National Antivisection Society
Survey to assess animal use in higher education
29 June 2010
LDF is currently funding a survey, conducted by researchers at Edinburgh University to allow information to be gathered about the use of animals in education throughout Europe.
The electronic survey is being sent to pharmacology and physiology lecturers and professors in ten different countries. In some cases, this has necessitated translating the survey into the relevant local language. Up until this point the survey has been sent to academics and institutions in the UK, Germany, France and the Netherlands.
The responses to the surveys sent so far have been returning in a steady stream and will now be analysed in order to create a picture of which animals are used and where. It is vital, with any survey that a sufficient level of responses is received and to ensure this, the researchers are following up with e-mails to prompt recipients to reply.
Whilst this information is very important in assessing animal use, perhaps the most vital element of this survey is the barriers to the use of alternatives to animals. Survey participants are being asked whether they use non-animal alternatives to teaching and if they do not, what reason there is for this.
Once the obstacles are known, these can be tackled. For example if many respondents in a specific country that they do not use non-animals teaching aids because they are not available in their language, then this could be addressed by translating existing elements of Professor Dewhurst’s ReCal programme into the local language.
The need to tackle the use of animals in education is very important as, not only will it save animals lives, but will allow students to see that animals are not an essential part of their education – a message that they will hopefully carry forwards in their careers.
In addition to not being necessary for education, research has shown that students can perform better in courses if they do not use animals. Studies of veterinary students have been reviewed in one scientific paper, which compared learning outcomes generated by non-harmful teaching methods with those achieved through harmful animal use. The paper (1) explained how, in papers which assessed the acquisition of surgical skills, 45.5% demonstrated superior learning outcomes using more humane alternatives and another 45.5% demonstrated equivalent learning outcomes. In 21 studies of non-veterinary students, using humane teaching alternatives, 38.1% demonstrated superior learning outcomes and 52.4% demonstrated equivalent learning outcomes.
(1) Knight, A. (2007) “humane teaching methods prove efficacious within veterinary and other biomedical education”, AATEX, 14, special Issue, pp.213-220
