Renato Schibeci

Western Australian school students' understanding of biotechnology

Are science educators providing secondary school students with the background to understand the science behind recent controversies such as the recently introduced compulsory labelling of genetically modified foods? Research from the UK suggests that many secondary school students do not understand the processes or implications of modern biotechnology. The situation in Australia is unclear. In this study, 1116 15-year-old students from eleven Western Australian schools were surveyed to determine their understanding of, and attitude towards, recent advances in modern biotechnology. The results indicate that approximately one third of students have little or no understanding of biotechnology. Many students over-estimate the use of biotechnology in our society by confusing current uses with possible future applications. The results provide a rationale for the inclusion of biotechnology, a cutting edge science, in the school science curriculum

Western Australian high school students' attitudes towards biotechnology processes

This study reports on the attitudes towards biotechnology of 905, 15–16 year-old students from 11 Western Australian schools. Students were asked to read 15 statements about biotechnology processes and to draw a line to separate what they considered ‘acceptable’ statements from those they considered ‘unacceptable’. Overall, the students hold a wide range of beliefs about what is an acceptable use of biotechnology. Their attitudes range from those of the 55 (6.0%) students who do not agree with the use of any living organisms in biotechnology to the 125 (14%) students who approve of all the stated uses of biotechnology, with a wide spread in between. Acceptance of the use of organisms in biotechnology decreases as we move from microorganisms (>90%approval) to plants (71–82%) to humans (42–45%) and animals (34–40%). The attitudes of 99 students who recently studied biotechnology and have a good understanding of the processes and issues were similar in percentage and spread to those who were less informed.

Beyond public perceptions of gene technology: community participation in public policy in Australia.

Public policy assumptions, which view “the public” as passive consumers, are deeply flawed. “The public” are, in fact, active citizens, who constitute the innovation end of the seamless web of relationships, running from research and development laboratory to shop, hospital or farm, or local neighborhood. “The public” do not receive the impact of technology; they are the impact, in that they determine with gene technology (GT) developers and sellers what happens to the technology in our society. In doing so, they, or more rightly we, exercise particular, contextual knowledges and actions. We suggest that it is the ignorance of this aspect of innovation in policy processes that produces the distrust and resentment that we found in our interviews with “publics” interested in gene technology. This is consistent with Beck’s description of the deep structural states of risk and fear in modern advanced societies with respect to new technologies, such as gene technology. Only policy processes that recognize the particular, local, and contextual knowledges of “the public,” which co-construct innovation, can achieve deep, social structural consideration of gene technology. And only such a deep consideration can avoid the polarized attitudes and deep suspicions that we have seen arise in places such as Britain. Such consideration needs the type of processes that involve active consultation and inclusion of “the public” in government and commercial innovation, the so-called deliberative and inclusionary processes (DIPs), such as consensus conferences and citizen juries. We suggest some measures that could be tried in Australia, which would take us further down the path of participation toward technological citizenship.

A framework and checklists for evaluating online learning in higher education

A case is made in this paper for using checklists and context‐bound evaluations of online learning materials in higher education. Context‐bound evaluations complement traditional forms of evaluation of educational courseware, such as checklists. Context‐bound approaches are useful for indicating the pedagogical quality of online learning materials that may be productively used in conjunction with checklists to evaluate online learning. Edith Cowan University has developed a framework and checklists for assessing aspects of online pedagogical learning materials in higher education. These checklists, which are intended to be useful indicators of the areas where online learning materials are strong and to identify areas that may be deficient, and are a valuable screening and information gathering device to use when undertaking a context‐bound evaluation of learning materials. As such, the quality of the instructional design remains an important consideration in evaluating courseware, and such information needs to be presented in a form that is accessible and useful for educational developers and researchers. Comment and dissent is invited on the value of contextual evaluations to reinvigorate the debate over appropriate ways of evaluating online learning materials in higher education.

“What Do You Think about Genetic Medicine?” Facilitating Sociable Public Discourse on Developments in the New Genetics:

An important aspect of any meaningful public discussion about developments in gene technology is the provision of opportunities for interested publics to engage in sociable public discourse with other lay people and with experts. This article reports on a series of peer group conversations conducted in late 1996 and early 1997 with sixteen community groups in Perth, Western Australia, interested in gene therapy technology. With the case of cystic fibrosis as a particular focus, and using background resource material as a stimulus for discussion, the participating groups explored a range of value issues arising from the new genetic medicine. This more discursive context enabled participants to express a number of background or life-world concerns about genetic medicine, concerns that are often obscured by the dominant biomedical and bioethical discourses.

Evaluating the use of learning objects in Australian and New Zealand schools

The Le@rning Federation, an agency funded by Australian and New Zealand governments, initiated a Field Review project as the start of a long-term research study to evaluate the impact, application and effectiveness of the online digital content developed according to the learning object model. In terms of content, the pilot Field Review found that many learning objects provided stimulating and diverse learning experiences for students. It is one of the potential strengths of learning objects that they are able to provide new geographical experiences and simulate dangerous or expensive learning activities at low relative cost.

Portrayals of science and scientists, and ‘science for citizenship’

There are increasing calls in the science education community for ‘science for citizenship’ as an important goal for the school science curriculum of the 21st century. The potential influence of portrayals of science and scientists in popular culture on the achievement of this goal is explored in this paper through a review of the literature. We develop a framework of important questions citizens ask in considering personal and social decision making in relation to science and technology issues, and how portrayals of science and scientists might contribute to this decision making process.

Teachers' Journeys towards Critical Use of ICT.

Teachers have a central role in developing new learning models in schools. This paper describes a study that explored teachers’ confidence and competence in using Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) as they participated in an ICT development project conducted by an Australian education system in 12 primary schools. The project aimed to develop ICT integrated teaching practices by providing in‐class equipment and teacher professional development in ICT use, curriculum development and teaching strategies. The study used qualitative data from teacher records of Professional Development and Action Learning to identify three of four stages proposed to describe teachers’ ICT learning. Teachers moved from gaining basic ICT skills, to conducting ICT‐focused lessons and eventually appropriate ICT integration. Teachers who progressed to the third stage were able to exploit additional learning opportunities and begin to make fundamental changes to their pedagogy, but needed more time to reach the final stage of challenging existing pedagogical structures.

What conceptions of science communication are espoused by science research funding bodies

We examine the conceptions of science communication, especially in relation to “public engagement with science” (PES), evident in the literature and websites of science research funding bodies in Europe, North America, South America, Asia and Oceania, and Africa. The analysis uses a fourfold classification of science communication to situate these conceptions: professional, deficit, consultative and deliberative. We find that all bodies engage in professional communication (within the research community); however, engagement with the broader community is variable. Deficit (information dissemination) models still prevail but there is evidence of movement towards more deliberative, participatory models.

Community Involvement in Biotechnology Policy?: The Australian Experience

The authors analyze the framework for public participation in Australian biotechnology policy and argue that participation is undermined by the institutional structures that were ostensibly designed to facilitate consultation. They conclude that for the moment, community consultation in the formulation of Australian biotechnology policy appears limited. Indeed, the Australian Gene Technology Act 2000 and the Gene Technology Community Consultative Committee Operating Procedures effectively exclude the community from participating in deliberations on biotechnology policy. The community continues to be treated as consumers of advice, rather than technological citizens who can make a genuine contribution to biotechnology policy.