One of the main problems in biology education is the need to know which topics in school biology are not understandable to students and which impede them to get good results in university entrance tests. The aim of the current study is to gain an overview of biological knowledge of students, who are intending to continue their education in the faculty of medicine by the end of their gymnasium studies and what are the crucial topics in which they underachieve. Based on these results, it is expected to make theoretically justified decisions what topics of biology should be emphasized in school biology and how to develop the school biology curriculum to meet the needs of competence-based biology education. The sample for this study was formed of 1017 gymnasium graduate students who fulfilled the medicine faculty entrance tests in biology (METIB) in four years (2015–2018). Based on the students’ test results the tasks were categorized into four achievement levels - advanced, high, intermediate and low-performance level. The most difficult topics for students occurred to be molecules and structures and human anatomy and physiology. Research data was collected using four METIBs, which were composed of 50-item multiple-choice questions. The Latent profile analysis of test results enabled to detect three achievement profiles of students – high, moderate and low achievers. In four years of this study, the distribution of students’ test scores was in correspondence with the normal distribution and was also in accordance with the Estonian National Curriculum assessment regulation system, with 15% of gymnasium graduate students achieving the highest score level and being successful in entering the faculty of medicine.

Abed, H. O. (2016). Drama-Based Science Teaching and Its Effect on Students’ Understanding of Scientific Concepts and Their Attitudes towards Science Learning. International Education Studies, 9(10). https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n10p163

Ağazade, S. A., Caner, H., Hasipoğlu, N. H., & Civelek, H. A. (2014). Turkish University Entrance Test and academic achievement in undergraduate programs: a criterion related validity study. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 4582–4590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.990

Aiken, R. A. (1982). Writing Multiple-Choice Tasks to Measure Higher-Order Educational Objectives. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 42, 803–806. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316448204200312

Brownell, S., Freeman, S., Wenderoth, P. M. and Crowe, J. A. (2014). BioCore Guide: A Tool for Interpreting the Core Concepts of Vision and Change for Biology Majors. Life Sciences Education, 13, 200–211. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0233

Brunner, M., Gogol, M., K., Sonnleitner, P., Keller, U., Krauss, S. & Preckel, F. (2013). Gender differences in the mean level, variability, and profile shape of student achievement:   Results from 41 countries. Intelligence, 41, 378–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2013.05.009

Butler, C. A. (2018). Multiple-Choice Testing in Education: Are the Best Practices for  Assessment Also Good for Learning. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 7, 323–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2018.07.002

Fisher, R. A. (1925). Theory of Statistical Estimation. Proceeding of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 22, 700–725. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305004100009580

Hasipoğlu, Ç. (2016). The Impact of the University Entrance Exam on EFL Education in Turkey: Pre service English Language Teachers’ Perspective. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.038

Hermann, R. S. (2013). High school biology teachers’ views on teaching evolution: implications for science teacher educators. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 597–616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9328-6

Kablan, Z., & Kaya, S. (2013). Science achievement in TIMSS cognitive domains based on learning styles. Egitim Arastirmalari – Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 53, 97–114. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2013.53.6

Kılıç, D., & Sağlam, N. (2014). Students’ understanding of genetics concepts: the effect of reasoning ability       and learning approaches. Journal of Biological Education, 48(2), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2013.837402

Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Kuncel, N. R., Hezlett, S. A., & Ones, D. S. (2001). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the Graduate Record Examinations: Implications for graduate student selection and performance. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 162–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.162

Lewis, J., Leach J. & Wood-Robinson, C. (2000). What’s in a cell? — young people’s understanding of the genetic relationship between cells, within an individual. Journal of Biological Education, 34(3), 129–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2000.9655702

Li, Y., & Belkin, N.J. (2008). A faceted approach to conceptualizing items in information seeking. Information Processing & Management, 44, 1822–1837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2008.07.005

Lukša, Ž., Radanovic, I., Grašic, D., & Sertic Peric, M. (2016). Misconceptions of Primary and High School Students Related to the Biological Concept of Human Reproduction, Cell Life Cycle and Molecular Basis of Heredity. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 13(3), 143–160.

