The problems in teaching and learning genetics

The study of genetics is the central point in understanding developmental biology and usually start
to be thought in secondary school (Banet & Ayuso, 1999; Karagöz & Çakir ,2011).The study of genetic
is considered as one of the difficult subject for both the teachers and the students, as it is a sequenced
process involving multilevel biological organization (Karagöz & Çakir ,2011). The difficulties and issues
related to learning and teaching genetics can be viewed as a global problem in biology education. This
is because the difficulties exist in all classroom despite the country and teaching technology used
(Smith&Wood, 2016).Different theorist may view the cause of this issues from different perspective.
For instance, Piagetian reflect the complication that arise in solving Mendelian genetics is due to the
poor cognitive development of the student while the constructivist argues that this issue is due to the
gap between scientific knowledge and personal experience (Duit et al,2006).Throughout this article
we will go through the issues in teaching and learning genetics which involves the misconception of
the theory, poor teaching approaches, inadequate teachers’ understanding and the ethical issues in
teaching genetics.Later,we will discover the suggested approaches to overcome the issues and ways
to prepare the students and teachers for deeper understanding of genetics.

It is vital to understand that the study of genetics is related to one another, and failure to
understand the basics, leads to failure in understanding the subject at higher level. (Shaw et al, 2008)
found that 55.6% of students shows major misconception in writing about genetics even after being
corrected by their biology teachers. This indicates a serious problem. In most cases, the use of
terminology in genetics leads to misconceptions in students. For instance, the term “dominant” may
confuse the students as they view this as a frequency and has the idea that dominant allele are always
“good” and eliminate the effect of “bad” allele.Whereby,this understanding of the concept is not true
in all cases (Pearson&Hugehes,1988).Furthermore, difficulties in forming conceptual relationship
between topics leads to misunderstanding .In most cases, students fails to see the linkage between
meiosis and Mendelian genetics (Cavallo,1996).This is because many students are not aware that
plants are made up of cells which has chromosomes and genes and reproduce asexually
(Stewart,Hafner &Dale,1990).The problem in linking the topics causes rote learning and failure in
extrapolating ideas (Murray,1987:Don ,1989).

Furthermore, initial problems in understanding cell division can be viewed as a source of

misconception in studying genetics. In the Biology curriculum in Malaysia the topic of cell division is
thought at an initial stage in form 4, while the study of inheritance is thought in form 5.This huge gap
in time may be considered as an issue, as students may forget and fails to make a connection between
the two topics and bring forward the previous misconception even further. Subsequently, the prior
knowledge of the students will be relatively poor. This is supported by a research finding that shows
that the most difficult task to a student is relating genetic problems to organization of chromosomes
and genes (Allen, 1987). Surprisingly, this problem is also faced by some professional in the field (Allen,
1987).Therefore we can see here that the use of terminology, making conceptual relationships
between topics and poor prior knowledge are huge factors that contribute to misconception in
students.
 Learning is a two way process which involves both the teacher and the student. Thus, teachers’
understanding has a huge impact on student’s ability to learn and understand. A study conducted in
Turkey reported that prospective biology teachers has incomplete understanding of Mendelian
genetics (Karagöz & Çakir ,2011).Also, the problem in understanding the location of genetic
information in a cell and the sequence of allele is present in the study. This is an alarming finding as
this poor understanding among teachers will be passed to the students. This will eventually cause
failure in the student to understand and to solve any problem solving questions involving genetics and
automatically practise rote memorization in order to achieve the minimum requirement of the
subject. Despite, having problems in understanding the concept, research analysis shows that most of
the teachers rarely use metacognitive strategies such as reflection to evaluate their own problem
solving process (Karagöz & Çakir ,2011).It is important for a teacher to keep improving the
understanding and keep updated with recent findings in the subject area. This is to ensure the quality
of teaching and learning in the classroom.

Besides that, teaching tools is very important in conveying a lesson. Nowadays, students are well
exposed to the technology and internet usage. Thus, teaching in a traditional way through reading
textbook could be less interesting. Also, some textbooks also has a very vague definition of genetic
terminology which is considered inadequate from a scientific point of view (Pearson & Hughes,
1986).Therefore alternative sources are important in ensuring the transfer of valid information to the
students.However,it is understood that the use of technology may be a limitation in a certain area. It
is vital to address that there are certain area in the study of genetics that could raise ethical
sensitivities. For instance, animal cloning, human cloning, IVF, surrogate mother and many more. A
national survey conducted among British shows that majority of the people has a negative view of
cloning as it is considered “against nature” and raise a big question on the “status of the embryo”
(Shepherd et al, 2007).Majority of the arguments were based on scientific progress and very little on
religion (Shepherd et al, 2007).In contrast, In Malaysia religion and social beliefs could be a major
source of arguments against many genetic procedures and teaching it to school students may be a
taboo. Although this is an issue a teacher should make sure the objectives of introducing all these
procedures in school are achieved despite being careful not to touch hurt any sensitivities or beliefs.

