INTRODUCTION

The academic community has become increasingly concerned about remaining aware of current limitations when teaching and learning about the theory of evolution. Dobzhansky's (40) famous quotation “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution” indicates evolution's centrality in learning about biology, yet a lack of understanding about evolution and its associated misconceptions has continued to increase among students and the general public since that time (5, 50). Given evolution's unifying and explanatory power, it would be reasonable to expect that its underlying principles and concepts would be taught widely and would be clearly understood. Yet teaching evolution remains one of the most challenging disciplines in science education (96), and a long lineage of research reveals considerable student ignorance about evolution and an associated uninformed view regarding how scientists work (2, 12, 14, 15, 29, 43, 44, 54, 72, 80, 103, 106). Few academics have made strides in enhancing students' understanding of fundamental Darwinian principles, and consequently many students approach evolution with trepidation (111). The vast majority of research has shown that teaching evolutionary concepts is generally problematic around the world (3, 7, 16, 17, 20, 101), and thus it can benefit from research on innovations in teaching and learning.

Studies focusing on students' acceptance and understanding of evolution have been widely conducted and have taken various demographic factors into account, such as gender (57, 82), academic standing (42, 52, 69, 82), and major course of study (57, 69). All of these studies have documented significant problems, and most have revealed little to no difference among or between groups. Interestingly, Muller's (92) classic paper showed that the fundamentals of evolution and natural selection are relatively simple concepts that can be easily understood and applied. Yet Alters & Nelson (5) found that upon university graduation, a large proportion of students still held misconceptions about evolution, and many lacked even the most basic understanding of evolution. This finding is indicative of the level at which evolution is taught and learned in universities and suggests that some university courses are below par, with little effort being made to improve course studies and produce a more appreciable understanding among an acceptable proportion of students.

In the United States, for example, much of the obstruction preventing the acceptance of evolution has been brought about by antievolution religious movements (4, 9, 95, 106). Such “opposition to evolution is so vocal in the United States that it has threatened federal funding of evolutionary research,” according to Futuyma (53). However, in Australia and other countries around the world, where antievolution sentiments are not as prevalent as they are in the United States, common misconceptions and a lack of solid understanding of evolutionary principles still persist and are widespread among university students (21). The difficulties connected with teaching evolution when religion is the major impediment are significant, and a large debate on this subject currently exists in the literature. Clearly, there are complex social, cultural, and religious reasons for students' rejection of evolution, and academics may find many of these factors impossible to rectify. However, in addition to religious constraints, at least some of the educational reasons for students' misunderstandings of evolution are likely due to the way evolution is taught, and academics have the power to change these measures.

Significant issues associated with teaching evolution in K–12 schools have been well documented (95, 96), and it is clear that the work in this area is of massive importance. However, this review focuses exclusively on teaching evolution at the university level, a unique teaching and learning environment that requires a distinctive methodology. In this regard, the review discusses issues pertaining to pedagogy, curriculum design, and academic development and provides helpful strategies.

PEDAGOGY

When to Teach Evolution

[W]hatever aspect of biology is studied, it provides irrefutable evidence in support of evolution.

Ernst Mayr (84)

With respect to science majors, the core concepts of evolution should be taught at the commencement of a science degree, in the first year, and should also be taught thoroughly, over a semester-long course. The reasons for this are twofold: First, it will enable students who go on to study biology in later years to apply evolutionary understanding to new biological concepts. And second, because many other degree programs (such as medicine, health science, veterinary science, and education) require students to take first-year core biology, this may be the only opportunity to teach this prominent group of students about the unifying theory of biology.

