The effects on the Biology section of the Alabama High School Graduation Exam

The effects on the Biology section of the Alabama High School Graduation Exam
Concerning the Use of Live Versus Alternative Dissecting Techniques




A proposal presented to the faculty of Troy University in partial fulfillments of the requirements for EDU6691
By
Jessica A. Smith


Chapter I
Introduction
Statement of the Problem
“Close to six million vertebrate animals are dissected in US high schools alone each year (Balcombe, 2000, p. 24). Is it truly necessary to allow high school students to continue to dissect animals when there are numerous alternatives available? Biology is the study of life. To study life, students do not have to view animals after death. Many studies have proven that dissection alternatives can be more effective or at least equal to live dissections. Alternatives are also less expensive than embalmed specimens. In order to understand the current state of dissection in American high schools, one must first understand the history of dissection.
Dissection has been the traditional way to expose and learn about animal structure. Dissection has an ancient and classical lineage, the documentation of which can be traced back to Aristotle’s work on such things as embryology, and Galen’s publication of the results of his investigations on animals. Galen never carried out vivisection on gladiators, but he benefitted from the detailed knowledge gained by those who attended gladiator’s injuries. Vesalius (born Andreas van Wesel, 1514-1564) in the 16th century was perhaps the greatest anatomist. He took advantage of the papal ruling of 1540 that cadavers of those who had committed sins that would condemn them to hell could be used for dissection. Even then, the theological problems associated with the resurrection of the body continued to limit the supply of human corpses in Europe. In the early 19th century, Burke and Hare of Edinburgh became among the most celebrated suppliers of bodies for a medical school as they turned to murder to maintain their trade (De Villers & Monk, 2005, p. 584).

Dissection continues to provide valuable experience for individuals entering the medical field. However, “the Humane Society of the United States found that for a typical school’s needs, the cost of providing animal specimens for dissection was often greater than the cost of purchasing a range of reusable alternative materials” (Balcombe, 2000, pg. 44). Due to current proration in Alabama schools, any program that saves a significant amount of money should be considered. Additionally, many organizations provide dissection alternatives on a free loan program.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to determine if the use of animal dissection in the Alabama high school Biology classroom has any effect on student’s scores on the Alabama High School Graduation Exam Biology section. The Biology section is composed entirely of biology questions. The effect of alternatives to dissection, such as computer programs, models, and videos, on the Alabama High School Graduation Exam Science section will also be examined. Gathering this information will help school districts decide whether to continue to use live dissections in the classroom or to choose other alternatives.
Significance of the Study
Many students do not like the idea of dissection and refuse to participate. According to Millett and Lock (1992), only 32% of secondary school learners indicated that they would find dissecting a dead animal interesting; 73% thought that it was wrong to breed animals for dissection; and 38% said they would object to any animal material being used for dissection. Clearly, the opinions of students are not being considered. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the continued use of dissection in the classroom.
Definition of Terms
Alabama Graduation Exam: tests high school students on an eleventh-grade level. It includes sections on language, reading comprehension, math, biology, and social studies. To receive a diploma from the State of Alabama, a student must pass all sections of the exam and complete the required Carnegie units of credit. Students have at least five chances to pass the test, once as a sophomore, once as a junior, and three times as a senior.
Dissection: The process of disassembling and observing something to determine its internal structure and as an aid to discerning the function and relationship of its components.
Dissection alternatives: Alternatives include virtual dissection software (CD-ROM), plastic models, pictorial atlases, videos, dissection charts, and dissection manuals. All provide accurate representation of the internal anatomy of an animal.
Live dissection: The process of disassembling a live or preserved animal specimen in order to learn about its internal anatomy.
Limitations and Delimitations of the Study
The proposed study will use a quantitative methodology to investigate the effects of live versus alternative dissecting techniques on the Biology section of the Alabama High School Graduation Exam. The schools researched will be found in the state of Alabama. An equal number of schools using live dissection and those using dissection alternatives will be examined. School size, socioeconomic levels, race and gender distribution will also be equal in schools researched.
Hypothesis
Students using alternative dissection methods in the Biology classrooms will perform as well or better on the Alabama High School Graduation Exam Biology section than students who perform live dissections.



