A Framework for Evidentiary Reasoning in Biology: Insights from Laboratory Courses Focused on Evolutionary Tree-thinking

Shiyao Liu; Chaonan Liu; Ala Samarapungavan; Stephanie M Gardner; Kari L Clase; Nancy J Pelaez

doi:10.1007/s11191-023-00435-6

A Framework for Evidentiary Reasoning in Biology: Insights from Laboratory Courses Focused on Evolutionary Tree-thinking

Sci Educ (Dordr). 2023 Apr 26:1-32. doi: 10.1007/s11191-023-00435-6. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Shiyao Liu^{1

2}, Chaonan Liu^{1

3}, Ala Samarapungavan⁴, Stephanie M Gardner¹, Kari L Clase⁵, Nancy J Pelaez¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN USA.
² Present Address: Interdisciplinary Science Learning Laboratories (ISLL), University of Delaware, Newark, DE USA.
³ Present Address: John Martinson Honors College, Purdue University, IN West Lafayette, USA.
⁴ Department of Educational Studies, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN USA.
⁵ Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Biotechnology Innovation and Regulatory Science (BIRS) Center, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN USA.

Abstract

Science educators report that students struggle with understanding, using, and evaluating the evidence underpinning scientific knowledge. However, there are not many studies focused on helping instructors address those difficulties. Here, we report on a laboratory instructor's scaffolding of students' evidentiary reasoning with and about evidence for evolutionary trees with guidance from the Conceptual Analysis of Disciplinary Evidence (CADE) framework, which links biological knowledge with epistemic considerations. To consider both domain-general and discipline-specific aspects of evidence, CADE was implemented to inform scaffolds in two ways: (1) generic evidence scaffolds (GES) reminded students of general epistemic considerations; (2) disciplinary evidence scaffolds (DES) explicitly reminded students of the disciplinary knowledge of relevance for considering biological evidence. An instructor's lab discussions were compared before and after they had a workshop with CADE. CADE helped the lab instructor facilitate students' evidentiary reasoning about evolutionary trees. In comparison to baseline, both GES and DES discussions covered more aspects and relationships among types of evidence for evolutionary tree-thinking and the instructor prompted more kinds of general epistemic considerations and biological knowledge. DES discussions emphasized the importance of disciplinary knowledge for research design. The CADE framework guided planning and implementation of intentional scaffolding aimed at guiding evidentiary reasoning.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11191-023-00435-6.

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2023, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.