cytoplasm of one cell is continuous with its neighboring cell with the help of plasmodesmata.	181	-	-	5	179–180
All things microscopic are about the same size.	All things microscopic are not uniform in size.	176	-	-	6	154
Nucleus is always found at the centre of the cell	In plant cells nucleus is found away from the center whereas the in animal cells nucleus is found at the center of the cell.	-	-	-	-	-
Nucleoid is the nucleus of prokaryotes.	The genetic material of a bacterial cell is found distributed in a region called nucleoid.	176	-	18–19	-	152–153
Nucleus and other cell organelles float in cytoplasm.	Nucleus and other cell organelles are anchored in the cell cytoplasm with the help of cytoskeleton structures.	-	136	-	17–18	173
Chromatin and Chromosomes are one and the same.	Chromatin is a thread-like structure which gets condensed to form chromosome prior to cell division.	192	-	21	15	161
Peroxisomes and glyoxysomes are different.	Glyoxysome is a type of perioxisome.	-	-	-	-	163
pH of lysosomes and pH of cytoplasm are identical.	pH of lysosomes is acidic when compared with the pH of the cytoplasm.	-	-	-	-	172
Vesicles and Vacuoles are the same.	Vesicles are smaller than vacuoles. Vesicles are capable of adhering to the cell membrane whereas vacuoles do not.	-	-	22	5	163
Vesicles swim in the cytoplasm.	Vesicles move along the cytoskeleton of the cell.	-	-	-	15	173
Mitochondrion creates energy for the cell to function.	Mitochondrion releases energy stored in bio-molecules. Energy can neither be created nor be destroyed but can be transformed from one form to another.	-	-	-	-	163
WBC show amoeboid movement due to its cell membrane.	Microfilaments in WBCs depolymerise and repolymerise quickly, so that its shape changes and helps in movement.	-	-	-	-	173
Greater the magnification, greater is the resolution of a microscope.	Resolution can never be improved with increased magnification.	-	-	-	10	-
Resolution and wavelength of light are independent.	Shorter the wavelength of light used, greater the resolution of the microscope.	-	-	17	11	-
Total Number (Percentage) of Correct Clarifications Reported in the Textbooks		7 (24.1%)	4 (13.8%)	7 (24.1%)	12 (37.9%)	22(75.8%)

Key: Book 1: ‘Biology Textbook for the Tamil Nadu Board of Higher Secondary Education (TN Board) Grades 11 and 12’, Book 2: ‘Biology Textbook for Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) Grades 11 and 12’, Book 3: ‘Biology Course Companion for International Baccalaureate Diploma Program (IBDP)’, Book 4: ‘Biology Course Book for Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level (AS-A Level)’ and Book 5: ‘Biology for Advanced Placements (AP Board)’.

3.2. Conceptual change elements

The present study reports that all the elements of conceptual change (namely dissatisfaction, intelligibility, plausibility and fruitfulness) needed for the replacement of the misconception “resolution of light microscopes can be improved by enhancing the design of the light microscope” has been reported only in “Biology Course Book for Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level (AS-A Level)” and “Biology Course Companion for International Baccalaureate Diploma Program (IBDP)” textbooks; that for the misconceptions “dimensions of objects in the microscopic world can never be measured” and “exchange of organic molecules between the cell and its environment is a function that depends on cell surface area and not cell volume” have been reported only in “Biology Course Companion for International Baccalaureate Diploma Program (IBDP)” and “Biology for Advanced Placements (AP Board)” respectively. The evidences for the presence of conceptual change elements in relation to the following three misconceptions namely “resolution of light microscopes can be improved by enhancing the design of the light microscope”, “dimensions of objects in the microscopic world can never be measured”, “exchange of organic molecules between the cell and its environment is a function that depends on cell surface area and not cell volume” have been presented in Tables 3, 4, 5 respectively.