A survey of course offerings across Australia revealed that fewer than half of first-year biology courses focus on evolution; instructors often teach it toward the end of the semester or teach it only from an evolutionary perspective rather than as a whole, and some may not teach it explicitly at all (K. Burke da Silva, unpublished results). Many universities still take a traditional approach (spanning the last 100 years) to first-year biology, focusing on a survey of biodiversity, typically comparing anatomical and taxonomical differences. Most evolution courses offered worldwide are not taught as independent subjects until the final or upper-year levels of a science degree program, when student enrollments are limited to those in very specific degree areas comprising much smaller student classes. Most studies on the effectiveness of teaching evolution have focused on either upper-level evolution courses (64) or introductory, nonmajor courses that offer short units on evolution (79, 87). Ingram & Nelson (64) found that in upper-level, full-semester evolution courses, students do experience a positive change toward understanding evolutionary concepts, especially those regarding human evolution. This is also the case when evolution is taught in a semester-long course at the first-year level, as found by Buckberry & Burke da Silva (21), indicating that core evolutionary concepts can be presented and understood at a very early stage in university science education, even when students arrive with widespread misconceptions.

A current concern and perhaps the biggest impediment to teaching difficult conceptual information (such as evolution) at the first-year level is the associated large class size with limited student-teacher interactions (58). Some students can find it particularly difficult to make the transition from small high school classrooms to large first-year university courses (77). By the end of their tenure as students, course enrollment returns to a smaller size; however, the transition from high school to first-year university can often overwhelm students. This is also difficult for university lecturers, and this situation appeared insurmountable in the past. However, these challenges are now being overcome through innovations in teaching and learning, along with the professional development of academic staff to ensure that students are provided with a mixed learning environment that emphasizes first-year, student-focused learning (25, 36).

Sinatra et al. (109) emphasized the need for conceptual change in the classroom. They argued that students are capable of grasping difficult theoretical concepts such as evolution when appropriate teaching innovations are employed. The noted attempts by academics to “weed out” the next generation of scientists (36, 120) at a time when student enrollment in the sciences is decreasing are no longer considered an acceptable approach.

How to Teach Evolution

An increasing number of studies have documented student avoidance of science, resulting in a reduction of university science graduates (78, 94, 97, 103). Of those students who choose to take science, many leave their courses as they find science less interesting and relevant than they had expected. These issues are not new and have been cited as common problems within many Australian, American, and British universities, and have resulted in a steady decline in student enrollments in tertiary science courses (39, 70, 78, 86, 104, 109). First-year programs should be designed to support students' transitions and provide an academic environment that challenges students to establish lifelong learning behavior. Providing students with a view of what a scientist is and does is instrumental in taking students beyond their high school perspectives of science and into a realm of possibilities for their own futures.

In the School of Biological Sciences at Flinders University, the issue of a lower-than-desirable first-year student intake was compounded by a disturbing withdrawal rate from first-year biology courses, thus reducing the progression of students into second-year biology. The methods of teaching large groups of students have generally been passive, and include employing noninteractive lectures, disjointed practical sessions, and online delivery of tutorials. The lack of a prerequisite requirement for biology, combined with the multitude of degree programs requiring students to take first-year biology, exacerbates the issues associated with passive teaching methods because lecturers were unable to ascertain whether the information being presented was accessible or engaging to a cohort of students with varying academic backgrounds and interests. The semester-long course on traditional biodiversity was viewed poorly by students—they not only were unable to see the relevance of the course but also were bored by the detailed memorization of facts, so their lecture attendance decreased, thus reducing engagement and overall success. A new course focusing on evolutionary theory (see Table 1 for syllabus) was developed in its place, with the aims of increasing student and lecturer engagement, improving student learning through inquiry, and bringing an understanding of evolutionary concepts to the large group of first-year biology students.

Table 1

Full-semester first-year biology: evolution syllabus

A NONTRADITIONAL PEDAGOGY

A More Appropriate Use of Lectures

This week's lectures on asexual and sexual reproduction were very interesting and engaging. Every concept or idea covered was thoroughly explained and was not too difficult to grasp. Furthermore, the lectorial provided an insight into mimicry, and this was very interesting! I personally found it to be a highlight of my week.

