Content uploaded by Arnold Arluke
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Arnold Arluke on Jun 11, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Learning the scientist's role: Animal dissection in middle school
Abstract
Based on fieldwork in sixth-grade science classes, this article looks at how students managed the dissection of fetal pigs. Although most students were initially ambivalent and squeamish about dissecting, they learned to transform the animal and the situation into one that was not only neutral but positive. By transforming their contact with the fetal pigs, accentuating the positive, avoiding part or all of the dissection, becoming macho, and using light-hearted humor, the students could regard the animals as mere specimens and not feel ethically or emotionally uneasy. It is argued that this transformation serves as a rite of passage into the scientific community.
... In Western science, only metaphysically-exclusive data are valued, and they are collected through reductionistic processes (Shipley & Williams, 2019) in an approach to knowledge production that reflects the Western industrial model of resource extraction (Marker, 2004). For Indigenous persons, the process of becoming and being a researcher is a complex negotiation between accommodating and resisting assimilation into the Western scientific worldview (Solot & Arluke, 1997). ...
... The practice of dissection exemplifies the assimilation process. Requiring students to dissect is an important rite-of-passage for initiates into the so-called "life sciences" (Solot & Arluke, 1997). The assimilation process begins with mild manipulations of animals in elementary school experiments and progresses to dissections of less familiar animals in middle and high school, to dissections of more complex and familiar animals in college, and ultimately to dissections of human cadavers (Solot & Arluke, 1997). ...
... Requiring students to dissect is an important rite-of-passage for initiates into the so-called "life sciences" (Solot & Arluke, 1997). The assimilation process begins with mild manipulations of animals in elementary school experiments and progresses to dissections of less familiar animals in middle and high school, to dissections of more complex and familiar animals in college, and ultimately to dissections of human cadavers (Solot & Arluke, 1997). Along the way, students are forced to cope by increasingly redefining the nature of living things to be nothing more than the sum of their biological parts (Solot & Arluke, 1997). ...
The Western scientific worldview is assumed to be universally applicable, including to research involving peoples with different worldviews. Even in the social sciences, which should be more aware of and open to diverse ontologies, epistemologies, and axiologies, Western science is privileged and reproduced and other ways of knowing are dismissed, denigrated, or otherwise treated as inferior. In particular, the use of culturally inappropriate data collection, analysis, and reporting processes has contributed to an increasingly contentious relationship with Indigenous peoples. Indigenous student and faculty researchers understandably experience both internal and external conflict when trying to perform Indigenous research in a way that respects Indigenous cultural expectations while also satisfying the requirements of Western gatekeepers. Indigenous research methodologies reflect the Indigenous worldview and provide an important alternative to the dominant positivist/ postpositivist paradigm of Western science to produce research that is by, with, and for Indigenous peoples. Indigenous methodologies approach community and cultural protocols, values, and needs as an integral part of research, and they emphasize common principles of respect, reciprocity, relevance, and responsibility. We believe broader recognition and acceptance of Indigenous methodologies would benefit all stakeholders, and, in furtherance of that goal, we identify structural, ideological, process-related, and results-related challenges and opportunities that should be considered as Indigenous methodologies are developed and employed.
... Animal sacrifice is often considered to be part of the scientific process in many disciplines. It does create anxieties in students and science trainees, which is overcome with time by finding justification for the greater good of learning or advancing in the research field (Solot and Arluke 1997). Experimental animals are ultimately objectified in labs, losing their status as living beings and treated as mere scientific tools (Birke 2012). ...
Knowledge systems are embedded in sets of values, worldviews, and cosmologies that affect the whole process of knowledge production. Employing an ethnographic method that integrates participant observation, interviews, and focus groups, I explore the contributions, ideas, points of view, and metaphors that individuals of Indigenous origins introduce to the scientific method when they enter Western scientific knowledge systems. This ethnographic exploration focuses on a group of students with a variety of Indigenous backgrounds participating in a field course on introduction to Ecology. Native-born students contribute innovations to the knowledge production process by shaping research questions, methodologies, and result interpretations. These innovations stem from diverse worldviews and epistemologies, and while they could significantly impact scientific knowledge production, the students may not fully appreciate their own relevance. This work may serve as a testimony of the processes of reflection and negotiation with the scientific methods, practices, and values that native students undergo when participating in a Western scientific context.
... One of the dominant values governing today's scientific culture is that it is permissible and even necessary to harm or kill other animals in the name of science. Performing these invasive procedures requires scientists to blunt empathic connection with the animals they study, a desensitization process that begins early (Ellis and Irvine 2010;Solot and Arluke 1997) and extends through one's graduate scientific training (Arluke 1994;Capaldo 2004;Lynch 1988;Thomas 2013). 3 Scientists themselves occasionally write about this experience (e.g., Avila-Villegas 2018;Gagliano 2018;Gluck 2016). ...
