Millet-Lock - GCSE Students Attitudes Towards Animal Use Some Implications for Biology-science Teachers

7/28/2019 Millet-Lock - GCSE Students Attitudes Towards Animal Use Some Implications for Biology-science Teachers

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/millet-lock-gcse-students-attitudes-towards-animal-use-some-implications 1/15

EBSCO Publishing Citation Format: APA (American Psychological Assoc.):

NOTE: Review the instructions at http://support.ebsco.com/help/?int=ehost&lang=&feature_id=APA and

make any necessary corrections before using. Pay special attention to personal names, capitalization,

and dates. Always consult your library resources for the exact formatting and punctuation guidelines.

References

Millet, K., & Lock, R. (1992). GCSE students' attitudes towards animal use: Some implications for

biology/science teachers. Journal Of Biological Education (Society Of Biology), 26 (3), 204.



GCSE STUDENTS' ATTITUDES TOWARDS ANIMAL USE: SOME IMPLICATIONS FOR

BIOLOGY/SCIENCE TEACHERS

What are 14/15-year-old students' attitudes towards using animals in schools, research and farming?

What implications do their attitudes have for teachers of biology?

Abstract

A sample of 468 14-15-year-old students from 10 schools responded to a questionnaire about uses

of animals in science-related contexts. The contexts investigated were animal experimentation,

animals in school and animals in farming. The students were questioned about their experience of

animals, their knowledge of animal use and their attitudes towards animals use. The data reported in

this paper relate to the students' attitudes. The responses show that the females in the sample tend

to be more strongly against animals use than the males, and that students' beliefs vary according to

the animal use. The implications of the findings for teaching biological science are considered.

Key words: Animals use, Students' attitudes.

Introduction

The study of science now occupies a significant part of the curriculum for every student up to the ageof sixteen. As only a small number of these will go on to become professional scientists, a

fundamental reason for the teaching of 'science for all' must be to improve the scientific literacy of the

population.

Given that the students in our schools today are the future adult population we set out to investigate

what the students in their 10th year of school knew and felt about some ways in which animals are

used. The use of animals can be a contentious issue, bringing about discussion of animal rights. We

were interested in exploring students' views and understanding of some aspects of animal use in

COhost http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=5296e40b-9464-40

5 2/29/2012



schools, in scientific research and in farming.

If, as adults, the students are to participate in debate relating to scientific issues, they must have an

adequate scientific understanding. The foundation for this understanding is ultimately assumed to

come from formal education. The assumption that science learnt at school will influence decision

making in later life is implicit in Science 5-16: a policy statement (DES, 1985), GCSE National

Criteria (SEAC, 1990) and National Curriculum proposals (DES, 1991). All the documents discuss

relevant science, where the relevance is to society at large. The Royal Society also recommended a

broad and balanced science curriculum to increase public understanding of science (Royal Society,

1985).

Consequently, it may be argued that science education should provide some knowledge of science

(although the detail may be forgotten over time), some experience of the processes of science, an

understanding of the limitations of science and scientific method and some idea of the social, and

cultural and ethical implications of science.

Scientific issues of public concern are widely reported in the media. Currently these might include

human embryo research, global warming, animal experimentation or nuclear energy. A public

equipped with the science education described above might be better able to interpret such issues,

as communicated by television, newspaper or other medium, and be in a better-informed position to

decide their own stance towards the controversies.

Little research has been carried out in the area of children's attitudes towards the use of animals.

Kellert (1979) in the study of American attitudes, knowledge and behaviour toward wildlife and

natural habitats, funded by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, developed a typology of basic adult

attitudes towards animals, rather than towards the use of animals by humans. He also identified

three stages in the development of children's perceptions of animals (Kellert and Westervelt,undated). He found that between the ages of 13 and 16 children developed a much broader ethical

concern and a greater ecological appreciation of animals.

Furnham and Gunter (1989) carried out a study of British adolescents' attitudes in which they asked

only two questions concerned with animals, in the contexts of testing medicines and cosmetics.

