comment Evolution education is a complex landscape Researchers in various contexts have long struggled with an apparent disconnect between an individual’s level of understanding of biological evolution and their acceptance of it as an explanation for the history and diversity of life. Here, we discuss the main factors associated with acceptance of evolution and chart a path forward for evolution education research. Ryan D. P. Dunk, M. Elizabeth Barnes, Michael J. Reiss, Brian Alters, Anila Asghar, B. Elijah Carter, Sehoya Cotner, Amanda L. Glaze, Patricia H. Hawley, Jamie L. Jensen, Louise S. Mead, Louis S. Nadelson, Craig E. Nelson, Briana Pobiner, Eugenie C. Scott, Andrew Shtulman, Gale M. Sinatra, Sherry A. Southerland, Emily M. Walter, Sara E. Brownell and Jason R. Wiles

ome recent work on evolution has left beyond understanding of evolution, that influence their reception and interpretation us perplexed, prompting us to reflect have a major association with evolution of the information presented. In the context Son what is known about the current acceptance: understanding the nature of of evolution education, it is clear (and research on evolution acceptance and where science (the means, aims, processes, and confirmed by research) that certain religious further work is needed. Unlike most other practice of science)6,7 and religiosity (the and sociocultural experiences tend to make subjects, an individual’s level of acceptance salience of one’s religious identity)6–9. students less receptive to the presentation of of evolution does not always depend on Understanding of evolution is an evolution. Culturally competent pedagogy their level of understanding1. A person important factor for acceptance. Earlier uses appropriate strategies to reduce who understands little about the evidence research in the field searched for a conflicts and obstacles induced by such for evolution might accept it as a matter of relationship between evolution acceptance experiences18–20. This approach should lead scientific consensus, while another person and understanding but found contradictory to an increase in both understanding and might reject evolution on religious or other results1,10–13. However, more recent acceptance of evolution—indeed, in one non-scientific grounds despite having a studies employing multifactorial models study, identification with evolution acceptors good understanding of the concept. have shown an independent significant was found to be the only factor significantly As a result, ever since evolution became association between evolution knowledge related to change in evolution acceptance21. a dominant paradigm in biology, evolution and acceptance when controlling for other Along with teaching in a culturally educators have faced a distinctive challenge: variables6–8,14, although the strength of this competent manner, the demonstrated how to cope with religious and other non- association varies between studies. Other connection between understanding scientific factors that can impede student recent work15 suggests that in certain groups the nature of science and acceptance of acceptance of evolution. For at least the past of UK secondary school students with evolution5–7,22,23 suggests that including three decades, there has been an expanding relatively low levels of rejection of evolution, clear and explicit instruction about the interdisciplinary body of research regarding measures of knowledge alone may be nature of science may have direct benefits in the acceptance of evolution among the sufficient to explain variation in evolution increasing evolution acceptance24,25. Student public and among students in particular. We acceptance, although the authors did not understanding of the nature of science is (the authors) have all studied reasons for— directly measure or test for factors shown to a good pedagogical target for a number and solutions to—the lack of acceptance be key in most other recent studies. of reasons. Beyond increasing evolution of evolution among various groups2. Here, While an instructional approach focused acceptance, learning and understanding we use our collective knowledge and almost exclusively on evolution knowledge more about the scientific enterprise could experience to summarize what is known may increase acceptance of evolution for help students become better-informed about acceptance of evolution, describe students without religious barriers15, such citizens and more aware of the processes a path for further exploration, and offer an approach may isolate and discourage common to all scientific disciplines. In recommendations for how evolution students who have particular religious addition, the nature of science is already a acceptance research can inform curricular beliefs by reinforcing the stereotype that it common part of most life sciences curricula, choices and instructional practices in life- is impossible to identify as both religious and, hence, education interventions can science education. and a scientist16. Although no single be designed to align with teachers’ existing Although the disconnect between strategy is likely to be sufficient to reach all pedagogical content knowledge. understanding and acceptance of evolution learners, one technique that holds promise, To continue to progress in our is not limited to the United States, the particularly for religious students, is that understanding of evolution acceptance and majority of research into this phenomenon of making evolution education ‘culturally associated factors, one area that needs to be has been done there for good reason— competent’17 by taking into account the addressed is consistency in measurement. compared with 32 European countries unique backgrounds and experiences of Currently, there is no universally used tool and Japan, only Turkey has lower public learners and working toward curricula that for measuring evolution acceptance. The acceptance of evolution than the United are compatibilist, not combative, in nature. three most common measures, however, States3. Researchers have examined This derives from a constructivist view of are all multi-item Likert scale tools— numerous factors associated with acceptance education, which holds that learners possess demonstrably better26,27 than single-item of evolution4,5 and found two main factors, a wealth of attitudes and experiences that measures of the type commonly used in