Anonymous first-year biology student

Teaching in large lecture theaters remains the most common method of instruction at universities (47) and clearly has more to do with economics (76) than with providing a high-quality learning environment. Fitzgerald (51) asked, “Is there any point in the lecture as a form of university teaching?” This question is even more relevant today; technologies have further advanced, yet the lecture format remains. Traditional teaching methods such as passive lectures have been shown to negatively affect students and lead to high withdrawal rates (73). However, lectures maintain at least some educational advantages, as they continue to exist in most educational platforms, which is most likely linked to the lecturers' enthusiasm and overall knowledge. Menz et al. (89) established that students are bored by low-quality lectures, which can drive them to nonattendance, whereas high-quality lectures can inspire students and maintain high attendance. Challenging students and providing them with new opportunities to learn can be highly engaging and assist them in understanding difficult conceptual information (41). Yet the proportion of lecturers who are gifted in this respect is not high. Thus, given the financial constraints that many universities face, replacing the lecture format with more expensive measures, such as problem-based learning, is unlikely. With student attention span averaging around 10 minutes (114), the standard hour-long lecture typically results in a lack of engagement and student dissatisfaction. Experiments involving measures of information retention show differences favoring discussion methods over uninterrupted lecture formats (88). Therefore, a cost-effective and straightforward alteration would be to modify lectures from passive, teacher-focused modalities to interactive, student-focused sessions.

Methods to improve lecturer interaction with students have proved successful, and having time to ask questions or problem-solve can significantly increase student engagement and understanding (85). This is especially the case for difficult conceptual information such as that required in the sciences, and in evolution specifically. When asked, many lecturers indicate that they do pose questions to students during lectures, but few students attempt to answer them, so the lecturer is left to answer the question. However, observation of lecturers has shown that most offer very little time for students to answer, and questions are often worded in a very complex manner so that students are unable to answer in a straightforward way, thus causing embarrassment or uncertainty in large lecture theaters (K. Burke da Silva, unpublished results). Lecturers also voice concerns about discussions reducing the time allocated to cover important content. As discussed by Handelsmann et al. (60), mounting evidence indicates that lectures are not the most effective strategy for learning and should be replaced with “active learning strategies and engaging students in discovery and scientific process.” Overloaded content and passive presentation of fact-based material should therefore be discouraged and replaced with methods that have proven to be successful in increasing student interest and understanding of evolutionary concepts.

Many studies have documented that use of the Internet, multimedia devices, or handheld response devices (clickers) allows staff to assess student misunderstandings and provide immediate feedback, which are easy methods to improve the passive lecture (19, 26, 28, 46, 59, 71). Animations and games embedded in lectures or used as study materials can also be effective in conveying complex concepts (45, 119). Evans (48) reported that, when added to traditional lectures, virtual learning (e-learning) in higher education allows student flexibility in learning and provides an opportunity to review the material and obtain feedback (49). Mobile learning using portable (handheld) wireless technologies such as iPods, MP3 players, smartphones, and personal digital assistants all allow learners to vary their study locations and study on the move.

I enjoyed the video on Tuesday's lecture. It was a refreshing way to be reintroduced to biology lectures after the break. The video in the first lecture was amazing and thoroughly interesting to watch. I find that including video segments along with information on slides solidifies concepts and improves my learning. Seeing these concepts, e.g., reproductive strategies, in action (particularly the primate and octopus videos) makes the topic more enjoyable than just listening and taking down notes.

Anonymous first-year biology student

Jensen & Finley (68) provided a course that is historically rich and covers the history of thought before and after the publication of Darwin's theory, and also includes presentations of historically classic experiments. Students who learned from this style of teaching significantly outperformed students who learned in a more traditional, lecture-based pedagogy (68). This approach has been noted across the sciences; Matthews (83) showed that improvements can be made across the board if classes are infused with the philosophical and historical dimensions of science. Instead of requiring students to analyze evidence, many lecturers expect students to passively receive knowledge from the authority (the lecturer) and not question the accuracy of the information. Nehm & Reilly (98) have totally abandoned an exclusively lecture-based pedagogy by embedding evolution as a common theme throughout all units taught in a semester-long course, with impressive results.