Morabito, P. N., Catley, M. K., & Novick, R. L. (2010). Reasoning about evolutionary history: Postsecondary students’ knowledge of most recent common ancestry and homoplasy.       Journal of Biological Education, 44(4), 166–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2010.9656217

Mullis, I., V. S., Martin, M., O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 International Results in Mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2012). Mplus User’s Guide. Seventh Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

National curricula for upper secondary schools. (2011). Appendix 4: Natural Science. Retrieved from https://www.riigiteataja.ee/aktilisa/1140/1201/1001/VV1_lisa4.pdf

National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Nehm, H., R., & Schonfeld, S., I. (2007). Does Increasing Biology Teacher Knowledge of Evolution and the Nature of Science Lead to Greater Preference for the Teaching of Evolution in Schools? Science Teacher Education, 18, 699–723. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-007-9062-7

Pan, S. C., & Rickard, T. C. (2018). Transfer of test-enhanced learning: Meta-analytic review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 144, 710–756. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000151

Pesina, S., & Solonchak, T. (2015). Concept in Cognitive Linguistics and Biocognitive Science. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, 587–592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.100

Quinn, H., Schweingruber, H., & Keller, T. (Eds.). (2011). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Committee on Conceptual Framework for the New K-12 Science Education Standards; National Research Council, USA.

Sager, C. (2008). Voices of evolution. Berkley, CA: The National Center for Science Education, Inc.

Schreier, M. 2012. Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. London: Sage.

Semilarski, H., & Laius, A. (2019). A complex instrument for measuring the components of gymnasium students’ biological literacy. EDULEARN19 Proceedings: 11th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, 1st-3rd July, 2019. Palma, Mallorca, SPAIN: iated.org/edulearn, 6285−6293.

Short, S. D., & Hawley, P. H. (2014). The effects of evolutionary education: Examining attitudes toward and              knowledge of evolution in college courses. Evolutionary Physiology, 13(1), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/147470491501300105

Shtulman, A., & Calabi, P. (2013). Tuition vs. intuition: Effects of instruction on naïve theories of evolution. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly Journal of Developmental Physiology, 59, 141–167. https://doi.org/10.1353/mpq.2013.0010

Sinatra, G. M., Brem, S. K., & Evans, E. M. (2008). Changing minds? Implications of conceptual change for teaching and learning about biological evolution. Evolution: Education Outreach, 1, 189–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-008-0037-8

Sinatra, G. M., Southerland, S. A., McConaughy, F., & Demastes, J. (2003). Intentions and beliefs in students’ understanding and acceptance of biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 510–528. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10087

Sungur, S., Takkaya, C., & Geban, Ö. (2006). Improving achievement through problem-based learning. Journal of Biological Education, 40(4), 155–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2006.9656037

Surman, J., Stráner, K., & Haslinger, P. (2014). Nomadic concepts in the history of biology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 48, 127–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2014.08.001

Tansey, J. T., Baird, T., Cox, M. M., Fox, K. M., Knight, J., & Sears, D. (2013). Foundational Concepts and Underlying Theories for majors “Biochemistry and Molecular Biology”. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 41(5), 289–296. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20727

Toman, U. (2018). An Investigation into the Learning of Ecological Concepts. European Journal of Educational Research, 7(3), 631–638. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.7.3.631

Tran, P. H., Griffin, P., & Nguyen, C. (2010). Validating the university entrance English test to the Vietnam National University: A conceptual framework and methodology. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 1295–1304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.190

Van Dijk, E. M., & Reydon, T. A. (2010). A conceptual analysis of evolutionary theory for teacher education. Science Education, 19(6–8), 655–677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9190-x

Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic Content Analysis. Newbury Park, CA. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412983488

Williams, G. A., & Kibowski, F. (2016). Latent Class Analysis and Latent Profile Analysis. In: L. A. Jason, D. S. Glenwick (Ed.). Handbook of methodological approaches to community-based research: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed              methods. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/med:psych/9780190243654.003.0015

Yeong, M., F. (2015). Using Primary Literature in an Undergraduate Assignment: Demonstrating connections among cellular processes. Journal of Biological Education, 49(1), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2014.882384

Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2001). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 35–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008