Chapter II
Literature Review
A growing number of students in the United States are refusing to perform dissections in their high school Biology classroom. According to Millett and Lock (1992), 83.5 percent of high school students surveyed felt that alternatives to animal experimentation be found. In an age of increasing environmental awareness, more emphasis will continue to be placed on the preservation of animal species. Orlans (1991) states that the concerns range from inhumane treatment of animals by the supply industry and the depletion of natural populations of affected species to concerns about the emotional responses of students who are ”turned off” to biology because of a dislike of dissection. Alternatives to dissection have been proven to be highly effective in high school Biology classrooms.
Concerns about live dissection
Often animals used in the classroom have been taken off the street, purchased from animal shelters, or bred specifically for the purpose. The most commonly dissected animals include cats, dogs, fetal pigs, rats, bony fish, sharks, crayfish, earthworms, starfish and frogs. Additionally, frogs are often pulled from the wild. This is especially discouraging due to the chytrid fungus that continues to wipe out entire species of frogs. Balcombe (2000) states that animals to be used for dissections are treated without respect and euthanized in an inhumane manner.
The acquisition of animals used for dissection is not regulated. Animals have been taken off the streets, where they could be someone’s pet. According to Balcombe (2000), in a large seizure of embalmbed cats in Mexico, the man in charge of collecting the cats admitted that a large portion of them were probably owned. The same is true for dogs. Also, cats and dogs can be purchased from animal shelters where they were euthanized. Due to the pet overpopulation, there is a surplus of pets that cannot be placed in a new home. However, most shelters profit from this. They sell euthanized cats and dogs to biological supply companies, who then sell them to schools. Often, animals are bred specifically for the purpose of dissection. This is true of certain types of frogs, as well as fetal pigs. After slaughter, the fetal pigs of pregnant sows are removed and sold to biological supply companies.
Of a major concern, is the removal of animals from the wild to satisfy dissection demands. Frog populations have continued to decline over the past decade. Removal of species from the wild contributes to this decline. “Efforts to turn the tide for frogs should involve both curbing human exploitation of wild populations and fostering appreciation and respect for their kind” (Balcombe, 2000, p. 33). Dogfish sharks are also taken from the wild in such large numbers that the species in on the verge on endangerment.
Unfortunately, animals that are to be euthanized for dissection purposes are treated inhumanely before, and during the euthanization process. In a People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) investigation of Carolina Biological Supply Company (PETA, 2000), numerous counts of animal cruelty were observed. Animals were denied food and water while being kept in cramped cages. Some animals did not die in the gas chambers used for euthanization, but were embalmed anyway. Others animals were drowned in buckets of water if they escaped the gas chamber alive. Such disrespect for animal life undermines the very idea of biological study.
Furthermore, high school students are beginning to foster a greater awareness of environmental issues. Along with this comes compassion for animals. This compassion causes many students to be very distressed at the idea of mutilating an animal. In fact, dissection seems to “desensitize individuals toward the treatment of other species” (Barr & Herzog, 2000, p. 67). If students are taught that they have a right to dominion over animals, then they will continue to foster that belief instead of working to preserve the balance of Earth’s ecosystems.
Alternatives to live dissection
There are many alternative to live dissections available. Many CD-ROM programs, such as CatLab exist that simulate the actual step-by-step performance of dissection. They allow students to make cuts in the specimen using the mouse and cursor. Some programs also offer three-deminsional views inside the body. Three-dimensional models made of plastic, can provide tactile and spatial experiences not present in computer programs. Such models allow students to see accurately sized representations of body parts and systems. There are also life-size models of the human body available. Additionally, there are videos, charts, workbooks, and picture atlases available for classroom use.
Effectiveness of dissection alternatives
Numerous studies have found that alternatives to dissection are very effective. Downie and Meadows (1995) examined the test results of 10 undergraduate biology students who had the choice to dissect a rat or use alternative models, charts and demonstrators. Students recorded exactly the same mean score on the test, regardless of the method they used. Additionally, in a study carried out by Predavec (2001), students who completed a computer-based rat dissection scored 74 percentage points better on a test than students completing the conventional dissection.
Malony (2005), studied 224 studnets enrolled in an all-girl high school. Students who completed the virtual dissection scored significantly higher on practical and objective tests that were used to measure knowledge acquisition. Dissection alternatives have proven to be effective instructional tools.

Popularity of live dissection
Students in the United States continue to dissect animals in the classroom even though it has been virtually eliminated in many other countries. For example, “dissection of whole organisms in school biology classes in Britain has all but ceased, largely due to ethical concerns surrounding the fact that these organisms were specifically bred for the purpose” (Roscoe, 2007, p. 6). It seems as though the United States will soon follow suit. According to Haury (1996), ever since the California Supreme Court supported the refusal of a student to dissect a frog in a high school biology class in 1987, there has been a steady decline in dissection.
Cost comparison of live dissection and dissection alternatives
“Teachers and administrators often cite the cost of alternatives as a reason for their not being implemented” (Balcombe, 1997, p.22). In fact, animal dissection is often more expensive. This is because preserved animal specimens must be purchased every year. Alternatives such as videos , models, and computer programs can be purchased once, updated as needed, and used repeatedly. Balcombe (2000), compares the cost of live cat dissection versus alternative dissection methods for a three-year period. Estimates are based on a class size of thirty students with the teacher having three classes that dissect per year. The lowest total cost of a live cat dissection is $4,991. This estimate includes 135 animals (2 students per cat), a 64-page dissection manual (30) and supplies (scalpels, scissors, formaldehyde, etc.). The total cost estimate for alternatives would be $1,865. This estimate includes 2 anatomy models, a dissection video, CatWorks program (4), CatLab CD-ROM (4), a 64-page dissection manual (30), and a VCR or DVD player if needed. The savings over a three-year period when choosing alternatives over live dissections is $3,126.