As many students arrive at university with common misconceptions about the concepts that are required for an accurate understanding of evolution, it is imperative that lecturers present materials with a knowledge of these barriers to learning. The US National Research Council's Committee on Undergraduate Science Education (33) reported that “recent research on students' conceptual misunderstandings of natural phenomena indicates that new concepts cannot be learned if alternative models that explain a phenomenon already exist in the learner's mind.” It is therefore necessary for lecturers to work on a constructivist approach and address questions that require students to answer using prior experience or knowledge to solve problems. In this way, students will use alternative approaches when their current understandings are shown to be incorrect, thus allowing them to generate new predictions, gain new understandings, and alter old beliefs (79).

I really enjoyed the lecture on animal ethics. Although this may no longer be a requirement due to the noninclusion of the fish prac, I believe it is still an invaluable insight of the involvement of animals in science. Friday, I read a very out-of-date Time magazine that included an article on testing drugs on pregnant women. Without having heard Thursday's lecture, I would never have read the article with such a critical eye. This particular lecture really did make people think more about the concept of animal rights, inspired some simmering beliefs, and jolted people's consciousness.

Anonymous first-year biology student

A historically rich context and an examination of the study and practice of science as based on observation, measurement, and logical conclusions are essential in an evolution course. Inquiries need to be highlighted, and discussion of the nature of uncertainty and the scientific method can help increase student understanding of how evolutionary biologists work. A position statement on introductory university science courses states that “at a minimum, every student should know and be able to do the following:…Solve and evaluate problems…[Design] meaningful experiments…Evaluate critically…Ask meaningful questions about real world scientific issues” (111). Presenting evolution in the light of critical thinking can consequently provide a model for critical thinking in other areas of a student's life, and thus can be a highly valuable tool.

Having a brief outline of background information about biologists featured in the lecture helps me remember more of the content. It gives a little bit more context, and I think that the more you know about a person, the more compelled you are to take an interest in their work. I'm not sure whether it would be helpful to others, but I thought I should let you know that it helped me a great deal.

Anonymous first-year biology student

Tying information together and making it relevant to real-world examples can be enhanced through the lectorial format, which is a case-based large group tutorial. Applying knowledge gained in previous lectures on how to solve problems makes basic concepts relevant and thus stimulates student interest.

The extinction lectures were amazingly engaging and very interesting! The lectorial was also interesting as always, and was good for understanding the fossil record gaps, etc.

Anonymous first-year biology student

As shown by Bull & Wichman (22), the application of evolutionary concepts to real-world problems can further increase the sophistication of student understanding. Through peer instruction, it also offers an opportunity for more engaged students to accelerate and reinforce their understanding by instructing other students who are moving at a slower pace (85). The excellent National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science Web site (http://sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/collection) provides case-based lectures in evolution and other science topics, including those with embedded clicker questions.

I found this week's lectures most interesting and how it applied to things like Sickle Cell Disease, because I am interested in the Medical field for my career.

Anonymous first-year biology student

Cloud-Hansen et al. (32) developed a biology unit to help students understand the Central Dogma and evolution through a case study focused on ciprofloxicin resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae. They found that focusing on this real-world problem throughout the semester required students to apply their knowledge, which resulted in college freshmen increasing their content knowledge and critical thinking skills.

Peer-Assisted Learning: Peer-Assisted Study Sessions

I enjoyed this week's PASS session! Haha the chocolate bits probably had a lot to do with that! But it was helpful in practicing calculating genotype frequencies too!:)

Anonymous first-year biology student

Hardy-Weinberg equations are quite confusing, and I am looking forward to PASS and practical sessions that include these concepts.

Anonymous first-year biology student

In combination with large first-year lectures, small group-learning sessions with peer leaders work exceptionally well for introductory evolution courses (24). Peer learning combines group learning with problem-solving activities and gives first-year students an opportunity to meet others and form friendships. It also provides them with the skills required to make learning a collaborative, social, fun endeavor. Students are not provided with the “correct” answers to problems; rather, they use the collective knowledge of their group and other groups to build their knowledge base and derive solutions to problems.