Furnham and Pinder (1990) carried out a study examining young people's attitudes to animal

experimentation with particular relevance to psychological experiments in animals. Both studies

suggested that males are more in favour of animal experimentation than females. The 1990 study

also suggested that 'attitudes to animal experimentation are closely interwoven with other political

and social issues'.

Our study was focused on the use of animals by society, in the context of a relevant science

education. We felt that students aged between 14 and 15 would be the most appropriate subjects

given Kellert's findings and the place of ethical considerations of science in Key Stage 4 of the

Science National Curriculum (DES, 1991). In this paper we will report our findings with regard to

students' attitudes and discuss their implications for science teaching.

Method


5 2/29/2012



Four hundred and sixty eight students (213 males and 255 females) completed a questionnaire

which explored their attitudes, knowledge and experience of animals and animal use. The year 10

students (aged 14-15), of mixed ability, were from 10 state secondary schools in England. The

schools were selected with the assistance of local science advisers and inspectors in seven local

authorities.

The questionnaire was administered by the authors in science lessons at the survey schools. The

science lesson context ensured that in the students' minds the activity was science focused and was

a means of creating a similar experience in all the schools. The same preamble was given to all

students and the questionnaire was promoted as a non-threatening exercise, eliciting honest

answers from the students. Questions in a variety of styles explored the students' experience of

using animals, their knowledge of animal use (Lock and Millett, 1991) and their attitudes.

Attitude was investigated using a Likert-type scale. There were 32 statements relating to the use of

animals in schools, in scientific research and in farming (see figure 1). The students were instructed

to tick the relevant box, to indicate the extent of their agreement or disagreement with each

statement.

Although the statements expressed opinions, there was a balance between those which opposed

and those which condoned animal use in the contexts described. The statements were grouped into

the three sections which were dearly identified for the students. The statements were presented to

the students in the same order as they appear in tables 1, 2 and 3.

The statements were tested in a number of schools, and subsequently some statements were

removed and others re-phrased to make them as unambiguous as possible. The whole questionnaire

was validated by semi-structured interviews with students in three schools.

Results

The extent of agreement, uncertainty or disagreement with each statement in the attitude scale is

shown, for males and females, in tables 1, 2 and 3.

Table 1 shows attitudes towards animal experimentation. The percentages shown are the responses

to each category for males and for females in the sample. Most students are against the use of

animals to research cosmetic or household products. Many students feel that research using animals

can only tell us about the animals and not about people, and feel that there should be a total ban on

animal experiments and that animals should be set free from experimental laboratories.

Table 2 shows attitudes towards the use of animals in schools. Although 41 per cent of females and

35 per cent of males thought it wrong to keep animals in schools, most would be happy to investigate

garden snail movement or the conditions which woodlice prefer; 45 per cent of males but only 18 per

cent of females in the sample thought that dissection might be interesting (not all students in the

sample had experience of dissection.) However, 83 per cent of females and 61 per cent of males felt

that it was wrong to breed animals purely for dissection.

Table 3 gives the responses to the statements relating to use of animals in farming. The trend in


5 2/29/2012



which females are more anti-animal use than males continues. In response to the statement (28) that

it is wrong to kill animals for food, 35 per cent of females agreed compared to only 12 per cent of

males in the sample. Keeping animals for their food products without specific mention of slaughter

was considered acceptable by 77 per cent of females and 88 per cent of males, although keeping

sheep for wool and not for meat brought a response of 60 per cent female agreement and 34 per

cent male agreement.

The responses were scored on a scale of 1-5 for each statement. A score of I indicated strong

disapproval and a score of 5 showed strong approval for the use of animals in the context of the

statement. The means of the scores were calculated for each statement. The five highest and five

lowest scoring items from the attitude scale are shown in table 4.

In table 4 the highest scoring items reflect an acceptance of animals in farming, of using living

invertebrates in science/biology lessons and also of the fact that in a life or death situation, the

human life may be valued more highly than that of the animals on which the drugs had been tested.