... One of the dominant values governing today's scientific culture is that it is permissible and even necessary to harm or kill other animals in the name of science. Performing these invasive procedures requires scientists to blunt empathic connection with the animals they study, a desensitization process that begins early (Ellis and Irvine 2010;Solot and Arluke 1997) and extends through one's graduate scientific training (Arluke 1994;Capaldo 2004;Lynch 1988;Thomas 2013). 3 Scientists themselves occasionally write about this experience (e.g., Avila-Villegas 2018; Gagliano 2018; Gluck 2016). ...
Conventional scientific training instructs researchers to avoid empathy with their study subjects in the service of maintaining “objectivity” and warding off “anthropomorphism.” This approach creates an artificial gulf between human and nonhuman worlds, and renders nonhuman beings as radical others without minds or at best, as beings with minds that cannot be known or accessed. Here we reconsider the wisdom and utility of this convention in the context of research with other animals, our own field of expertise. Our analysis reveals that contrary to governing assumptions in modern scientific practice, suppressing empathy for other living beings does not inevitably make us more objective. Quite the contrary: it can, instead, introduce its own forms of bias into how we think and work as scientists and thus into the research we produce. These observations not only raise serious scientific concerns, but ethical ones as well. We explore what empathy can do in practice to strengthen science, promote more ethical relationships with other species, and inform policy that protects animal interests.
... Despite bans on animal dissection at secondary and postsecondary levels in several countries and its limited use in others ( Oakley, 2012), the dissection of animals remains commonplace at all levels of education throughout North America (Osenkowski et al., 2015), even though myriad non-animal teaching methods (NAMs) are available (InterNICHE, 2021;Norecopa, 2016;USDA National Agricultural Library, 2021). Resistance to adopting NAMs (e.g., virtual anatomy tools) is often rationalized using claims about the benefits of animal dissection-for example, claims that dissection is the best way to teach anatomy and is an important tradition ( Osenkowski et al., 2015); that it fosters student engagement, provides a kinesthetic experience, and supports future learning (Oakley, 2012); and that it is an important rite of passage (Solot & Arluke, 1997). While many of these claims are based on opinions or preferences, the claim that dissection is the best way to teach anatomy is empirically testable. ...
Animal dissection is practiced to varying degrees around the world and is particularly prevalent in North America throughout all levels of education. However, a growing number of studies suggest that non-animal teaching methods (NAMs) (e.g., virtual anatomy tools and three-dimensional models) are better for achieving learning goals compared to dissection. We conducted a systematic review of studies published between 2005 and 2020 that evaluated the pedagogical value of NAMs versus animal dissection. Our results from 20 published studies show that in 95% of the studies (19/20) students at all education levels (secondary, postsecondary, and medical school) performed at least as well—and in most of those studies better (14/19)—when they used NAMs compared to animal dissection. These results provide compelling evidence in support of the 3Rs’ principle of replacement. Given that NAMs have been demonstrated as effective for science education, steps should be taken by educational institutions to phase out animal dissection.
... However, it has been argued that dissection can encourage a decreased sensitivity toward animal life. Solot and Arluke (1997) observed sixth-grade students during fetal pig dissection. They found that many students described themselves as becoming "immune" or "adapted" to the situation, i.e., appearing hardened by the activity as the dissection progressed. ...
Animal dissection has been a traditional teaching tool in biology for centuries. However, harmful animal use in education has raised ethical and environmental concerns in the last decades and led to an ongoing debate about the role and importance of animal dissection in teaching across all education levels. To understand the current status of dissection in secondary education and the attitudes toward humane teaching alternatives among the educators, I conducted a survey–for the first time–among high school biology teachers in Switzerland. The specific aims of this study were (i) to explore the extent of animal or animal parts dissection in high school biology classes, (ii) to understand the attitudes and experiences of high school biology teachers toward dissection and animal-free alternatives, and (iii) to gain some insight into the circumstances hindering a wider uptake of alternatives to animal dissection in high school education. In total, 76 teachers participated in the online survey. The vast majority (97%) of the participants reported using animal dissection in their classes. The responses also revealed that a large proportion of the teachers consider animal-free alternatives inferior teaching tools in comparison with dissection. As the obstacles to adopting alternatives were most often listed the lack of time to research other methods, high costs, and peer pressure. In conclusion, the wider uptake of humane teaching methods would require financial support as well as a shift in the attitudes of high school biology teachers.
... 2010 Using mammalian dissection in lessons is common (De Villiers and Sommerville 2005). Dissection develops students' skills and provides a direct experience of living tissue (Offner, 1993;Randler et al. 2016;Wheeler, 1993), and teaches students to be objective (Solot and Arluke 1997). Students can discover the structures of organisms and develop a greater appreciation for the complexity of life when dissections are integrated into the instructional process (National Science Teachers Association [NSTA] 2005)2019). ...
