Tim Hartelt, Helge Martens
Original article: Hartelt, T., & Martens, H. (2024). Influence of self-assessment and conditional metaconceptual knowledge on students' self-regulation of intuitive and scientific conceptions of evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 61(5), 1134–1180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21938

Feature 

Students naturally use intuitive thinking to make sense of the world, and in many everyday contexts, this kind of thinking is useful. For example, it makes sense to say someone walked into the kitchen to get a glass of water—a purpose-driven explanation. But when students apply this kind of teleological reasoning (i.e., assuming purpose or intent) to evolution—like saying elephants “grew longer trunks to reach food”—they fall into a common evolution misconception. 

Research shows that these intuitive ideas are deeply ingrained and tend to stick around even after formal science instruction. However, instead of trying to “erase” them, this study recommends helping students learn to recognize when these ideas are appropriate—and when they’re not. 

The Research-Based Solution: Metacognitive Learning Activities 

Researchers developed and tested two innovative classroom activities to help students: 

• Recognize their intuitive ideas 
• Reflect on how they apply in different contexts 
• Use scientific thinking more accurately in biology 

These two activities were: 

• Self-Assessment of Conceptions 
  Students reviewed a list of intuitive vs. scientific ideas about evolution, then analyzed their own thinking to see which ones they had used. This raised metacognitive awareness of their current understanding. 
• Instruction on Context-Dependency
  Students learned where intuitive thinking is helpful (e.g., everyday life) and where it can lead to misconceptions (e.g., the scientific context of evolution). This helped them learn to self-regulate their thinking depending on the context.

Findings from a Large Experimental Study

• Students who engaged in these two metacognitive activities showed a greater understanding of evolution than those who received only traditional content-focused instruction. 
• These students used fewer intuitive misconceptions and more accurate scientific explanations, even if their total exposure to scientific facts was less than the control group. 

In other words, helping students understand how they think was more effective than simply giving them more content. 

Implications for Science Teaching

• Address evolution misconceptions directly—not by “debunking,” but by teaching contextual thinking and metacognitive reflection. 
• Supplement traditional instruction with activities that help students evaluate their own thinking. 
• Encourage students to recognize the limits of intuitive reasoning in scientific contexts and learn to switch between everyday and scientific thinking when appropriate. 

Classroom-Ready Resources

Materials developed, evaluated, and revised by the authors can be freely accessed and used by educators: https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2025.87.2.113