Peer-assisted study has been found to aid students both in making the transition to university and in developing study skills in their first year (10, 24, 118). Sessions are typically facilitated by upper-year-level students who received high grades in their first-year programs. Introducing the peer program to the evolution course at Flinders University has significantly increased student satisfaction and engagement in the subject. In weekly student feedback provided throughout the semester, students' comments were positive and indicated the value they placed on these sessions with respect to improving their understanding of evolutionary concepts. Activities are designed to be interactive and allow students with different learning styles to benefit from different approaches, as proposed by Kolb (75) through experiential learning theory. This strategy is consistent with the recommendations of Dagher & BouJaoude (34). For examples of evolutionary concepts that can be covered in peer-led sessions, see the Supplemental Appendix.

For me, the two lectures this week tied a lot of what we have learned throughout the semester together by allowing me to understand the extent of evolution. The emphasis on human evolution was very interesting. PASS this week also helped me get a better understanding on lecture content. I think I understand Hardy-Weinberg finally, after the last two PASS sessions.

Anonymous first-year biology student

A similar approach to learning evolution that provides students with opportunities to generate solutions to problems and build understanding through a hands-on approach to learning has been discussed in multiple studies (64, 67, 105). These activities range from lessons simulating natural selection using playing cards to using casts of hominid fossil skulls to teach human evolution (4, 55, 74; http://www.indiana.edu/∼ensiweb).

Inquiry-Based Laboratories

One must learn by doing the thing, for though you think you know it—you have no certainty until you try.

Sophocles

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (6) and the National Research Council (96) have endorsed science curricula that actively engage students using an inquiry-based approach. As suggested by Hodson (63), inquiry-based learning is a much more effective way for students to learn about science than traditional lecture-based approaches, as it also improves their attitudes toward science (65, 108). Providing inquiry-based activities in the classroom for school-aged children has not been highly effective (54), as schoolteachers generally lack an understanding of the ways scientists develop theories and solve problems (54). This is obviously not the case with university lecturers, yet traditional first-year science laboratories tend to use a “cookbook” approach to practically demonstrate theoretical principles (1). When a more inquiry-based approach is taken, students construct their own ideas and hypotheses, giving them ownership and a better understanding of practical material, which ultimately leads to higher motivation and improved learning outcomes. Inquiry-based laboratories allow students to seek information through questioning (93) and can be closely linked to concepts taught in the lecture theater, allowing them to investigate issues at a deeper level. This method, however, requires scaffolding so that students are introduced to the scientific method and build the skills they need to propose questions and design methods to test them.

Inquiry-based learning enables students to “question, explore, reason, collaborate, and communicate with others rather than just follow directions and memorize a body of existing knowledge” (102). Using this methodology, students can learn to ask more appropriate questions directed toward their interests.

I found the write-up for the fighting fish practical challenging but rewarding—it was clear how other research could be discussed and related to our results, which helped put the experiment into a broader context.

Anonymous first-year biology student

This prac was brilliant. It really helped me understand the responses of animals and how their behavior can be affected by communication—in this case, visual. To be able to design the aspects of the behavior we wanted to look at was great because I really wanted to see how the males behaved when presented with another male.

Anonymous first-year biology student

Improving laboratory practicals can have significant effects on student engagement and interest in science, and on interest in evolution specifically (104). The development of educationally valid practicals that effectively improve student learning and interest can be costly and requires a large time investment, but they do not need to be specific to each university setting. One resource for sharing educationally valid practicals is called ASELL (Advancing Science by Enhancing Learning in the Laboratory), which is a project that aims to engage academics in professional development activities where biology practicals are tested and evaluated by both academics and students. High-quality practicals are presented at the ASELL Web site (http://www.asell.org) along with technical notes, and are available for use and/or modification to fit the laboratory requirements of any biology course at any university around the world.

