Students’ reasons for preferring teleological explanations

References

• Abrams, E., & Southerland, S. (2001). The how’s and why’s of biological change: How learners neglect physical mechanisms in their search for meaning. International Journal of Science Education, 23(12), 1271–1281. doi: 10.1080/09500690110038558
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aldridge, M., & Dingwall, R. (2003). Teleology on television? European Journal of Communication, 18(4), 435–453. doi: 10.1177/0267323103184001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartov, H. (1978). Can students be taught to distinguish between teleological and causal explanations? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15, 567–572. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660150619
   Google Scholar
• Bishop, B. A., & Anderson, C. W. (1990). Student conceptions of natural selection and its role in evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(5), 415–427. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660270503
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boerwinkel, D. J., Waarlo, A. J., & Boersma, K. (2009). A designer’s view: The perspective of form and function. Journal of Biological Education, 44(1), 12–18. doi: 10.1080/00219266.2009.9656186
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braaten, M., & Windschitl, M. (2011). Working toward a stronger conceptualization of scientific explanation for science education. Science Education, 95(4), 639–669. doi: 10.1002/sce.20449
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brigandt, I. (2013). Explanation in biology: Reduction, pluralism, and explanatory aims. Science & Education, 22(1), 69–91. doi: 10.1007/s11191-011-9350-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buller, D. J. (1998). Etiological theories of function: A geographical survey. Biology and Philosophy, 13, 505–527. doi: 10.1023/A:1006559512367
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casler, K., & Kelemen, D. (2008). Developmental continuity in teleo-functional explanation: Reasoning about nature among Romanian Romani adults. Journal of Cognition and Development, 9(3), 340–362. doi: 10.1080/15248370802248556
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coley, J. D., & Tanner, K. (2015). Relations between intuitive biological thinking and biological misconceptions in biology majors and nonmajors. Cell Biology Education, 14(1), ar8. doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-06-0094
   Google Scholar
• Coley, J. D., & Tanner, K. D. (2012). Common origins of diverse misconceptions: Cognitive principles and the development of biology thinking. Cell Biology Education, 11(3), 209–215. doi: 10.1187/cbe.12-06-0074
   Google Scholar
• Evans, E. M. (2001). Cognitive and contextual factors in the emergence of diverse belief systems: Creation versus evolution. Cognitive Psychology, 42(3), 217–266. doi: 10.1006/cogp.2001.0749
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, E. M. (2008). Conceptual change and evolutionary biology: A developmental analysis. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), Educational psychology handbook series. International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 263–294). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Friedler, Y., Zohar, A., & Tamir, P. (1993). The effect of age and of learning on the ability to distinguish between anthropomorphic and teleological explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 15(4), 439–443. doi: 10.1080/0950069930150407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galli, G., & Meinardi, L. M., & N, E. (2011). The role of teleological thinking in learning the Darwinian model of evolution. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 4(1), 145–152. doi: 10.1007/s12052-010-0272-7
   Google Scholar
• Horwood, R. H. (1988). Explanation and description in science teaching. Science Education, 72(1), 41–49. doi: 10.1002/sce.3730720104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen, M. S., & Finley, F. N. (1996). Changes in students’ understanding of evolution resulting from different curricular and instructional strategies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), 879–900. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199610)33:8<879::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-T
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jungwirth, E. (1975). Caveat mentor-let the teacher beware! Research in Science Education, 5(1), 153–160.
   Google Scholar
• Kampourakis, K. (2007). Teleology in biology, chemistry and physics education: What primary teachers should know. Review of Science, Mathematics and ICT Education, 1(2), 81–93.