Table 3. Elements of conceptual change related to the misconception “resolution of light microscopes can be improved by enhancing the design of the light microscope”

Textbook	Element
	Dissatisfaction^1	Intelligibility^2	Plausibility^3	Fruitfulness^4
Book 1	None	Electron Microscope, Components and Types of Microscopes. (Pg: 171–174).	None.	None
Book 2	None	None	None	None
Book 3	Light Microscopes have limited resolution (Pg: 17).	Developments in scientific research follow improvements in apparatus: the invention of electron microscopes. (Pg: 17–18).	Drawing the ultrastructure of prokaryotic cells and eukaryotic cells based on electron micrographs. (Pg: 19, Pg: 21–23). Understanding the electron micrograph of liver cell and its cell organelles. (Pg: 23).	Intepreting the electron micrographs to identify organelles and deduce the function of specialized cells (Pg: 25).
Book 4	Light Microscopes: microscopists became frustrated because they realized that no matter how much ever the design of the light microscopes got improved, there was a limit to how much could ever be seen using light. (Pg: 6).	Magnification (Pg: 6), Resolution (Pg:10), Electromagnetic Spectrum (Pg: 11), Electron Microscopy—Transmission Electron Microscope and Scanning Electron Microscope, Viewing specimens with Electron Microscope (Pg: 11–13).	Cell Organelles like Ribosomes, can be viewed using electron microscopes. (Pg: 15).	Ultrastructure of an Animal Cell. (Pg: 13)
Book 5	None	Electron Microscopes. Transmission and Scanning Electron Microscopes. (Pg:149).	None	None

Table 4. Elements of conceptual change related to the misconception “dimensions of objects in the microscopic world can never be measured”

Textbook	Element
	Dissatisfaction	Intelligibility	Plausibility	Fruitfulness
Book 1	None	Microscopic Measurements: Ocular Micrometer, Stage Micrometer.	None	None
Book 2	None	None	None	None
Book 3	None	None	None	None
Book 4	Objects in the microscopic world, can be measured using very small units of measurement. These are unfamiliar to people. In cell studies: μ is the Greek letter mu; is the units of measurement. (Pg 6).	Measuring Cells: Eye-piece Graticule and Stage Micrometer. Calculating the magnification of a photograph or image using the formula M = I/A. Where M is magnification, I is Image Size and A is Actual Size. (Pg: 7–8).	Numerical Problem related to application of the magnification formula. Calculating magnification from a scale bar. Worked out example on Calculating the real size of an object from its Magnification (Pg: 8–9)	Exercise numerical Problem on calculation of actual size. (Pg: 24, Question 9).
Book 5	None	None	None	None

Table 5. Elements of conceptual change related to the misconception “exchange of organic molecules between the cell and its environment is a function that depends on cell surface area and not cell volume”

Textbook	Element
	Dissatisfaction	Intelligibility	Plausibility	Fruitfulness
Book 1	None	None	None	None
Book 2	None	None	None	None
Book 3	Limitations on Cell Size (Pg: 9)	Cell Volume, Surface Area, Surface Area to Volume Ratio and its advantages. (Pg 9)	None	None
Book 4	None	None	None	None
Book 5	Small size, in general, is necessary for all cells, whether prokaryotic or eukaryotic. The small size of prokaryotes allows ions and organic molecules that enter them to quickly diffuse to other parts of the cell. This is not the case in eukaryotic cells, which have developed different structural adaptations to enhance intracellular transport. (Pg: 154).	Notice that as a cell increases in size, its surface area-to-volume ratio decreases. When there is insufficient surface area to support a cell’s increasing volume, a cell will either divide or die. The cell on the left has a volume of 1 mm^3 and a surface area of 6 mm^2, with a surface area-to-volume ratio of 6 to 1, whereas the cell on the right has a volume of 8 mm^3 and a surface area of 24 mm^2, with a surface area-to-volume ratio of 3 to 1 (Pg: 155).	A worked out numerical problem providing quantitative justification them significance of cell surface area to volume ratio with respect efficiency of exchange of nutrients and wastes with a cell’s environment. (Pg: 156).	A task that seeks the learner to draw annotated diagram to explain how approximately 300 million alveoli in a human lung increases surface area for gas exchange to the size of a tennis court. (Pg: 156).

