Preservice Biology Teachers’ Beliefs About Evidence-Based Medicine and Alternative Medicine

Author:

Schmidt ElviraORCID,Zeyer AlbertORCID,Kremer KerstinORCID

Abstract

AbstractHealth-related discussions in society and the media—specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic—showed that individuals are confronted with Alternative Medicine and Evidence-Based Medicine. When making reflective decisions about these treatments, both knowledge and beliefs are important. Previous research with preservice biology teachers has shown that they commonly use Alternative Medicine, although they have little knowledge about it. To date, systematic studies on preservice biology teachers’ beliefs about Alternative Medicine and Evidence-Based Medicine are lacking. Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior, the present study elicited German (N = 40) preservice biology teachers’ beliefs about these treatments via an open-ended questionnaire. Behavioral, normative, and control beliefs were categorized using qualitative content analysis. The results showed that the participants mentioned the efficacy, scientificity, and safety of treatments as important beliefs. For Alternative Medicine, beliefs were related to scientific evidence for its efficacy, naturalness and mild effects. These beliefs indicate that some preservice biology teachers do not have a clear understanding of Evidence-Based Medicine and Alternative Medicine, which can influence their decision-making. The results highlight the need to incorporate Alternative Medicine and Evidence-Based Medicine into health-related decision-making within biology education and biology teacher education and provide a basis for further research.

Funder

Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference107 articles.

1. Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2023). Research on teaching, learning, and assessment of nature of science. In Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 850–898). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367855758-32

2. Ajzen, I. (2005). Attitudes, personality, and behavior (2nd ed.). Open University Press.

3. Ajzen, I. (2011). Behavioral interventions: Design and evaluation guided by theory of planned behaviour. In M. Mark, S. Donaldson, & B. Campbell (Eds.), Social psychology program and policy evaluation (pp. 74–100). Guildford.

4. Akbar, S. (2020). Handbook of 200 Medicinal Plants. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16807-0

5. Allchin, D. (2013). Teaching the nature of science: Perspectives & resources. Ships Education Press.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3