   Google Scholar
• Kampourakis, K., Palaiokrassa, E., Papadopoulou, M., Pavlidi, V., & Argyropoulou, M. (2012). Children’s intuitive teleology: Shifting the focus of evolution education research. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 5(2), 279–291. doi: 10.1007/s12052-012-0393-2
   Google Scholar
• Kampourakis, K., Pavlidi, V., Papadopoulou, M., & Palaiokrassa, E. (2012). Children’s teleological intuitions: What kind of explanations do 7-8 year olds give for the features of organisms, artifacts and natural objects? Research in Science Education, 42(4), 651–671. doi: 10.1007/s11165-011-9219-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kampourakis, K., & Zogza, V. (2007). Students’ preconceptions about evolution: How accurate is the characterization as “lamarckian” when considering the history of evolutionary thought? Science & Education, 16(3–5), 393–422. doi: 10.1007/s11191-006-9019-9
   Google Scholar
• Kampourakis, K., & Zogza, V. (2008). Students’ intuitive explanations of the causes of homologies and adaptations. Science & Education, 17(1), 27–47. doi: 10.1007/s11191-007-9075-9
   Google Scholar
• Kampourakis, K., & Zogza, V. (2009). Preliminary evolutionary explanations: A basic framework for conceptual change and explanatory coherence in evolution. Science & Education, 18(10), 1313–1340. doi: 10.1007/s11191-008-9171-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keil, F. C. (1992). The origins of an autonomous biology. In M. R. Gunnar & M. Maratsos (Eds.), Minnesota symposia on child psychology series. Modularity and constraints in language and cognition. The Minnesota symposia on child psychology, volume 25 (pp. 103–137). Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Kelemen, D. (1999a). Function, goals and intention: Children’s teleological reasoning about objects. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(12), 461–468. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01402-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelemen, D. (1999b). Why are rocks pointy? Children’s preference for teleological explanations of the natural world. Developmental Psychology, 35(6), 1440–1452. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.35.6.1440
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelemen, D. (1999c). The scope of teleological thinking in preschool children. Cognition, 70(3), 241–272. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00010-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelemen, D. (2003). British and American children’s preferences for teleo-functional explanations of the natural world. Cognition, 88(2), 201–221. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00024-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelemen, D. (2012). Teleological minds: How natural intuitions about agency and purpose influence learning about evolution. In K. Rosengren, S. K. Brem, E. M. Evans, & G. M. Sinatra (Eds.), Evolution challenges: Integrating research and practice in teaching and learning about evolution (pp. 66–92). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kelemen, D., & Di Yanni, C. (2005). Intuitions about origins: Purpose and intelligent design in children’s reasoning about nature. Journal of Cognition and Development, 6(1), 3–31. doi: 10.1207/s15327647jcd0601_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelemen, D., & Rosset, E. (2009). The human function compunction: Teleological explanation in adults. Cognition, 111, 138–143. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.01.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelemen, D., Rottman, J., & Seston, R. (2013). Professional physical scientists display tenacious teleological tendencies: Purpose-based reasoning as a cognitive default. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(4), 1074–1083. doi: 10.1037/a0030399
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leinhardt, G. (2001). Instructional explanations: A commonplace for teaching and locating contrast. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 333–337). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Language and educational processes. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Lennox, J. G., & Kampourakis, K. (2013). Biological teleology: The need for history. In K. Kampourakis (Ed.), History, philosophy and theory of the life sciences. The philosophy of biology. A companion for educators (pp. 421–454). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Lombrozo, T., Kelemen, D., & Zaitchik, D. (2007). Inferring design. Psychological Science, 18(11), 999–1006. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.02015.x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mayring, P. (2010). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken [Qualitative content analysis: Basics and techniques] (11th ed.). Studium Paedagogik. Weinheim: Beltz.
   Google Scholar
• McCain, K. (2015). Explanation and the nature of scientific knowledge. Science & Education, 24, 827–854. doi: 10.1007/s11191-015-9775-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaughlin, P. (2001). What functions explain: Functional explanation and self-reproducing systems. Cambridge studies in philosophy and biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Michael, J. A. (1998). Students’ misconceptions about perceived physiological responses. Advanves in Physiology Education, 19(1), 90–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michael, J. A., Richardson, D., Rovick, A., Modell, H., Bruce, D., Horwitz, B., & Williams, S. (1999). Undergraduate students’ misconceptions about respiratory physiology. Advances in Physiology Education, 22, 127–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministerium für Schule und Weiterbildung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen [Ministry of Education and Training of the State of North Rhine-Westphalia]. (2008). Kernlehrplan für das Gymnasium – Sekundarstufe I in Nordrhein-Westfalen – Biologie [Core curriculum for high school – Lower secondary level in North Rhine-Westphalia – Biology]. Retrieved from https://www.schulentwicklung.nrw.de/lehrplaene/upload/lehrplaene_download/gymnasium_g8/gym8_biologie.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Mossio, M., Saborido, C., & Moreno, A. (2009). An organizational account of biological functions. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 60(4), 813–841. doi: 10.1093/bjps/axp036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nehm, R. H., & Ridgway, J. (2011). What do experts and novices “see” in evolutionary problems? Evolution: Education and Outreach, 4(4), 666–679. doi: 10.1007/s12052-011-0369-7
   Google Scholar
• Renkl, A. (2014). Toward an instructionally oriented theory of example-based learning. Cognitive Science, 38(1), 1–37. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12086
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Renkl, A. (2015). Different roads lead to Rome: The case of principle-based cognitive skills. Learning: Research and Practice, 1(1), 79–90. doi: 10.1080/23735082.2015.994255
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, D. R. (1990). A survey of students’ notions of body function as teleologic or mechanistic. American Journal of Physiology, 258, 8–10.
