Abstract
AbstractThis study explores the socio-scientific issue of the relevance of animal experimentation using a role-playing game to develop argumentation and decision-making skills as key components of critical thinking. The activity was conducted with two cohorts, each consisting of 30 pre-service early childhood education teachers at the University of Málaga (Málaga, Spain). The study analyzes the arguments provided by the participants to justify their decisions and perceptions on the issue before and after engaging in the role-playing. The findings reveal a progression of participants from the initial rejection of animal experimentation to recognizing its imperative role in shaping scientific knowledge. Additionally, an enhancement in the understanding of rational aspects of the issue is detected, as observed through the evolution of the types of arguments employed in justifications before and after the intervention. Furthermore, emotionally charged arguments related to ethical and moral aspects of the issue are also observed.
Funder
Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación
Universidad de Málaga
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference107 articles.
1. Agell, L., Soria, V., & Carrió, M. (2015). Using role play to debate animal testing. Journal of Biological Education, 49, 309–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2014.943788
2. Abbott, A. (2010). Basel declaration defends animal research. Nature, 468, 743.
3. Akhtar, A. (2015). The flaws and human harms of animal experimentation. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics: The International Journal of Healthcare Ethics Committees, 24(4), 407–419. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180115000079
4. Andrews, R. (2015). Critical thinking and/or argumentation in higher education. In M. Davies & R. Barnett (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher education (pp. 729–780). Palgrave Macmillan.
5. Archila, P. A. (2017). Using drama to promote argumentation in science education. The case of “should’ve”. Science & Education, 26, 345–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9901-7