As now the education system of our country is aiming to move forward it is very important for us
to find a solution to the addressed issues. Teaching human inheritance as a central topic in genetic
introduction could be a possible solution to boost the interest among students to learn genetics. This
is because it enable the students to relate to their personal experience and also to relate to the social
and health issues (Haddow et al, 1988).Secondly, emphasizing problem solving exercise in learning
genetics could help with better understanding and in improving the misconception that usually occur.
This is because in order to solve a problem solving question, one must have an appropriate
understanding of the topic and should prevent rote memorization. Thirdly, a teacher should put an
effort in building a classroom environment with an active learning that emphasize on meaningful
learning. However, it is not a straight cut as in Malaysia the teaching and learning is very restricted to
the curriculum and making any changes beyond the limit of a classroom involves bureaucracy. Hence,
a change within the capability of a teacher is very precious opportunity that should not be missed.
 In Conclusion, learning genetics is a fundamental in understanding biology. Recognising the issues
in teaching and learning genetics will give a room for further improvement. It is my hope to see the
teaching and learning of genetics will be improved in the future so that we can prepare our students
for the next level. In which we can go further from just understanding genetics to making critics and
arguments on the available concept that promote a better learning and understanding.
Reference

1. Albaladejo, C., & Lucas, A. M. (1988). Pupils’ meanings for “mutation.” Journal of Biological
Education, 22, 215–219
2. Allen, R. D. (1987). Student Difficulties with Mendelian Genetics Problems. The American
Biology Teacher, 49(4), 229-233. doi:10.2307/4448497
3. Banet, E. and Ayuso, E. (2000), Teaching genetics at secondary school: A strategy for
teaching about the location of inheritance information.Sci.Ed.,84:313-
351.doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84
4. Cavallo, A. M. L. (1996). Meaningful learning, reasoning ability and students’ understanding
and problem solving of topics in genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 625–
656
5. Duit R, Treagust D, Widodo A. Teaching science for conceptual change: Theory and practice.
In: Vosniadou S, editor. International handbook of research on conceptual change. New York,
London: Routledge; 2008. p. 629–646.
6. Dreyfus, A., & Jungwirth, E. (1989). The pupil and the living cell: A taxonomy of dysfunctional
concepts about an abstract idea. Journal of Biological Education, 23, 49–55.
7. Haddow, P. K., Eunpu, D. L., Singer, N., Brandt, D. L., & Ledwith, M. B. (1988). Introducing
high school students to human genetics. The American Biology Teacher, 50, 496–500
8. Karagöz. M.,& Çakir. M. (2011). Problem solving in genetics: conceptual and procedural
difficulties. Summer, 11(3), 1668-1674.
9. Michelle K. Smith and William B. Wood (2016). Teaching Genetics: Past, Present, and Future.
Genetics S vol. 204 no. 1 5-10; https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.116.187138
10. Murray, D., & Bowbal, D. (1987). Constructing a conceptual framework for solving a problem.
In D. D. Novak (Ed.), Proceedings of the second international seminar on Misconceptions and
Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics (pp. 348–359). Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press.
11. Nagle, E., & Kažoka, D. (2014). Ethical Challenges in Teaching Genetics for Medical Students.
Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 15(2), 181-185. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.776
12. Pearson, J. T., & Hughes, W. J. (1986). Designing an A-level genetic course: II. Sequencing the
material and developing a strategy for teaching and assessment. Journal of Biological
Education, 20, 133–137.
13. R. Shepherd, J. Barnett, H. Cooper, A. Coyle, J. Moran-Ellis, V. Senior, et al(2007).Towards an
understanding of British public attitudes concerning human cloning.Social Science &
Medicine, 65 (2), pp. 377-392
14. Stewart, J. H., Hafner, D., & Dale, M. (1990). Students’ alternative views of meiosis. The
American Biology Teacher, 52, 228–232
15. Shaw, K. R., Horne, K.V., Zhang, H., & Boughman, J. (2008). Essay contest reveals
misconceptions of high school students in genetics content. Genetics, 178, 1157–1168