Using Critical Literacy to Explore Genetics and its Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues with In-Service Secondary Teachers

Abstract

The described interdisciplinary course helped a mixed population of in-service secondary English and biology teacher-participants increase their genetics content knowledge and awareness of Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) that arose from discoveries and practices associated with the Human Genome Project. This was accomplished by applying a critical literacy approach that allows people develop cognitive skills such that they are able to “read the world” (Wink, 2004). The approach is one that permits readers to go beyond the literal text to examine what is present as well as what is missing as it relates to issues of equity and fairness. Becoming critically literate enabled these teacher-participants to challenge the subtle attitudes, values, and beliefs conveyed by a range of written and oral texts. The teacher-participants in this course improved their critical literacy skills by actively reading, critically writing about, and using evidence to support their conclusions about issues arising from advances in human genetics. A biologist, a linguist, and an educator collaboratively designed and taught the course. The personalized focus on the integration of thoughtful reading and writing in this class enhanced the teacher-participants' (n = 16) professional and intellectual development and will potentially improve learning in their biology and English classrooms in the future.

Citizens' Attitudes, Knowledge, and Educational Needs in the Field of Omics Sciences: A Systematic Literature Review

“…The articles included in this systematic review were published between 2006 and 2020. Among the 54 included studies, 44% were conducted in USA (n = 24) (Fomous et al, 2006;Goddard et al, 2007Goddard et al, , 2009Gleason et al, 2010;Hahn et al, 2010;Lemke et al, 2010;East et al, 2012;Kaphingst et al, 2012Kaphingst et al, , 2015Kaphingst et al, , 2016Kolor et al, 2012;Haga et al, 2013;Almeling, 2014;Borzekowski et al, 2014;Waters et al, 2014Waters et al, , 2016Waters et al, , 2017Abrams et al, 2015;Dodson et al, 2015;Graves et al, 2015;Schmidlen et al, 2016;Ahmed et al, 2017;Krakow et al, 2017;Horrow et al, 2019), 22% (n = 12) in the European Union (EU27) (Henneman et al, 2006(Henneman et al, , 2013Calsbeek et al, 2007;Morren et al, 2007;Mai et al, 2011;Smerecnik et al, 2011;Dijkstra et al, 2012;Vermeulen et al, 2014;Mavroidopoulou et al, 2015;McCormack et al, 2016;Fournier and Poulain, 2018;Rebitschek et al, 2019), 9% (n = 5) in Canada (Morin, 2009;Nielsen and El-Sohemy, 2012;Bombard et al, 2013;…”

“…Instead, 26% (n =14) reported residential methods, such as meetings, workshop, or focus groups (Skirton et al, 2006;Morin, 2009;Hahn et al, 2010;Lemke et al, 2010;Bombard et al, 2013;Nicholls et al, 2013;Etchegary et al, 2015;McCormack et al, 2016;Ahmed et al, 2017;Waters et al, 2017;Fournier and Poulain, 2018;Metcalfe et al, 2018;Jones et al, 2019;Rebitschek et al, 2019). Furthermore, in 4% of the studies (n = 2) a course was developed (Gleason et al, 2010;East et al, 2012), while in 4% of cases (n = 2) a movie or a short video was realized (Sturgis et al, 2010;Mählmann et al, 2016). Lastly, one study (2%) involved the online consultation of a web portal on genomics and its implications (Fomous et al, 2006), and in another one (2%), focused on nutrigenomics, a clinical trial was carried out (Nielsen and El-Sohemy, 2012).…”

“…Furthermore, 15% of the studies (n = 6) addressed the ethical, social and legal implications related to genetic information (Fomous et al, 2006;Makeeva et al, 2009;Gleason et al, 2010;Lemke et al, 2010;Bombard et al, 2013;Almeling, 2014;McCormack et al, 2016). Ten percent (n = 4) of included articles focused on nutrigenomics and/or nutrigenetic tests (Goddard et al, 2007(Goddard et al, , 2009Morin, 2009;Nielsen and El-Sohemy, 2012).…”

“…Study participants had, in most cases (64%, n = 25), a limited knowledge level regarding the abovementioned topics (Skirton et al, 2006;Calsbeek et al, 2007;Goddard et al, 2007Goddard et al, , 2009Morren et al, 2007;Ishiyama et al, 2008;Molster et al, 2009;Morin, 2009;Gleason et al, 2010;Hahn et al, 2010;Lemke et al, 2010;Smerecnik et al, 2011;Dijkstra et al, 2012;East et al, 2012;Nielsen and El-Sohemy, 2012;Almeling, 2014;Borzekowski et al, 2014;Abrams et al, 2015;Etchegary et al, 2015;Mavroidopoulou et al, 2015;Mählmann et al, 2016;Simonstein and Mashiach-Eizenberg, 2016;Ahmed et al, 2017;Waters et al, 2017;Metcalfe et al, 2018;Jones et al, 2019) (Table 2). Instead, few studies (26%, n = 10) showed a medium or moderate knowledge level (Henneman et al, 2006;Molster et al, 2009;Haga et al, 2013;Waters et al, 2014Waters et al, , 2016Abrams et al, 2015;Dodson et al, 2015;Kaphingst et al, 2016;Miyamoto et al, 2016;Krakow et al, 2017).…”

Integrating Socio-Scientific Issues to Enhance the Bioethical Decision-Making Skills of High School Students

“…Scientific literacy is the capacity to pose, identify and evaluate scientific issues underlying national and local decisions, and express positions that are scientifically and technologically sound (Gleason, Melancon, & Keline, 2010). Liras and Arenas (2010) stressed that scientific knowledge and its credibility should essentially stem from the need for its impartiality and objectivity and the force it exerts should be based primarily in building citizen's capacity to solve social problems.…”