It is a controversial issue in education that students perform dissection experiments. Different opinions have been noted in studies on this subject, and various applications are recommended according to education levels. This case study aimed to determine pre-service science teachers’ views of hands-on dissection and virtual dissection. The study group consisted of 36 students, 29 female, and seven male. An open-ended question form and student diaries were used as data collection tools. The implementation started with observing the chicken embryo development process that the students actively carried out. Then, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the frog dissection experiment was conducted as a virtual dissection. The content analysis method was used in the analysis of the data. According to the findings, the observations made during the chicken embryo development process emerged negatively due to ethical and moral concerns as the development process progressed. The frog dissection experiment applied in the virtual environment was accepted by the majority of the pre-service teachers who stated that they would prefer virtual dissection tools.
The unique breed of particle physicists constitutes a community of sophisticated mythmakers--explicators of the nature of matter who forever alter our views of space and time. But who are these people? What is their world really like? Sharon Traweek, a bold and original observer of culture, opens the door to this unusual domain and offers us a glimpse into the inner sanctum. http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674063488
Based on ethnographic research in biomedical laboratories, this paper argues that sacrifice is an ambivalent notion in the culture of animal experimentation, requiring both objectification of and identification with the animal. Because of this ambivalence, laboratory animals are not accorded a single, uniform, and unchanging status but seen simultaneously as objects and pets. Animals are objectified by incorporation into the protocol, by deindividualization, by commodification, by isolation, and by situational definition. At the same time, laboratory workers develop pet-like relationships with the animals, which may be treated as enshrined pets, liberated pets, saved pets, or martyred pets.
Discusses the meanings 1st yr medical students attribute to their experimentation on and killing of dogs. 41 21–30 yr olds were interviewed pre and post physiology lab where live, anesthetized dogs were drug injected, surgically manipulated, then killed. Before lab, there was widespread uneasiness among Ss regarding the moral implications of their use of dogs. However after lab, Ss described the experience very positively. Findings suggest that this attitude change stems from Ss' ability to neutralize the moral dirty work of "dog lab." The authors argue that Ss learn absolutions that permit denial of responsibility and wrongdoing. Unlike justifications, excuses, and apologies which neutralize the stigma of questionable behavior, absolutions morally elevate the behavior, making it a privilege to perform while leaving one's moral self intact. It is argued that doctors in training learn absolutions to morally elevate the negative aspects of their occupation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Focusing on the dissection of cadavers by first-year medical students, this article examines the process of professional initiation at a medical school in the United States. The essay argues that medical training reifies not only 'the patient,' but also 'the doctor': the first as an object that can be known and handled through disenchanted, professional routines, and the second as an agent who handles human bodies with such routines in all circumstances, even-the students learn-when the patient is so dead, and when professional routines only further its destruction.
Professionals are not supposed to feel desire or disgust for their clients, and they presumably begin to learn " affective neutrality" in professional school. Medical students learn to manage the inappropriate feelings they have in situations of clinical contact with the human body, but two years of participant observation revealed that the subject of "emotion management" is taboo. Yet the culture of medicine that informs teaching also includes a hidden curriculum of unspoken rules and resources for dealing with unwanted emotions. Students draw on aspects of their training to manage their emotions. Their emotion management strategies include transforming the patient or the procedure into an analytic object or event, accentuating the comfortable felings that come from learning and practicing "real medicine," empathizing with patients or blaming them, joking, and avoiding sensitive contact. By relying upon these strategies, students reproduce the perspective of modern Western medicine and the kind of doctor-patient relationship it implies.
The ethnographic study performed by Bruno Latour engaged him in the world of the scientific laboratory to develop an understanding of scientific culture through observations of their daily interactions and processes. Latour assumed a scientific perspective in his study; observing his participants with the "same cold, unblinking eye" that they use in their daily research activities. He familiarized himself with the laboratory by intense focus on "literary inscription", noting that the writing process drives every activity in the laboratory. He unpacked the structure of scientific literature to uncover its importance to scientists (factual knowledge), how scientists communicate, and the processes involved with generating scientific knowledge (use of assays, instrumentation, documentation). The introduction by Jonas Salk stated that Latour's study could increase public understanding of scientists, thereby decreasing the expectations laid on them, and the general fear toward them. [Teri, STS 901-Fall; only read Ch. 2]
The notion of the 'core set' usually refers to that group of scientists involved in the eventual resolution of a given technical controversy. Drawing upon actor-network theory, we suggest that such core sets, especially at science/public interfaces, are, in fact, constituted from generalized agonistic sets which entail 'non-technical' issues - political, ethical, economic. Interview material with scientists who use animals in their research showed how they attempted to demarcate such a core set with their public critics. We consider how they constricted the core set by discursively demarcating the criteria for membership. These included 'rationality' and 'emotional authenticity'. Elaborating an Collins' use of 'core set', we suggest that these discourses indicate that scientists are potentially engaged in actively constituting a core set by setting out cultural criteria for membership. Contrary to the focus of actor-network theory upon 'definitive' enrolment, we found that scientists can also engage in characterizing suitable antagonists. As a supplement to both core set and enrolment, we suggest the concept of 'envelopment'.