Key: Book 1: “Biology Textbook for the Tamil Nadu Board of Higher Secondary Education (TN Board) Grades 11 and 12”, Book 2: “Biology Textbook for Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) Grades 11 and 12”, Book 3: “Biology Course Companion for International Baccalaureate Diploma Program (IBDP)”, Book 4: “Biology Course Book for Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level (AS-A Level)” and Book 5: “Biology for Advanced Placements (AP Board)”.

¹Dissatisfaction—the author exposes the learners to phenomena that the current conceptions cannot explain; ²Intelligibility—the author provides description about the new conception; ³Plausibility—The author provides evidences that the new conception helps to solve problems the old concepts could not; and ⁴Fruitfulness—the author provides examples about the additional application of the new conception.

4. Discussion

Textbook is a ubiquitous tool in science teaching and learning (Khine & Liu, 2016). During schooling, textbooks are often used as the primary organizer of the learning contents that students are expected to master and that textbooks provide detailed explanations of the topics to be learnt (Chiappetta & Fillman, 2007). Many learners and teachers of biology presume that the subject of biology can be mastered by rote learning and the reason behind this perception can be attributed to the way of text presentation in the biology textbooks.

4.1. Text presentation

Based on text presentation, all the five presently studied textbooks fall under two categories (Table 6). Text presentation pertaining to the lesson “Cell Structure” in three textbooks (Biology Course Companion for International Baccalaureate Diploma Program-IBDP, Biology Course Book for Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level (AS-A Level) and Biology for Advanced Placements-AP Board) is non-expository and foster conceptual understanding by “reasoning and inquiry” leading to “meaningful learning”. In contrast, text presentation in “Biology Textbook for Tamil Nadu Board of Higher Secondary Education (TN Board)” and in “Biology Textbook for Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE)” is expository and foster conceptual understanding by “memorization” leading to “rote learning”. The Tamil Nadu Board of Higher Secondary Education (TN Board) with expository text presentation manifests greater content overload than textbooks with non-expository text presentation.

Table 6. Categorization of the biology textbooks considered in this study

S.No	Name of the Education Board	Grades	Name of the Textbook	Name of the Author(s)	Name of the Publisher	Number of Volumes	Categorization
1.	International Baccalaureate (IB) (previously International Baccalaureate Organization – IBO)	11 and 12	Biology Course Companion	Andrew Allot and David Mindorff	Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom	One	Non-expository with Refutational Characteristics
2.	Cambridge Assessment International Examination (CAIE) (previously Cambridge International Examinations – CIE)	11 and 12	Biology Course Book	Mary Jones, Richard Fosbery, Jennifer Gregory, Dennis Taylor	Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom	One	Non-expository with Refutational Characteristics
3.	Advanced Placements (AP) – The College Board	11 and 12	Biology for Advanced Placements	Julianne Zedalis, John Eggebrech	Open Stax, Rice University, Houston, Texas	One	Non-expository with Adequate Refutational Characteristics
4.	Central Board of Secondary Education, India (CBSE)	11 and 12	Biology Textbook for Class XI	NCERT Team of writers	NCERT, New Delhi, India	Two	Expository with Non-Encyclopedic Coverage
			Biology Textbook for Class XII
5.	Tamil Nadu State Board of Education (TN)	11 and 12	Biology – Botany for Higher Secondary First Year	SCERT Team of writers	SCERT, Tamil Nadu, India	Two
							Expository with Encyclopedic Coverage
			Biology – Zoology for Higher Secondary First Year
			Biology – Botany for Higher Secondary Second Year			Two
			Biology – Zoology for Higher Secondary Second Year

