Why Brazilian Students Struggle with Basic Concepts
Imagine a freshman biology student in Brazil, poised to begin their university education. When asked how the giraffe got its long neck, they confidently explain that generations of giraffes stretched their necks to reach higher leaves, and this acquired characteristic was passed on to their offspring. This Lamarckian explanation, disproven by modern evolutionary biology, persists in classrooms despite Charles Darwin's foundational work on natural selection published over 160 years ago.
A striking study conducted at Universidade Estadual do Centro-Oeste do Paraná (UNICENTRO) revealed that nearly half of incoming university students struggle with fundamental evolutionary concepts, with average test scores hovering at just 48.8% correct answers across all majors 1 . Even students entering biological sciences programs scored only 58.7% on average, highlighting a significant gap in one of biology's most fundamental theories 1 .
This educational shortfall matters profoundly. Evolution provides the unifying framework for all biological sciences, yet misconceptions about it can hinder scientific progress and literacy in an era of rapid biotechnology advancement 6 . This article explores what happens when evolution education fails and how we might bridge these critical knowledge gaps.
Average test scores across all majors
Biological sciences students' average score
Research conducted with 231 Brazilian freshmen revealed surprising patterns in how evolution is understood and misunderstood. Students were grouped into three major fields: biological sciences, exact sciences (such as physics, chemistry, and math), and human sciences (including history and pedagogy) 1 .
The results demonstrated a clear knowledge divide between majors. While biological sciences students performed best, their average scores remained concerningly low. The research identified several critical areas of confusion that transcend simple misunderstanding and point to deeper educational failures 1 .
The study identified three areas where students showed the greatest confusion, regardless of their chosen major 1 :
Students struggled tremendously to distinguish between homologous structures (shared due to common ancestry, like human arms and whale flippers) and analogous structures (similar functions but different evolutionary origins, like whale and fish flippers).
This question received the lowest scores, with only 25% of students answering correctly overall, and biological sciences students scoring just 42% 1 .
Many students failed to grasp that natural selection depends on pre-existing variation in populations, with selection acting on random mutations that confer advantages in specific environments.
Students struggled with understanding the role of random mutation in evolution 1 .
While students generally understood Darwin's theory of natural selection better than Lamarck's theory of acquired characteristics, a significant minority—particularly in chemistry—attributed the "use and disuse" concept to Darwin.
74% correctly identified Lamarck's theory, but confusion remained about attribution 1 .
The Brazilian study employed a rigorous quantitative approach to assess evolutionary knowledge 1 . Researchers developed a specialized ten-question questionnaire targeting the most common evolutionary misconceptions at varying difficulty levels. The 231 participants spanned multiple disciplines, allowing comparison across academic interests.
The assessment tools were subjected to sophisticated statistical analysis, including analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's comparative average test, to ensure the significance of observed differences between student groups. Researchers further employed principal component analysis and UPGMA clustering to identify patterns in how evolutionary knowledge distributed across different academic backgrounds 1 .
Specialized 10-question test targeting common evolutionary misconceptions
231 freshmen students across multiple academic disciplines
ANOVA, Tukey's test, principal component analysis, UPGMA clustering
Identification of knowledge patterns and educational gaps
| Aspect | Darwin's Theory | Lamarck's Theory |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanism | Natural selection acts on random variations | Use and disuse of organs |
| Origin of Traits | Variations exist randomly beforehand | Acquired during lifetime |
| Inheritance | Advantageous traits passed to offspring | Acquired characteristics inherited |
| Student Understanding | 75% correct | 74% correct |
The implications of these educational gaps extend far beyond examination scores. Evolution provides the foundational framework for modern biology, medicine, and biotechnology 6 . Misunderstanding evolutionary principles can hinder scientific progress and literacy.
As the study authors noted, "Although evolutionary biology and ecology are supposed to represent teaching guide issues according to the recommendations of the National Curricular Parameters for the Secondary School, the data obtained suggest that the evidence for evolution, the role of natural selection and random events, as well as the sources of variation, must be better focused at schools" 1 .
The problem may originate with educators themselves. Previous research has found that teachers often claim evolution is easy to teach while simultaneously demonstrating Lamarckian biases in their own answers to specific questions 1 . This creates a cycle of misconception that passes from teacher to student, generation after generation.
Teachers with evolutionary misconceptions pass these on to students, who may become teachers themselves, perpetuating the problem.
Students enter university with foundational gaps that hinder their ability to grasp advanced biological concepts.
Addressing these deep-seated misconceptions requires more than simply retelling the story of the Galapagos finches. Effective evolution education must:
Rather than ignoring common misunderstandings, address them explicitly in the curriculum.
Focus on the specific role of natural selection and the evidence supporting evolutionary theory.
Explain the random nature of mutation and how it provides the raw material for evolution.
Clearly differentiate Darwinian and Lamarckian explanations with concrete examples.
As Darwin himself understood, scientific understanding requires both careful observation and testing ideas against evidence 3 . Perhaps it's time to apply this evolutionary approach to evolution education itself, developing and testing new strategies to ensure students grasp one of science's most powerful explanatory frameworks.
The journey to better evolution education may be evolutionary in itself—requiring variation in teaching methods, selection of the most effective approaches, and inheritance of successful strategies across educational generations.