The lowest scoring items show that students are against the use of animals for testing household or

cosmetic products, and that they are keen to replace the use of animals in scientific research. They

also feel that chickens should not be kept in battery cages.

The males in the sample consistently scored higher than the females, showing attitudes more prone

to approve or condone the use of animals. This reflects Furnham and Pinder's (1990) findings with

regard to gender differences. The mean scores for attitude statements related to animal

experimentation tend to be lower than those related either to farming or to use of animals in schools.

This may suggest that the students feel more strongly against animal use in scientific research than

in the other contexts we investigated.

DiscussionThe students' responses to the attitude statements have important implications for those teaching

biological components of a science curriculum. In meeting National Curriculum requirements relating

to the application and economic, social and technological implications of science, teachers may be

acting as mediators between the students' views of the world and the accepted scientific view.

The use of animals might be a suitable starting point for discussion about the social issues of

science, the nature of the limitations of science, the application of scientific knowledge and the ethics

of science. For instance, dissection can be presented as an issue to be debated in terms of benefits

to humans, which in turn may lead to discussion of vivisection. Teachers may wish to provide

students with examples of vivi-section that have proved beneficial to humans, such as Banting's work

in the search for insulin (Bliss, 1982; Newton, 1988). The students should have opportunities to

receive information and to air their own opinions. The students' attitudes towards the use of animals

will become adult attitudes unless they have the experience of exploring the issues further and

coming to understand their own, and others', points of view.

In their responses to the attitude statements, the students' perceptions of moral dilemma and their

confusion begin to emerge. For example, almost all the statements relating to the use of animals in

scientific research elicited low scores (anti-animal use) with the exception of, 'I would take a medicine


5 2/29/2012



that had been tested on animals if it would save my life' (statement 5, table 4). The students are

unable to reconcile their views of animal use in a situation that directly places the value of human life

against the value of animal life. In science lessons, they should begin to rehearse the arguments

expressed by adults. Morality, or ethics, should be presented as a choice between alternatives, not

as simplistic right or wrong solutions to problems.

Animals are used in many ways by society and many children may have experience of animals as

pets. This affinity with certain animal species influences their opinion and many adolescents may

face moral dilemmas of their own with regard to animal use; many adolescents use 'cruelty-free'

cosmetic products or become vegetarian. The teacher's role is to extend the students' experience

and knowledge of animal use and to provide opportunities for them to consider some of the dilemmas

faced by scientists.

Although the sample was not nationally representative, there is no reason to consider that it has any

particular bias. We feel that the need for curriculum development is clear, particularly where the

questionnaire revealed confusion or uncertainty in attitudes and a corresponding lack of knowledge

(Lock and Millett, 1991). For example, most students were uncertain whether animal research

improved human life (statement 8, table 1) and very few were able to identify medical advances

linked to animal research. In response to the statement, 'Animal experiments only tell us about

animals and not about people', 60 per cent of females and 51 per cent of males indicated agreement

and a third of all males and females were unsure of their feelings. The students need accurate

evidence relating to the use of animals in scientific research, so that they may hold an informed

opinion, not one based on hearsay.

One area in which the students completing the questionnaire expressed interest to the researchers,

was that of alternatives to animal experiments. The statement (16,table 1) stating that alternatives to

animal experiments should be sought elicited 92 per cent agreement among females and 74 per centagreement among males. However, the majority were unable to identify any alternatives to animals in

research procedures and those who did make a suggestion preferred human volunteers.

The application of knowledge of life processes in medicine and agriculture is an aspect of National

Curriculum science. Students should gain an understanding of physiological principles and how such

principles might be utilized to develop new drugs or diagnose disease --even if the model used is an

animal, not human. They should learn that science can be a tool that enables humans to adapt to

their environment but that the choice of action can involve questions of morality. Some aspects of the

debate surrounding animal experimentation, in both historical and current concerns, may help

students to understand some of the complexity of science. This may be a way of demonstrating the

link between science as a search for knowledge and the application of such knowledge.