Expository presentation of biological texts delimits biology as a body of knowledge thereby amputating the spirit of thinking, analysis, reasoning, and evaluation within the learner. Rather than concentrating on the core concepts and misconceptions, expository texts present a wide range of concepts in a diffused manner. Such an expository coverage (as in ‘Tamil Nadu Board of Higher Secondary Education -TN Board) of the manifest content has increased the content load (interns of the learning points) fostering memorization of biological facts and conceptual understanding through rote-learning. According to Ausbel’s Theory of Meaningful Learning (1968), meaningful learning focuses on the process of learning whereas that of rote learning focuses on the product only. In contrast to expository texts, non-expository texts provide opportunities for active engagement and inquiry to the learner. In non-expository text presentation, every lesson is introduced with a motivating introduction as revealed in “Biology Course Book for Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level (AS-A Level)” and in “Biology for Advanced Placements AP Board)”. Cross-thematic concepts have also been clarified through proper reasoning and analogies and that such cross-thematic concepts have not been included as mere facts and laws (for example wavelength, resolution, magnification and numerical aperture, etc), as portrayed in “Biology Course Book for Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level AS-A Level)”. However, none of the non-expository textbooks studied here have highlighted the common misconceptions and pitfalls that learners would encounter during the learning of “Cell Structure”. “Misconceptions” are described as naïve theories, alternate conceptions, or views of science that are not consistent with concepts currently accepted by the scientific community (Özdemir & Clark, 2007). Learners develop misconceptions due to their intuitive thinking, everyday life experiences and superficial science instructions (Garrison & Bently, 1990) and these misconceptions conflict with learning at school (Gale, 2005). For example, the common misconceptions encountered during the learning of “Cell Structure” are with respect to “cell wall and cell membrane”, “cell membrane and plasma membrane”, “protoplasm and cytoplasm”, “nucleus, nucleolus and nucleoid”; “vacuole and vesicle”; “cristae and cisternae”; “chromosomes and chromatin”; “flagella, cilia, fimbriae, and pili”; “protoplast and tonoplast”; “centrosome and centrioles”; “plastids and plastics”; “peroxysome, glyoxysome and lysosome”; “volume and surface area”; “real size and actual size”; “stem cells of animals and stem cells of plants”; “chromomere and centromere” etc. A supplementary refutational text could have been included in all these textbooks to provide conceptual clarity with respect to such misconceptions.