Chapter III
Methodology
Methods
A quantitative study will be performed to test if there is a significant difference between student performance on the Biology section of the Alabama High School Graduation Exam and the use of live or alternative dissecting techniques. Data will be collected from the individual schools participating as well as the Alabama State Department of Education. A statistical analysis of the scores on the Alabama High School Graduation Exam will be performed. Results should be reliable, because every student that takes the Graduation Exam has identical questions.
Research Questions
When collecting data, the researcher should consider the following questions:
1. Are there significant differences in Biology scores on the Alabama High School Graduation Exam of students who participated in live dissection in Biology class compared to students who participated in alternative dissection techniques in Biology class?
2. Does gender influence scores on the Biology section of the AHSGE when students participate in live or alternative dissection techniques?
3. Does race influence scores on the Biology section of the AHSGE when students participate in live or alternative dissection techniques?
4. Does socioeconomic status influence scores on the Biology section of the AHSGE when students participate in live or alternative dissection techniques?
5. Does school funding influence the use of live or alternative dissection techniques in the Biology classroom?
Population
The population involved in this study will consist of students in Alabama high schools who have taken Biology, either using live dissection or alternative dissecting techniques, and have also taken the Biology section of the Alabama High School Graduation Exam. An equal number of students from both categories will be compared. The student population is diverse and will vary in age, race, and socioeconomic status.
Data Collection
Student scores on the Biology Section of the Alabama High School Graduation Exam will be gathered from participating schools or from the Alabama State Department of Education. The students will be grouped into two groups: students who participated in live dissections in Biology class and students who participated in alternative dissection techniques in Biology class.
Instrumentation
The instrument used in the study to compare the effects of live versus alternative dissecting techniques on the Biology Section of the Alabama High School Graduation Exam will be an ANOVA, where three variables will be compared and a paired sample t-test, in which the means of the two variables are compared. The means of students who participated in live dissection in Biology class will be compared to the means of students who participated in alternative dissecting techniques in Biology class.
Data Analysis
The study will use statistical software, Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), to analyze the mean scores of the two groups of students. A t-test and an ANOVA will be used to determine if there is a significant difference between scores on the Biology section of the Alabama High School Graduation Exam (AHSGE) of students participating in live dissections compared to students who participated in alternative dissecting techniques. The data will be analyzed to determine if there is a significant difference between student performance on the AHSGE and the type of dissection technique they used.
Ethical Treatment of Human Subjects
The identities of students will remain anonymous. Only test scores will be analyzed. A permission form for individual students will not be necessary as long as the researcher has gained proper legal access to student scores on the Biology section of the AHSGE from administrators at participating schools or personnel at the Alabama State Department of Education.














References
Balcombe, J., (1997). Student/teacher conflict regarding animal dissection. The American Biology Teacher, 59 (1), 22-25.
Balcombe, J., (2000). The use of animals in higher education: Problems, alternatives, and recommendations. Washington, DC: The Humane Society Press.
Barr, G. & Hersog, H., (2001). Fetal pig: The high school dissection experience. Society & Animals, 8 (1), 53-69.
De Villers, R. & Monk, M., (2005). The first cut is the deepest: Reflections on the state of animal dissection in biology dissection. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37 (5), 583-600.
Downie, R. & Meadows, J. (1995). Experience with a dissection opt-out scheme in university level biology. Journal of Biological Education, 29 (3), 187-194.
Haury, D.L., (1996). Alternatives to animal dissection in school science classes. ERIC Digest (ED402155).
Maloney, R. S., (2005). Exploring virtual fetal pig dissection as a learning tool for female high school biology students. Educational Research & Evaluation, 11 (6), 591-603.
Millett, K. & Lock, R. (1992). GCSE students’ attitudes toward animal use: some implications for biology/science teachers. Journal of Biological Education, 26 (3), 204-208.
Orlans, F. B. (1991). Use of animals in education: Policy and practice in the United States. Journal of Biological Education, 25 (1), 27-32.
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. (2000). Dissections: Lessons in cruelty. Norfolk, VA: Author.
Predavec, M. (2001). Evaluation of E-Rat, a computer-based rat dissection, in terms of students learning outcomes. Educational Research, 35 (2), 75-80.
Roscoe, N. (2007). Dissection: A dying art? Biologist, 54 (1) 6.