When dealing with socially controversial issues of a scientific nature, the teacher must consider the

students' beliefs. If the aim is to educate and not to inculcate, attitudes towards classroom issues

such as dissection or the use of animals in investigations are important starting points for discussion.

If a teacher is prepared to discuss the morality of, for instance, dissection in biology, he or she must

respect the choice made by the students. The consequence of this action may necessitate the

provision of dissection for some and alternative activities for others. The students should be able to


5 2/29/2012





8. Research from animal experiment improves the

lives of people. 17 38

9. I think that no more cosmetic products (like

shampoo or lipstick) should be tested on animals 88 71

10. I think that household cleaning products should

not be tested on animals 94 80

11. I think that should be set free experimental

laboratories 75 63

12. A new washing-up liquid should be tested on

animals' skin before being sold in the shops 4 10

13. Medicines used for treating pet dogs should be

tested on laboratory dogs first 18 36

14. I think that animals should still be used to

research diseases for which there are no cures 16 32

15. Animals experiments only tell us animals and not

about people. 60 51

16. I think scientist should find alternatives toanimals experiments 92 74

Uncertain

Attitude statement F M

1. New medicines should be tested on animals 26 24

before they are taken by humans

2. I believe in a total ban animal experiments 23 32

3. I would prefer to take medicines that had not

been tested on animals 23 33

4. I think that medicine that had been tested on

animals if it would save my life 27 32

5. I would take a medicine that had been tested


5 2/29/2012



on animals if it would save my life 31 14

6. Deodorants should be tested on animals' skin

to make sure they are safe for humans to use 11 19

7. I would stop buying a product if I found out

that it had been tested on animals 27 40








laboratories 20 25








about people. 32 33

16. I think scientist should find alternatives to

animals experiments 7 19

Uncertain


1. New medicines should be tested on animals 62 50

before they are taken by humans

2. I believe in a total ban animal experiments 17 28


5 2/29/2012



3. I would prefer to take medicines that had not

been tested on animals 8 23

4. I think that medicine that had been tested on

animals if it would save my life 12 29

5. I would take a medicine that had been tested

on animals if it would save my life 7 4

6. Deodorants should be tested on animals' skin

to make sure they are safe for humans to use 87 68

7. I would stop buying a product if I found out

that it had been tested on animals 6 29








laboratories 8 13








about people. 7 16

16. I think scientist should find alternatives to

animals experiments 1 6

Table 2 Attitudes towards use of animals in schools (percentage

of meals and females responding to each category).


5 2/29/2012



Agree


17. I would find dissecting (cutting apart)a dead

animal interesting 18 45

18. I don't think that woodlice come to any harm

if they are used in investigation to find

out what conditions they prefer 48 59

19. I think that is wrong to breed animals that will

only be used for dissection 83 61

20. I think that is wrong to keep animals in school 41 35

21. I would dissect a part of an animal that had

been killed for food (e.g. sheep's eye) 26 57

22. It is good idea to keep animals in school to

watch how they live 36 49

23. I would object to any animal material being used

for dissection 52 22

24. I think that watching earthworm to see how fastthey crawl is cruel 31 15

25. I would rather learn about animals from books

than by watching living animals 31 27

26. I think watching other people dissect is

acceptable 20 32

27. I would not mind watching garden snails moving

to find out more about them 72 74

Uncertain





15 2/29/2012















24. I think that watching earthworm to see how fast

they crawl is cruel 32 34


acceptable 23 27



Disagree












15 2/29/2012








24. I think that watching earthworm to see how fast

they crawl is cruel 36 61

25. I would rather learn about animals from books

than by watching living animals 35 55


acceptable 61 41



Table 3 Attitudes towards use of animals in farming (percentage

of meals and females responding to each category).