Effective research and presentation of information in multiple contexts are key skills for success in science as well as many other career pathways. Providing students with an opportunity to ask a question of their own choice, design an experiment to test their hypothesis, and present their results in poster format provides students with an opportunity to know what it means to be a scientist. The research project carried out in the first-year evolution course at Flinders University allows students to develop their creative skills as well as enhance group participation and critical thinking skills. The research project also provides high-achieving students with an opportunity to excel and gives them links to research laboratories and job prospects. Figure 1 shows first-year biology students preparing for discussion at the poster presentation at a Flinders University end-of-year celebration; for an example of first-year students presenting their research findings, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKelH9hYLcc.

What to Teach

Evolution needs to be taught as a fact (35). In a postcourse quiz of 550 first-year biology students at Flinders University, where evolution is taught as a fact and a theory, 85% of students agreed that evolution is a fact and a theory; however, even after a semester of study, 15% of students claimed that evolution is not a fact, but “only a theory.” In contrast, 100% of students agreed that gravity is both a fact and a theory. Among the main difficulties in teaching and learning evolutionary biology is that students enter courses with prior, developed explanations of natural phenomena. These explanations are often incompatible with scientific theory, but if they are strongly ingrained in a student's prior experience, they are difficult to correct (16).

According to Demastes et al. (37), among the significant problems that undergraduate students have when learning evolutionary theory is a Lamarckian view of evolution or Lamarckian reasoning (16, 20, 36, 68, 110). In addition, Tidon & Lewontin (116) discovered that teachers in Brazil thought that questions concerning Lamarckian concepts were easy to understand, yet many held Lamarckian views themselves. Bishop & Anderson (16) learned that students are naïve about Lamarckian explanations and favor an explanation that acquired traits can be inherited. With this knowledge, lecturers can structure their courses to ensure that this misunderstanding is less likely to occur.

Tidon & Lewontin (116) explain that students often confuse the random processes of natural selection with an organism's need to adapt to its environment; for example, “organisms develop new traits because they need them to survive, and the word ‘adaptation’ is used to refer to individuals changing in response to the environment.” This confusion is common among university students (as reported in 16, 20, 91, 99), indicating a need for more rigorous clarification and focused effort on the subject. Wolpert (121) claimed that the workings of a process like evolution by natural selection are counterintuitive, which makes it difficult for students to process the information effectively; this again indicates that the standard passive lecture approach should be avoided for these difficult concepts.

The design of an appropriate curriculum that presents evolutionary theory in a historically rich setting with a focus on areas likely to be fraught with misconceptions will encourage students to engage in the course and provide a far better understanding of science and the natural world than a course that focuses on biodiversity and anatomical and physiological differences that have occurred by natural selection. Jensen & Finley (67) provided such a course and found that students replaced their initial conceptions with a more accurate Darwinian understanding. It is difficult to find adequate introductory textbooks that present evolution in a way that can be easily taught at the first-year university level, leaving lecturers susceptible to the easier process of allowing the textbooks to drive the curriculum and resulting in an inflexible and didactic, or rote, learning approach. In a study of 50 college-level textbooks in the fields of evolution, biology, ecology, genetics, paleontology, and systematics, Linhart (81) discovered that each gave a poor definition of evolution and often presented concepts inaccurately. Textbooks further removed from the disciplines of evolutionary biology have a tendency to avoid the subject altogether, causing students to think more mechanistically and not approach their learning from an evolutionary perspective.

A good starting point to assess students' understanding of evolution and the extent to which common misconceptions are held is to give students a quiz on the first day of class, such as ones developed by Anderson et al. (7) and Buckberry & Burke da Silva (21). This not only helps lecturers better understand their students, but also allows for postcourse testing (using the same quiz) to ascertain the effectiveness of current teaching techniques and the curriculum used.

