Exposing the hazards of teaching 19th century genetic science

Abstract

AbstractScience should provide students an accurate and contemporary education on genetic influence, particularly how it impacts trait variability and developmental norms. Stories involving familial, racial, and sexual differences routinely appear in the popular media and sales of over‐the‐counter genetic tests are mounting. Unfortunately, research suggests genetic curricula in secondary education and university courses have little impact on genetic literacy; instead they appear to amplify genetic essentialism. This position paper reports on genetic essentialism, the impact of three components of science education (teachers, students, curriculum), and critiques existing genetic lessons in two prevalent scientific disciplines, biology and psychology. Two entrenched 19th century genetic paradigms (e.g., Mendelian inheritance and behavioral genetics) are specifically examined. The paper closes with specific recommendations for improving students' genetic literacy including important contemporary genetic science (e.g., epigenetics) and instructional approaches (e.g., learning progression, refutational teaching).