Nature Ecology & Evolution | VOL 3 | MARCH 2019 | 327–329 | www.nature.com/natecolevol 327 comment

national surveys. Of the three measures sets and, where possible, comparison groups Canada. 6Department of Biology, Duke University, of evolution acceptance, the Measure of and other controls to isolate the effect of Durham, NC, USA. 7Department of Biology Teaching Acceptance of the Theory of Evolution different interventions. If science educators and Learning, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, (MATE)10,28 is the oldest and most widely succeed in increasing evolution acceptance, MN, USA. 8Department of Middle Grades and used. The Inventory of Student Evolution the benefits will accrue for not only students Secondary Education, Georgia Southern University, Acceptance (I-SEA)29 and Generalized but also society as a whole, through better Statesboro, GA, USA. 9College of Education, Texas Acceptance of Evolution Evaluation overall attitudes toward societal challenges Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA. 10Department (GAENE)30 tools were more recently that are tightly linked to evolution, such as of Biology, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, developed to address concerns with the antibiotic resistance, vaccine development, USA. 11Department of Integrative Biology, Michigan MATE and have gained some traction in food security, and climate change. State University & BEACON Center for the Study the evolution education literature as robust We hope that this brief review will serve of Evolution in Action, East Lansing, MI, USA. measures. A recent study that employed as a useful and clarifying primer on the 12Department of Leadership Studies, University of more than one instrument found that the state of evolution education research that Central Arkansas, Conway, AR, USA. 13Department correlation between two measures may be highlights both the successes in the field of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, quite strong31. However, on-going work and how much work still needs to be done. USA. 14Department of Anthropology, Smithsonian in the measurement of evolution Much remains to be discovered, and the National Museum of Natural History, Washington, acceptance and associated factors is still findings discussed here are certainly far D.C., USA. 15National Center for Science Education, of critical importance. from infallible. As in any field of study, novel Oakland, CA, USA. 16Department of Psychology & To avoid making overreaching research findings are important and useful, Department of Cognitive Science, Occidental College, recommendations across dissimilar contexts, and they serve to drive the field forward. Los Angeles, CA, USA. 17Rossier School of Education, researchers also need to explore in more But we caution against sensationalist titles University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, detail the generalizability of results. Many and conclusions that there is ‘no missing USA. 18College of Education, Florida State University, existing studies have been performed in link’14 between evolution knowledge Tallahassee, FL, USA. 19Department of Biology, traditional university settings, which tend and acceptance (a majority of evolution California State University, Fresno, Fresno, CA, toward underrepresentation of certain education researchers would never have USA. 20Department of Science Education, Harvard- groups of people, most notably racial and argued there was), or that ‘teachers should Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Harvard ethnic minorities. Do these same patterns teach the science and not focus on belief University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. hold in underrepresented minority groups, systems’15 (an attitude which has been the *e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] which already face barriers in science, driving force behind decades of curriculum technology, engineering and mathematics changes that have failed to substantially Published online: 4 February 2019 (STEM) education32,33? Does the general move the bar on public acceptance of https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0802-9 public have the same reasons for rejecting evolution34). Instead, we suggest that new evolution as the students in the majority research be understood through the lens References 1. Sinatra, G. M., Southerland, S. A., McConaughy, F. & Demastes, J. W. of studies (early evidence shows that they of what we already know: acceptance of J. Res. Sci. Teach. 40, 510–528 (2003). 14 may )? Additionally, it is important to evolution is related to understanding of 2. Rosengren, K. S., Brem, S. K., Evans, E. M., & Sinatra, G. M. (eds) investigate whether the influence of various not only evolution, but also the nature of Evolution Challenges: Integrating Research and Practice in Teaching and Learning About Evolution. (Oxford University Press, factors associated with evolution acceptance, science and religious attitudes and identity. Oxford, 2012). such as understanding of the nature of Strategies to increase evolution acceptance 3. Miller, J. D., Scott, E. C. & Okamoto, S. Science 313, science and religiosity, might change over must necessarily include a consideration 765–766 (2006). 4. Wiles, J. R. & Alters, B. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 33, 2559–2585 (2011). time. Do these associations remain static in of all of these factors. To do less is to reject 5. Pobiner, B. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 159, 232–274 (2016). individuals, or does the relative impact of the preponderance of evidence arising 6. Dunk, R. D. P., Petto, A. J., Wiles, J. R. & Campbell, B. C. Evol. certain factors on an individual’s acceptance from the science of teaching and learning— Educ. Outreach 10, 4 (2017). 7. Glaze, A. L., Goldston, M. J. & Dantzler, J. Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. of evolution change throughout their life and to risk the scientific literacy of the 13, 1189–1209 (2015). 21,22 and experiences ? And within and across rising generation. ❐ 8. Rissler, L. J., Duncan, S. I. & Caruso, N. M. Evol. Educ. Outreach populations, have these patterns been stable, 7, 24 (2014). or have changes occurred in the influence of Ryan D. P. Dunk1*, M. Elizabeth Barnes2, 9. Barnes, M. E., Evans, E. M., Hazel, A., Brownell, S. E. & Nesse, R. M. 3 4 5 Evol. Educ. Outreach 10, 7 (2017). these factors over the past 5, 10, or 30 years? Michael J. Reiss , Brian Alters , Anila Asghar , 10. Rutledge, M. L. & Warden, M. A. Am. Biol. Teach. 62, The ultimate goal of this area of B. Elijah Carter6, Sehoya Cotner7, 23–31 (2000). research is to empower educators to Amanda L. Glaze8, Patricia H. Hawley9, 11. Trani, R. Am. Biol. Teach. 66, 419–427 (2004). 10 11 12. Lawson, A. E. & Worsnop, W. A. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 29, increase their students’ understanding of Jamie L. Jensen , Louise S. Mead , 143–166 (1992). 12 13 evolution. We also suggest that increasing Louis S. Nadelson , Craig E. Nelson , 13. Ingram, E. L. & Nelson, C. E. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 43, acceptance of evolution should be a goal Briana Pobiner14, Eugenie C. Scott15, 7–24 (2006). 16 17 14. Weisberg, D. S., Landrum, A. R., Metz, S. E. & Weisberg, M. of instruction, insofar as possible, as long Andrew Shtulman , Gale M. Sinatra , Bioscience 68, 212–222 (2018). 18 19 as it is not required of students. This will Sherry A. Southerland , Emily M. Walter , 15. Mead, R., Hejmadi, M. & Hurst, L. D. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, likely necessitate some diversification of Sara E. Brownell2 and Jason R. Wiles1,20* 388–394 (2018). 1 16. Rios, K., Cheng, Z. H., Totton, R. R. & Sharif, A. F. Soc. Psychol. strategies, as different groups will respond Department of Biology, Syracuse University, Personal. Sci. 6, 959–967 (2015). 2 differently to different strategies; although Syracuse, NY, USA. School of Life Sciences, 17. Barnes, M. E. & Brownell, S. E. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 16, it is appropriate to seek out educational Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA. 1–10 (2017). 3UCL Institute of Education, University College 18. Barnes, M. E., Elser, J. & Brownell, S. E. Am. Biol. Teach. 79, strategies that are the most beneficial 104–111 (2017). 4 and minimize harmful complications, we London, London, UK. Attallah College of 19. Hawley, P.H. & Sinatra, G.M. J. Res. Sci. Teach. (in the press) (2019). acknowledge that there is no one-size-fits- Educational Studies & Schmid College of Science 20. Pobiner, B., Beardsley, P. M., Bertka, C. M. & Watson, W. A. all approach to evolution education. To and Technology, Chapman University, Orange, Evol. Educ. Outreach 11, 3 (2018). 21. Walker, J. D., Wassenberg, D., Franta, G. & Cotner, S. J. Coll. Sci. 5 this end, we hope to see an increase in the CA, USA. Department of Integrated Studies in Teach. 47, 46–56 (2017). number of studies that use longitudinal data Education, McGill University, Montréal, Québec, 22. Carter, B. E. & Wiles, J. R. Evol. Educ. Outreach 7, 6 (2014).