A curriculum for a semester-long course in evolution that is not influenced by standard textbooks can be clearly influenced by Mayr (84) in his group of five “facts” and three inferences. In an abbreviated version, Anderson et al. (7) rephrased each as the following:

A syllabus that was developed for the semester-long first-year course at Flinders University used Mayr's facts and inferences in its design but sought to incorporate additional points so that evolution instruction did not become equivalent with natural selection alone, as stated by Catley (30). The inclusion of macroevolutionary concepts, including phylogenetics and systematics, is also important in a course that thoroughly covers evolution (31), as is instruction on the introduction of life on earth, including first organisms and extinction events.

Various authors (8, 30, 100, 107) have proposed the inclusion of various components listed above, and many of them have been included in the first-year evolution course at Flinders University. Table 1 provides an outline of a semester-long curriculum that, in association with the pedagogy stressed above, includes historically rich content, emphasizes content that ensures the reduction of misconceptions, and is highly engaging to students by allowing a more hands-on, research-focused approach.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF STAFF: HOW DO YOU TEACH IT? SCIENTISTS LEADING SCIENTISTS

For most academic staff, their primary allegiance is to their discipline or research interests, and teaching is most often secondary (38, 62, 66). Interestingly, most university academics prefer the term lecturer rather than teacher, as discussed by Behr (13). Some evidence suggests that science academics in particular are known to avoid innovations in teaching and learning and have been found to be intimidated by the challenge (58). Most science lecturers follow textbooks closely, and few investigate methods to improve their teaching approaches (24). When Australian science academics were asked whether they read the teaching and learning literature, those with some form of qualification in education/teaching (such as a graduate certificate in higher education) differed from those without any qualifications. Of those without qualifications, 70% indicated that they did not use any form of literature to aid in the development of their teaching, whereas 85% of those with qualifications examined the literature (most often journal articles) (24). Science academics rarely attend teaching and learning conferences and do not attend professional development programs at the same levels as other academic staff members, and they are therefore typically less informed about innovations in tertiary education (24). Embedding education symposia within discipline-specific science conferences makes it more likely that science academics will see them, but they are typically offered at the beginning or end of a conference and often have much lower attendance than the discipline-based symposia. At the 2008 Genetics Society of AustralAsia conference, approximately half of the delegates attended a teaching and learning symposium that was embedded within the conference even though it was held at the same time as a discipline-specific session. In addition, one of the keynote lectures of the conference was an education-focused talk that was attended by the general conference participants, thus reaching a far greater audience.

Reliance on the traditional lecture approach remains the most consistent method of teaching, likely for several reasons: First, it is the way most science academics were taught themselves, and therefore it is what they know (117); second, it is convenient, as textbooks offer purpose-built lecture material; and third, it is cost-effective (122). When academic staff adopt innovations, it typically occurs through chance encounters via personal contact, primarily with a respected colleague. Although this method may be effective in improving teaching and learning, it is not highly efficient. Identifying methods to improve teaching performance without requiring exorbitant time investments (as universities also expect high research output from science academics in particular) might best occur by teaching focused staff members who have time to investigate the teaching and learning literature and interest in doing so, and can interpret their findings for more research-focused staff members. This “scientists leading scientists” approach (24) removes the chance encounter element of academic development, and because the teaching-focused staff members can speak the same language as research-focused academics, there is a greater chance of the improvements being adopted. Science academics also know the specific difficulties associated with teaching their particular discipline, so this approach can provide practical, explicit methods to improve teaching in the lecture theater and laboratory. Teaching-focused staff could therefore be in a position to undertake scholarly activities within teaching and learning in their particular discipline, and in this way enhance not only their own teaching but also that of their research-focused colleagues (18, 32, 61).

Gorham (56), as illustrated in Barnett et al. (11), proposed eight simple measures that lecturing staff could use that can effectively promote student learning:

Perhaps, in addition to the above, lecturers could benefit by sitting in on and observing high-quality lectures. Each university has a spectrum of lecturing talent, and regardless of the discipline, high-quality lecturers stand out owing to their ability to reach students and hold their attention for the duration of the lecture. Although lecture performance is often associated with personality, good lecturers put great effort into continual improvement in style and delivery as well as content.

