Creationism and evolution views of brazilian teachers and teachers-to-be
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims at assessing the evolutionist and creationist conceptions of Brazilian teachers. The work was developed within the framework of the European project BIOHEAD-CITIZEN, which takes into account that scientific knowledge and teachers’ attitudes and values can influence the teaching practices. The large questionnaire BIOHEAD-CITIZEN, which was constructed to be applied in 19 countries in Europe, Africa and in Middle East, was applied, in this study, to six groups of Brazilian teachers: Primary school teachers, Biology teachers and Portuguese language teachers and corresponding teachers-to-be. For this paper the answers to questions about evolution were used as dependent variables. Descriptive and multivariate analyses were carried out. Biology teachers and Biology teachers-to-be give more importance to the natural selection and the evolution process than the other groups of teachers. Comparing to the BIOHEAD-CITIZEN countries, the total Brazilian sample showed a higher percentage of creationist conceptions, particularly the Brazilian Biology teachers and teachers-to-be. As discussed herein, this may not be an obstacle for teaching evolution as they accept both creationist and evolutionist concomitantly.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".