328 Nature Ecology & Evolution | VOL 3 | MARCH 2019 | 327–329 | www.nature.com/natecolevol comment

23. Lombrozo, T., Tanukos, A. & Weisberg, M. Evol. Educ. Outreach 26. McIver, J.P. & Carmines, E.G. Unidimensional Scaling. (SAGE 32. Walls, L. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 53, 1546–1570 (2016). 1, 290–298 (2008). Publications, Inc., Newbury Park, CA, USA, 1981). 33. Mead, L. S., Clarke, J. B., Forcino, F. & Graves, J. L. Evol. Educ. 24. Alters, B.J. & Alters, S.M. Defending Evolution in the Classroom: A 27. Nunnally, J.C. & Bernstein, I.H. Psychometric Teory. Outreach 8, 6 (2015). Guide To Te Creation/Evolution Controversy. (Jones and Bartlett (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1994). 34. Gallup. Evolution, creationism, intelligent design (Gallup, 2017); Publishers, Sudbury, MA, USA, 2001). 28. Rutledge, M. L. & Sadler, K. C. Am. Biol. Teach. 69, 332–335 (2007). http://www.gallup.com/poll/21814/evolution-creationism- 25. Pennock, R.T. On teaching evolution and the nature of science. 29. Nadelson, L. S. & Southerland, S. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 34, 1637–1666 (2012). intelligent-design.aspx in Evolutionary Science and Society: Educating a New Generation 30. Smith, M. U., Snyder, S. W. & Devereaux, R. S. J. Res. Sci. Teach. (Proceedings of the BSCS, AIBS Symposium, November 2004, 53, 1289–1315 (2016). NABT Convention, Chicago, IL) (eds. Cracraf, J. & Bybee, R. W.) 31. Metzger, K. J., Montplaisir, D., Haines, D. & Nickodem, K. Competing interests 7–12 (BSCS, Colorado Springs, CO, USA, 2005). Evol. Educ. Outreach 11, 10 (2018). The authors declare no competing interests.

Nature Ecology & Evolution | VOL 3 | MARCH 2019 | 327–329 | www.nature.com/natecolevol 329