4.2. Misconceptions clarified and conceptual change elements

Owing to the fact that biology is a conceptual science, many learners find difficulties in understanding biological concepts. This has led students to memorize biological concepts rather than using techniques of conceptual learning (Özcan, 2000). Learners adopt procedural learning when they are unable to link a new knowledge with their pre-existing knowledge (Kahveci & Selahatdin, 2008). This leads to the generation of misconceptions. The cause for misconception can be insufficiency of prior knowledge in the learner, insufficiency of content knowledge in the teacher, textbooks, use of daily life language instead of scientific language and lastly influence of cultural factors (Aşçı et al., 2001; Goh et al., 1993; Lubben et al., 1999; Storey, 1991). The present study reports that out of the 29 misconceptions considered, 75.8% of them have been clarified and refuted by “Biology for Advanced Placements (AP Board)” whereas 37.9% by “Biology Course Book for Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level (AS-A Level)”. This reveals that text presentation in these textbooks is refutational in characteristics. Further, the present study also found that out of the five textbooks analyzed, the elements of conceptual change needed for the replacement of the three common misconceptions (while learning “Cell Structure”) namely “resolution of light microscopes can be improved by enhancing the design of the light microscope”, “dimensions of objects in the microscopic world can never be measured” and “exchange of organic molecules between the cell and its environment is a function that depends on cell surface area and not cell volume” are reported only in the three biology textbooks of the international boards which refuted single idea misconceptions rather than complex ideas. Textbooks bring about conceptual change only when they provide opportunities for dissatisfaction of an existing misconception. This dissatisfaction creates a necessity for conceptual change regarding a misconception. Textbooks should provide the learner, opportunities to discern misconceptions by making them intelligible. In the “Biology Course Book for Advanced Subsidiary and Advanced Level (AS-A Level)”, the learning point “ … … … Microscopists became frustrated because they realized that no matter how much ever the design of the light microscopes get improved, there was a limit to how much could ever be see using light … … .” – creates an opportunity of dissatisfaction for the misconception “Resolution of light microscopes can be never improved by enhancing the design of the light microscope”. The misconception is made intelligible through learning point on “resolution of microscope” and its relationship with wavelength of light in the electromagnetic spectrum. Textbooks creating dissatisfaction and intelligibility about misconceptions also create opportunities for the learners to apply the new concepts to solve real-world problems which could not be solved by the earlier misconceptions (plausibility). Here the learning point “ … .cell organelles like ribosomes can be viewed using electron microscopes … … .” provides an opportunity to discern the plausibility. Therefore, textbook with elements of dissatisfaction, intelligibility, plausibility completes the process of conceptual change through establishing the fruitfulness of the new concept. In this case the fruitfulness is established by the “ultrastructure of the animal cell” obtained from the resolving power of electron microscope. Likewise for the misconception “dimesnions of objects in the microscopic world can never be measured” the element of dissatisfaction is provided as “ … … … .objects in the microscopic world, can be measured using very small units of measurement. These are unfamiliar to people. In cell studies: μ is the Greek letter mu; is the units of measurement”; the element of intelligibility is provided as “Eye-piece Graticule and Stage Micrometer. Calculating the magnification of a photograph or image using the formula M = I/A. Where M is magnification, I is Image Size and A is Actual Size”; the element of plausibility is provided in the form of “numerical problem related to application of the magnification formula; problems related to calculation of magnification from a scale bar and worked out examples on calculating the real size of an object from its magnification”; finally fruitfulness is established through the “Exercise numerical Problem on calculation of actual size”. Likewise, conceptual change for the misconception that “exchange of organic molecules between the Cell and its environment is a function that depends on cell surface are and not cell volume” is brought about through the element of dissatisfaction that “Small size, in general, is necessary for all cells, whether prokaryotic or eukaryotic. The small size of prokaryotes allows ions and organic molecules that enter them to quickly diffuse to other parts of the cell. This is not the case in eukaryotic cells, which have developed different structural adaptations to enhance intracellular transport”; the element of intelligibility “notice that as a cell increases in size, its surface area-to-volume ratio decreases. When there is insufficient surface area to support a cell’s increasing volume, a cell will either divide or die. The cell on the left has a volume of 1 mm³ and a surface area of 6 mm², with a surface area-to-volume ratio of 6 to 1, whereas the cell on the right has a volume of 8 mm³ and a surface area of 24 mm², with a surface area-to-volume ratio of 3 to 1”; the element of plausibility “A worked out numerical problem providing quantitative justification them significance of cell surface area to volume ratio with respect efficiency of exchange of nutrients and wastes with a cell’s environment” and finally the element of fruitfulness is provided through “A task that seeks the learner to draw annotated diagram to explain how approximately 300 million alveoli in a human lung increases surface area for gas exchange to the size of a tennis court”. The effectiveness of text presentation also depends on the nature of misconceptions being refuted. In such a text presentation, less change would be required to accommodate the new information. Similar findings have also been reported by Chi (2008).

4.3. Textbooks as a tool for conceptual change

Textbooks with expository nature present texts in detailed explanations of science concepts without any reference to common misconceptions (Osborne, 2010; Tippett, 2010). Textbooks with refutational nature present misconceptions explicitly following which they are then refuted with established scientific explanations (Sinatra et al., 2011; Tippett, 2010; Vosniadou & Mason, 2012). Refutational textbooks serve as a tool for conceptual change learning and can be seen as promoters of conceptual understanding instead of rote learning. Refutation texts, sometimes called conceptual change texts, generally engage, challenge, and remediate common misconceptions whereas certain other refutational texts merely contain explanations for the phenomena about which misconceptions might be held (Tippett, 2010). Major research on conceptual change texts or refutational texts comes from the United States (e.g., Hynd & Alvermann, 1986; Maria & MacGinitie, 1987). Researchers from other countries like Australia (Palmer, 2003), Canada (Kendeou & Van den Broek, 2007), China (Chiu & Wong, 1995), Cyprus (Diakidoy et al., 2003), Finland (Mikkilä-Erdmann, 2002), Italy (Mason et al., 2008), and Turkey (Pinarbaşi et al., 2006; Tekkaya, 2003) have examined the role of refutation text in conceptual change learning. Research on refutational texts related to biology focused grossly on robust misconceptions of complex ideas such as natural selection, energy and photosynthesis (Ariasi & Mason, 2011; Diakidoy et al., 2003; Mason et al., 2008; Mikkilä-Erdmann, 2002; Muis et al., 2018) whereas those pertaining to other areas of biology like “Cell Biology” have been scanty or unreported (Asterhan & Resnick, 2020).

