Animal ethics in Australian education - a research study

Joy Verrinder BA DipT MBA MA

^{(Prof. Ethics & Gov.)}

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Research method
• Results
• Practical implications of this research
• Areas for further research
• References
  
  

Abstract

Despite animals’ lives being inextricably linked with human society, and a substantial body of philosophical and scientific knowledge on animal ethics issues, animal ethics appears to not be included in school curricula in Australia. Research was therefore conducted to investigate whether animal ethics is being addressed in school curricula, and if so, to what extent. Existing approaches to animal education, current relevant school curriculum documents in Queensland, Australia, and relevant theories on ethics, animal ethics, affective development, compassion, and professional ethics were examined. Data was gathered using questionnaires to examine the knowledge and attitudes of upper primary and secondary students and teachers in Queensland schools to humans’ treatment of animals and the inclusion of animal ethics in upper primary and secondary school curricula.

The findings suggest that existing approaches to animal education are largely external to school curricula. Current relevant school curriculum documents in Queensland, Australia, do not address animal ethics issues. Data from the questionnaires support the inclusion of ethics and animal ethics in schools. Most students and teachers were found to have compassionate attitudes towards how humans should treat animals generally. However, many have inconsistent attitudes towards the treatment of animals used for specific purposes by humans and limited knowledge about many animals’ abilities and how they are treated. Most students and teachers are interested in learning about animal ethics issues and their inclusion in the curriculum. Both students and teachers agree that these issues are not currently included sufficiently in the curriculum documents or in teaching. Many teachers lack training and resources in addressing ethical issues in general, and animal ethics in particular.

Recommendations include inclusion of animal ethics in primary and secondary school curricula, as well as a systematic approach to affective development with strategies to address differences in compassionate ethos based on gender, student age group, and faculty discipline. Professional ethics training to cultivate principled thinking based on a universal framework for ethical decision-making is recommended for all teachers.

Introduction

Humans share the planet with as many as 4700 species of mammals, 9700 species of birds, 4800 species of amphibeans, over 23,000 species of fish, and around 6000 species of reptiles (Compassion in World Farming (CIWF), 2007). Apart from their essential contribution to the intricate interdependence of life, animals have been used on an increasingly intensive scale as human population and technology have expanded.

In Australia, millions of animals are used for human purposes. Approximately 500 million animals are farmed for food annually (FAOSTAT, 2005). This does not include the millions of fish and other marine creatures such as oysters and prawns. Approximately 6.5 million are used each year for research purposes (Australian Association for Humane Research Inc., 2006). There are approximately 38 million companion animals in 63% of Australian households (Australian Companion Animal Council, 2006).

Animal ethics, or how these animals ought to be treated, has had a long history. Preece (2007) presents detailed evidence that there has been considerable support for animals having souls, being sentient beings and not being created for human use, and that the debate on how animals should be treated has been contested throughout Western history.

However in the last 30 years, there has been a proliferation of concern in all areas of animal use and treatment, and a demand for a new ethic. Rollin suggests five possible reasons for this:

• The rise of confinement agriculture and biomedical research both of which have led to suffering on a scale far greater than acts of deliberate cruelty.
  
  
• An increase in ethical sensitivity to disenfranchised human groups which inevitably grew to include animals.
  
  
• Fewer people making their living directly from animals, so that the social paradigm for an animal is based on companion animals, which are viewed as “members of the family.”
  
  
• An increasingly urban public with a fascination with animals.
  
  
• Extremely bright and articulate people, including philosophers and scientists, who have written persuasively and intelligently about a new ethic for animals (Armstrong & Botzler, 2003)
  
  

Animal capabilities and the ethical issues concerning humans treatment of animals have become increasingly prominent not only in philosophy (Regan, 2004; Singer, 1991; Singer & Mason, 2006; Sunstein & Nussbaum, 2004) and science (Bekoff, 2003; Brown, Laland, & Krause, 2006; De Waal, 1996; Duncan, 2005; Ford, 1999; Fraser & Preece, 2004; Griffin, 1976; Rollin, 1989, 1995), but also in animal protection law (Francione, 1996; Wise, 2002).

It would seem hard to imagine that such a proliferation of concern and interest would not ensure the inclusion of animal ethics in relevant core school curricula such as the Social Sciences, Science and even English (in which skills of communication are partly taught through topical issues). The National Goals for Schooling include developing the capacity “to exercise judgment and responsibility in matters of morality, ethics and social justice”(MCEETYA, 1999). The National Framework for Values Education in Australian Schools (MCEETYA, 2005) identifies core values such as care and compassion, integrity, and respect, which are highly relevant to animal ethics.

However, a close examination of the relevant Queensland school syllabuses for Years 1 -10 and relevant Australian national education frameworks revealed that animal ethics has a peripheral, almost non-existent position, incommensurate with the current levels of animal use and related public, scientific and philosophical interest and concern.

An analysis of the research literature revealed considerable data from other countries about students’ generally humane but often inconsistent attitudes toward different groups of animals. However there appeared to be limited research on students’ attitudes to how humans ought to treat animals i.e. animal ethics, and no research was found on teachers’ attitudes to animal ethics or its inclusion in the curriculum.

The following research was therefore conducted in Queensland schools to investigate the knowledge and attitudes of teachers and students to animal ethics and its inclusion in the curriculum.

Research method

A questionnaire was administered to 97 teachers and 343 students from 10 schools. Year 7 students and teachers and Year 10 students and secondary humanities and science teachers were included in the study. While it was originally intended to conduct research in both urban and rural schools, delays in gaining permission to conduct the research in schools resulted in time constraints, so 90% of participants were from city suburban areas. However, 35% had lived in a farming community and all the students in one of the five secondary schools had exposure to Agricultural Science. 91% were from the State school sector. 56% were female.

The questionnaire was predominantly quantitative. Likert-type five point scales were used to ascertain attitudes (ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree), knowledge (ranging from no knowledge to a great deal of knowledge) and interest (ranging from no interest to very interested). The scaling of inclusion of animals in schools was determined by a continuum ranging from “not included” to “more than 20 lessons”. Some attitude statements were reverse-framed to prevent pre-judgment of response sequences or survey bias. All questionnaires were anonymous and confidential.

Each questionnaire was structured similarly with between 82 and 109 questions. The research questions covered:

• What are the attitudes of students and teachers to how animals should be treated by humans in general?
  
  
• What are the attitudes of students and teachers to current specific treatments of animals?
  
  
• What do students and teachers know about the abilities of animals and how they are treated?
  
  
• How interested are students and teachers in how animals are treated?
  
  
• What do students and teachers think should be taught about animals?
  
  
• What is being taught in schools about the abilities of animals and how animals are treated?
  
  
• To what extent do teachers have the skills, confidence, training, resources and interest, for teaching ethics and animal ethics?
  
  
• What do students and teachers think about various uses of living and non-living animals in schools?
  
  
• To what extent are living and non-living animals currently used in schools?
  
  
  
  AAWS International Animal Welfare Conference | Next page