THE DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF A MODEL COURSE IN ADVANCED BIOLOGY FOR SECONDARY EDUCATION.

摘要

The major purposes of this study were to: determine the current status of advanced biology in North Carolina high schools; develop a model for an advanced biology course; validate and modify the model through input from various professional groups; and develop a suggested model advanced biology course.; A literature review helped determine the history of goals and objectives development for advanced biology and course types classified as advanced biology. The Advanced Biology Survey Form assessed the current status of advanced biology in North Carolina. Over 66% of the 262 North Carolina advanced biology teachers responded. A second form, Ideal Advanced Course Survey Form, assisted in determining the characteristics of an ideal advanced biology course, with replies received from 54% of the teachers. A model advanced biology course was developed based on the first two survey forms and the literature. A third instrument, Survey Instrument for a Model Advanced Biology Course, was constructed to determine acceptance of the model course. Respondents were randomly selected from five groups: advanced biology teachers and local science supervisors in North Carolina; university biology professors, university science educators, and state science supervisors from across the nation. Replies to the instrument were: teachers, 72%; local supervisors, 86%; biology professors, 74%; university science educators, 52%; and state supervisors, 54%.; Data from all forms were analyzed descriptively. Model survey instrument data were analyzed to see if differences existed among the means for the five groups. These means were compared by use of an ANOVA and t tests per statement.; Data revealed general agreement among the five groups on the model instrument. The model contained six areas: teachers, logistics, subject content, other content, instruction, and facilities/materials. A total of 49 items for response were divided among these six areas with only one being rejected as not appropriate for the model. Because of the positive nature of the responses of the five groups no other substantive changes were made in the model.