5. Limitations

Future studies related to biology textbook analysis can address the following limitations of the present study. In addition to content analysis, opinions from teachers and students can be sought to review and explore the usage of these textbooks. In the present study biology textbooks of international, national, and regional boards of higher secondary education in the Asian region were considered. Future studies can include school boards of other countries.

6. Conclusions

The present study identified the differences in the text presentation of the lesson “Cell Structure” in five biology textbooks of different educational boards in Asia prescribed for the students of Grades 11 and 12 with respect to misconceptions and elements of conceptual change. From the perspective of conceptual change, all the three biology textbooks of international boards reveal elements of conceptual change with respect to misconceptions and these evidences highlight the refutational characteristics of these textbooks. The present study substantiates the fact that biology textbooks from India need serious revision and improvement. The study recommends that in order to enhance the learners’ analytical and reasoning ability in biology, the curricular objectives of educational boards from India should be revised and aligned with the curricular objectives of international educational boards. The analysis revealed that text presentation in biology textbooks of international educational boards is non-expository and that of Indian educational boards is expository.

Empirical Evidence − 1 (Learning Situation 1)Illustration of learning the concepts “Resolution”, “Numerical Aperture” and “Magnification” using TN Biology Textbook

Empirical Evidence − 2 (Learning Situation 2)Illustration of learning the concept “Magnification” using AS-A Level Biology Textbook

Empirical Evidence − 3 (Learning Situation 3)Illustration of learning the concept “Resolution” using AS-A Level Biology Textbook

1. The authors introduce the concept of Resolution by asking the readers to compare two micrographs of the same specimen at the same magnification but one observed under a Light Microscope and the other observed under Electron Microscope. Of the two micrographs the authors highlight that the micrograph observed under Electron Microscope is much clearer due to its high resolution.

2. After this explanation, the authors provide the definition of Resolution.3. The maximum resolution of a light microscope is also provided.4. The effect of magnification can be felt only upto the limit of resolution and beyond the limit of resolution any further magnification leads to blurring is well explained. All these concepts are well highlighted.5. The concept of resolution is also well linked with the Nature of Light.6. The reason why mitochondria are seen under light microscope whereas ribosomes are not visible is well reasoned by the authors: “the limit of resolution is one half of the wavelength of light used”.

Submission declaration and verification

The work described by the authors has not been published previously and it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The authors approve the publication of this work. If accepted, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, including electronically without the written consent of the copyright holder.

Ethical research

This submission conforms to the American Educational Research Association “Code of Ethics” on research.

Ethical Issues (Originality and plagiarism)

The authors of this study ensure that they have written entirely original works.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplemental material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2283640

Additional information

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Notes on contributors

J. Parthasarathy

Parthasarathy J, a higher secondary biology teacher for almost a decade, serving in a Government School in Tamil Nadu, India. Prior to this, he has taught IBDP, AS-A Level and CBSE biology in India and abroad. His voluminous teaching experience spanning for over fifteen years became resourceful in conducting educational research in the following domains, namely, textbook, curriculum and pedagogy. He is of the opinion that at high school level, biology is primarily taught by content-based teaching method. This method prioritizes factual understanding where transfer of knowledge is highly limited. In order to ensure conceptual clarity as well as high transfer of knowledge, he emphasizes that biology should be taught using concept-based teaching instead of content-based teaching. This research article primarily focuses on the analysis of biology textbooks for grades 11 and 12 of different educational boards in Asia with respect to misconceptions and elements of conceptual change.