An evolutionary view regarding how academics ultimately see teaching and learning needs comes from Thornton & Raihani (115), who suggest that “teaching will only be favored by selection when the costs to teachers of facilitating learning are outweighed by the long-term fitness benefits they accrue once pupils have learned, and these benefits will be scaled by the ease with which pupils could learn without teaching.” Currently within Australia—and perhaps in other countries where student numbers in the sciences are now decreasing—the cost of low-quality teaching is becoming considerable, causing students to withdraw from programs, and consequently the economic push is likely to drive university administrators to place a greater weight on education and demand higher-quality teaching at the tertiary level.

TEACHING EVOLUTION TO NONMAJORS

According to Miller et al. (90), approximately one-third of American adults firmly reject the fundamental concepts of evolution. A large number of non-science-major students enroll in introductory biology courses. Clearly, this is an ideal opportunity to reach the masses and increase the scientific literacy of this hugely diverse group of students, many of whom are likely to have significant misconceptions about evolution and its supporting data. Teaching evolution and scientific inquiry is fundamental for increasing the science literacy of all university students, as stated by the American Society for the Advancement of Science (6). Providing students with an informed understanding of evolution will help them determine their beliefs and aid them in understanding that religious indoctrination is not a scientific process. In North America, where all university students are required to enroll in at least one science course, students should therefore have a higher level of scientific literacy than students in countries without this requirement. Thus, if all universities aspire to great knowledge, then surely at least a basic grounding in science should be a requirement for all university students worldwide.

Teaching non-science-major students is challenging, and perhaps the most effective approach would be a theme-based and highly relevant mode (23). Expecting nonmajors to learn science and approach a science course the same way that science majors do is not likely to engage their interest. Nonmajors' biology textbooks are generally simplified or abridged versions of those used for biology majors, and seem to focus not on scientific literacy but rather on scientific facts. Again, textbooks appear to be driving the curriculum in these courses, which consequently makes it difficult for academics to move away from this more traditional approach to teaching. Evolutionary biology is not highlighted by most introductory textbooks, and teaching it as a priority may require lecturers to go outside standard textbook readings.

Alters & Nelson (5; see also 113) found that there is surprisingly little difference between biology majors and nonmajors with respect to their understanding of evolutionary concepts; in fact, biology majors scored only slightly better on a test that occurred after a semester of teaching even though they had made a much more thorough examination of the material (112). This finding suggests that teaching evolution to both groups of students is not optimal, and new strategies should be investigated. A focus on scientific literacy and improved understanding of the scientific method would ideally lead to a more sophisticated understanding of evolutionary concepts within this group. Bishop & Anderson (16) found that nonmajor biology students have a high degree of misunderstanding about scientific terms relating to evolution (such as adapt, adaptation, and fitness) and have a tendency to use these terms in everyday language rather than in the context of evolution. Students who arrived at university with a high school background in biology scored significantly better on presemester tests than students without a background in biology, as revealed by Buckberry & Burke da Silva (21). This more than suggests the importance of knowing the abilities of the student cohort as well as being aware of what is being taught at the high school level.

CONCLUSION

Strategies that aim to improve tertiary teaching of evolution are well documented, and multiple resources are available online (4, 5, 27), yet the quality of university teaching in this area remains inconsistent. Groups such as the Society for the Study of Evolution Education Committee, the National Association of Biology Teachers, and McGill University's Evolution Education Research Centre along with resources such as UC Berkeley's Understanding Evolution online exhibit (http://evolution.berkeley.edu) are helping to improve teaching and learning and facilitating the professional development of academic staff. The biology community as a whole needs to embed educational symposia within scholarly focused conferences and journals to reach more academic staff. The employment of teaching-focused staff increases the probability of influencing more research-focused academics. Improving teaching and learning at the university level is not onerous, and using methods that are tested and published is an effective approach that should be well understood and appreciated by the scientific community.

disclosure statement

The author is not aware of any affiliations, memberships, funding, or financial holdings that might be perceived as affecting the objectivity of this review.