Agree


28. I believe that is wrong to kill animals for food 35 12

29. I think it is good idea to grow trout in fish

farms keeping animals to provide food (eggs, milk)

for people is acceptable to me 22 57

30. Keeping animals to provide food (eggs, milk) for

people is acceptable to me 77 88

31. Farmers should keep sheep for their wool and not

for their meat 60 34

32. It is best to keep chickens in battery cages

for egg laying 3 12

Uncertain



15 2/29/2012







30. Keeping animals to provide food (eggs, milk) for

people is acceptable to me 16 8




for egg laying 15 15

Disagree






30. Keeping animals to provide food (eggs, milk) forpeople is acceptable to me 6 3




for egg laying 82 74

Table 4 Highest and lowest scoring items on the attitude scale

Mean scores

Attitude statement All F M

30. Keeping animals to provide food

(eggs, milk) for 3.944 3.810 4.104

5. I would take a medicine that

had been tested on animals if it


15 2/29/2012



would save my life 3.882 3.686 4.117

27. I would not mind watching garden

snails moving to find out more about

them 3.745 3.724 3.770

18. I don't think that woodlice come to

any harm if they are used in

investigations to find out what

conditions they prefer 3.431 3.325 5.557

28. I believe that it is wrong to kill

animals for food 3.298 2.913 3.756

Lowest scoring items (including disapproval of animal use

in use in each context)

Mean scores

Attitude statement All F M

10. I think that household cleaning

products should not be tested on animal 1.697 1.427 2.019

32. It is best to keep chickens in battery

cages for egg laying 1.718 1.585 1.877

16. I think scientists should find

alternatives to animal experiments 1.721 1.488 2.000

12. A new washing-up liquid should be

tested on animals' skin before being

sold in the shops 1.839 1.638 2.080

9.I think that no more cosmetic products(like shampoo or lipstick) should be

tested on animals 1.857 1.580 2.188

Figure 1 Animal uses described in the attitude statements.

Animals in research

Using animals for fundamental research

Using animals in applied research

e.g. diagnosis, safety evaluation

Animals in education

Keeping animals

Use of living animals

Dissection

Animals in farming


15 2/29/2012



Meat production

Animal products

Farming systems

References

Bliss, M. (1982) The discovery of insulin. Edinburgh, Scotland: Paul Harris Publishing.

DES (1985) Sciences 5-16: a statement policy. London: HMSO.

DES (1991) National Curriculum science for ages 5-16. Proposals of the Secretary of State for

Education and Science and the Secretary of State for Wales. London: HMSO.

Furnham, A. and Gunter, B. (1989) The anatomy of adolescence: young people's social attitudes in

Britain. London: Routledge.

Furnham, A. and Pinder, A. (1990) Young people's attitudes to experimentation on animals. The

Psychologist, 10, 444-448.

Kellert, S. (1979) Contemporary values of wildlife in American society. In Wildlife values, ed. Shaw,W. W. and Zube, E. H. pp. 31-60. Fort Collins, Colorado, USA: US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain

Forest and Range Experiment Station.

Kellert, S. and Westervelt, M. (undated) Children's attitudes, knowledge and behaviour towards

animals (phase V). Washington DC, USA: US Dept. of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service.

Lock, R. and Millett, K. (1991) The Animals and Science Education Project Report. Birmingham:

University of Birmingham.

Newton, D. P. (1988) Making science education relevant. London: Kogan Page.

Royal Society (1985) The public understanding of science. London: Royal Society.

SEAC (1990) GCSE National Criteria. London: HMSO.

~~~~~~~~

By Katherine Millett and Roger Lock

At the time of writing Katherine Millett was a researcher with the Animals and Science Education

Project. She is currently Head of Science at Wheatly Park School, Holton, Oxfordshire OX9 IQH.

Roger Lock is a Lecturer in Science Education in the School of Education, University of Birmingham,

Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT.

Copyright of Journal of Biological Education (Society of Biology) is the property of Society of Biology

and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the

copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles

for individual use.

Documents

Millet-Lock - GCSE Students Attitudes Towards Animal Use Some Implications for Biology-science Teachers