   Google Scholar
• Rottman, J., Zhu, L., Wang, W., Seston Schillaci, R., Clark, K. J., & Kelemen, D. (2017). Cultural influences on the teleological stance: Evidence from China. Religion, Brain & Behavior, 7(1), 17–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sächsisches Staatsministerium für Kultus und Sport [Saxon State Ministry of Education and Sports]. (2011). Lehrplan Gymnasium – Biologie [Curriculum for high school – Biology]. Retrieved from http://www.schule.sachsen.de/lpdb/web/downloads/1394_lp_gy_biologie_2017.pdf?v2
   Google Scholar
• Sehon, S. R. (2010). Zielgerichtetes Handeln und teleologische Erklärungen [Goal-directed actions and teleological explanations]. In C. Horn & G. Löhrer (Eds.), Gründe und Zwecke [Reasons and purposes] (pp. 225–245). Berlin: Suhrkamp Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Talanquer, V. (2007). Explanations and teleology in chemistry education. International Journal of Science Education, 29(7), 853–870. doi: 10.1080/09500690601087632
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Talanquer, V. (2010). Exploring dominant types of explanations built by general chemistry students. International Journal of Science Education, 32(18), 2393–2412. doi: 10.1080/09500690903369662
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Talanquer, V. (2013). When atoms want. Journal of Chemical Education, 90(11), 1419–1424. doi: 10.1021/ed400311x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tamir, P. (1985). Causality and teleology in high school biology. Research in Science & Technological Education, 3(1), 19–28. doi: 10.1080/0263514850030103
   Google Scholar
• Tamir, P., & Zohar, A. (1991). Anthropomorphism and teleology in reasoning about biological phenomena. Science Education, 75(1), 57–67. doi: 10.1002/sce.3730750106
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang, K.-S. (2016). Constructing scientific explanations through premise–reasoning–outcome (PRO): An exploratory study to scaffold students in structuring written explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 38(9), 1415–1440. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2016.1192309
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toepfer, G. (2004). Zweckbegriff und Organismus: Über die teleologische Beurteilung biologischer Systeme [Purpose and organism: On the teleological judgement of biological systems]. Würzburg: Königshausen u. Neumann.
   Google Scholar
• Toepfer, G. (2012). Teleology and its constitutive role for biology as the science of organized systems in nature. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 43(1), 113–119. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsc.2011.05.010
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Treagust, D. F., & Harrison, A. G. (2000). In search of explanatory frameworks: An analysis of Richard Feynman’s lecture ‘Atoms in motion’. International Journal of Science Education, 22(11), 1157–1170. doi: 10.1080/09500690050166733
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unsworth, L. (2001). Evaluating the language of different types of explanations in junior high school science texts. International Journal of Science Education, 23(6), 585–609. doi: 10.1080/09500690010006473
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wittwer, J., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2010). Using a diagnosis-based approach to individualize instructional explanations in computer-mediated communication. Educational Psychology Review, 22(1), 9–23. doi: 10.1007/s10648-010-9118-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wittwer, J., & Renkl, A. (2008). Why instructional explanations often do not work: A framework for understanding the effectiveness of instructional explanations. Educational Psychologist, 43(1), 49–64. doi: 10.1080/00461520701756420
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wouters, A. G. (2013). Biology’s functional perspective: Roles, advantages and organization. In K. Kampourakis (Ed.), History, philosophy and theory of the life sciences. The philosophy of biology. A companion for educators (pp. 455–486). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Zohar, A., & Ginossar, S. (1998). Lifting the taboo regarding teleology and anthropomorphism in biology education – heretical suggestions. Science Education, 82, 679–697. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199811)82:6<679::AID-SCE3>3.0.CO;2-E
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar