Canadian and Pakistani Muslim teachers’ perceptions of evolutionary science and evolution education
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study seeks to explore the intersections among religion, science and education in Muslim teachers’ science classrooms in diverse contexts. Specifically, it examines the ways in which the scientific theory of evolution is understood by Muslim high school science teachers in light of their theological beliefs about creation. Data were collected from 25 high school science teachers from various schools in Canada and Pakistan. Qualitative interviews and focus group discussions were conducted to probe participants' perceptions of evolution in relation to their religious beliefs and how they address the evolution/creation controversy in teaching. Canadian and Pakistani Muslim science teachers mostly accepted evolution of living beings except human beings because human evolution contradicts their Islamic beliefs. Canadian and Pakistani science teachers mostly lacked a clear understanding of biological evolution and most were in favor of teaching both the religious and scientific perspectives in their science courses. This study has implications for teacher development and science education. Better training opportunities are needed for Muslim science teachers to support them to develop sophisticated content and pedagogical knowledge about evolution.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it