Tools for TeachersFrequently Asked Questions for Teachers
"Why
do some students choose not to participate in specimen dissection?" An animal is killed. Some feel that this loss of life is unnecessary and can and should be avoided. Conservation. Given the extent of ongoing habitat destruction and the fragility of the habitats that remain, many feel that the yearly harvesting of millions of animals for dissection is wasteful and further compromises already besieged natural resources. Animal welfare. The treatment of live animals destined for dissection is often inhumane. Animals are often stockpiled on top of one another and shipped in crowded containers with no temperature regulation. Undercover video footage exposes that some are still living as they are pumped full of formaldehyde or other preservatives. Toxic waste. Formaldehyde is a potential carcinogen and millions of specimens, preserved in such chemicals, must be disposed of after dissection. Respect for life. Instead of regarding animal life as valuable, students can learn that life is usable and disposable. Dissection choice allows students who have moral concerns to use effective alternatives to animal specimens. [ Back to top ] "Aren’t students who choose them allowed alternatives?" Many teachers, parents, and school administrators have heard of situations where a student was made uncomfortable, or penalized for not wanting to dissect. The Ethical Science and Education Coalition receives dozens of calls from students who have encountered resistance when requesting an alternative, as have other organizations. Fortunately, many science teachers today are sensitive to their students’ requests and are knowledgeable about dissection choice. However, this is not universally the case. The growing number of court cases where students – with parental support – are filing litigation against school systems and/or individual teachers indicates that many students are not being granted dissection choice.
[ Back to top ] "Do alternatives to dissection provide the same knowledge as specimen dissection?" Dissection alternatives not only provide the necessary basic anatomy information that an unlabeled specimen cannot, but also integrate advanced scientific concepts and various fields of study. In 28 out of 29 studies, students using alternatives performed as well if not better with alternatives than did students using specimens. Computer programs offer anatomy, physiology, histology, and even ecology lessons through interactive graphics and video in a variety of modalities that ensure that students are highly engaged in the learning process. Charts, books, models, and videos are also benefiting from advancing photographic and computer technology with accurate representations of specimens via detailed graphics. Today’s technology puts basic lessons of anatomy and physiology forward in a clear and engaging manner. Because animal specimens can be used only once, alternative lessons actually give teachers more options than do traditional dissection specimens. Students can also master or enhance essential computer skills when using computer dissection programs. This added benefit of sharpening computer skills is a definite advantage to budding scientists who will rely heavily on computer technology throughout their careers.
[ Back to top ]
According to the Association of American Medical Colleges, more than 60 U.S. medical schools rely exclusively on alternatives to animal labs, and medical simulation centers are heralded as the future of medical education. Many vet schools are also integrating advanced computer technology into their classrooms, including three-dimensional dissection computer programs. Studies from a variety of prestigious journals
including the Many students taking a high school biology class will change career choices when confronted by the prospect of mandatory dissections. Anecdotal evidence demonstrates that girls especially are likely to abandon science if faced with forced dissection. Considering the lack of women in the sciences and the newly emerging field of bioethics as an important and integral part of the biology, can science afford to turn away these socially conscious individuals (See Keeping Girls and Women in Science)?
[ Back to top ] Million animals, including amphibians, sharks, reptiles, fish, and insects, are "harvested" from natural habitats each year for dissection purposes. Frogs, for example, do not reproduce well in captivity, and the cost of breeding them is so exorbitant that few schools would be able to afford to buy them even if breeding were feasible. It is less expensive to remove them from natural habitats via the use of large nets and then ship them to biological supply houses where they can be prepared and sold. Fetal pigs and organs from cows and sheep, often used in dissection labs, come from slaughterhouses and factory farms. The abuse associated with factory farming is well-documented. Animals are often kept in cramped, unsanitary conditions while enduring painful procedures (such as debeaking). There are instances where animals are dismembered while still living. Video footage from undercover investigations into the procurement methods used by major U.S. biological supply companies indicates that they obtained cats from Class B dealers. These dealers are known to find animals from "free to good home" ads or to steal them from neighborhoods. In addition, animal protection organizations, in response to complaints of disappearing pets in Mexico, found that thousands of cats were being trapped in residential neighborhoods, killed, and shipped to the U.S. where they were sold to schools for educational purposes.
[ Back to top ] When a student disagrees with a teacher, the case is sometimes made that the student is being difficult or disrespectful. Many educators realize, however, that not all children learn the same way. Some children cannot find it within themselves to dissect an animal. These students are not being rebellious but simply wish to find a way to reconcile their lessons with their beliefs and values. As President John Buehrens of the Unitarian Universalist Association said:
Updated May 2001 |
