Eighth-grade students’ perceptions of biotechnology: A case study

The aim of this qualitative study, which was based on a case study conducted in a primary school in Turkey, was to examine eighth-grade students’ perceptions of biotechnological issues in terms of social, ethic and economic aspects. The study sample consisted of 18 eighth grade students. The data were collected with videotapes and an open-ended questionnaire. A content analysis was conducted on the transcripts of videotapes through a model of analytical induction, which sought to extract the implicit conceptions about several aspects under study. As a result of the analysis of data from the open-ended questionnaire and videotapes, it was found that the students did not truly understand what biotechnology is and they had uncertain views about the social, ethic and economic effects of biotechnology on their daily lives. The advantages of genetic engineering of both plants and animals which were most commonly affirmed by the students were improved storage properties and improved growth although fewer students thought that these qualities were true of plant products. Most of the students were strongly supportive of medical applications of biotechnology to avoid genetic diseases.


Bal, Ş., & Keskin, N. (2002, September). Evaluation of students’ attitudes and opinions about genetic engineering applications by means of group discussion. 5th National Congress of Science and Mathematics Education. Ankara: ODTU. (16-18 September) Retrieved from www.fedu.metu.edu.tr/UFBMEK-5/b_kitabi/PD in 20.10.2010

Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (1992). Qualitative research for education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Chen, S.Y. & Raffan, J. (1999). Biotechnology: Students’ knowledge and attitudes in the UK and Taiwan. Journal of Biological Education, 34(1), 17-23.

Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Darçın, E. S. & Güven, T. (2008). Development of an attitude measure oriented to biotechnology for the pre-service science teachers, Turkish Science Education, 5 (3), 72-81.

Dawson V (2007) An exploration of high school (12-17 year old) students’ understandings of, and attitudes towards biotechnology processes. Research in Science Education 37(1):59–73

Dawson, V., & Schibeci, R. (2003). Western Australian high school students’ attitudes towards biotechnology process. Journal of Biological Education 38(1), 7-12.

Dawson, V. & Taylor, P. (2000). Do adolescent’s bioethical decisions differ from those of experts? Journal of Biological Education, 34, 1-5.

Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Bristol, PA: Open University Press.

Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.

Gardner, G. E. & Jones, M. G. (2011) Science instructors’ perceptions of the risks of biotechnology: Implications for science education, Research in Science Education, DOI 10.1007/s11165-010-9187-0

Gunter, B., Kinderlerer, J.,& Beyleveld, D. (1998). Teenagers and biotechnology: A survey of understanding and opinion in Britain. Studies in Science Education, 32, 81-112

Hammerich, P. (2000). Confronting students’ conceptions of the nature of science with cooperative controversy. In W. McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (pp. 127-136). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Hill R, Stanisstreet M, Boyes E, & Sullivan O. (1998) Reactions to a new technology: students’ ideas about genetically engineered foodstuffs. Research in Science and Technology Education 16(2):203-216

Hill, R., Stanisstreet, M., O’Sullivan, H. & Boyes, E. (1999) Genetic engineering of animals for medical research: Students’ views, School Science Review, 80(293): 23-9.

Hladnik, H. C., Peklaj, C:, Košmelj, K., Hladnik, A & Javornik, B. (2009). Assessment of Slovene secondary school students’ attitudes to biotechnology in terms of usefulness, moral acceptability and risk perception, Public Understanding of Science, 18(6), 747- 758.

Inaba, M. & Macer, D. (2003). Attitudes to biotechnology in Japan in 2003. Eubios Journal of Asia and International Bioethics, 13, 78-90.

Kolstø, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socio-scientific issues. Science Education, 85(3), 291-310.

Kolstø, S. D.(2006) 'Patterns in students' argumentation confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issues', International Journal of Science Education, 28 (14), 1689-1716

Laugksch, R. (2000). Scientific literacy: a conceptual overview. Science and Education, 84, 71-94.

Lee, H., Abd-El-Khalick, F. & Choi, K. (2006) Korean science teachers' perceptions of the introduction of socio-scientific issues into the science curriculum, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 6: 2, 97-117

Levinson, R. (2001). Should controversial issues in science be taught through the humanities? School Science Review, 82(300), 97-102.

Levinson, R. & Turner, S. (2001). The teaching of social and ethical issues in the school curriculum, arising from developments in biomedical research: A research study of teachers. London: Institute of Education, University of London.

Levinson, R. (2004). Teaching bioethics in science: Crossing a bridge too far? Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 4(3), 353-369.

Lewis, J., Driver, R., Leach, J., & Wood-Robinson, C. (1997). Young people’s understanding of, and attitudes to the new genetics project. Working Paper 2: Understanding of basic genetics and DNA technology (A): The Written Probes. University of Leeds, Centre for Studies in Science and Mathematics Education, Learning in Science Research Group.

Lewis J, Wood-Robinson C (2000) Genes, chromosomes, cell division and inheritance-do students see any relationship? International Journal of Science Education, 22, 177-195

Lock, R. & Miles, C. (1993). Biotechnology and genetic engineering: students’ knowledge and attitudes. Journal of Biological Education, 27, 267-273.

Marbach-Ad (2001) Attempting to break the code in student comprehension of genetic concepts. Journal of Biology Education, 35(4):183-189

Marlier E (1992) Euro barometer: Opinions of Europeans on biotechnology in 1991. In: Durant J (ed) Biotechnology in public: A review of recent research. Science Museum Publications, London

Massarani, L. & Moreira, I. (2005). Attitudes towards genetics: A case study among Brazilian high school students. Public Understanding of Science, 14, 201-212

Mohapatra, A. K., Priyadarshini, D. & Biswas, A.( 2010). Genetically modified food: Knowledge and attitude of teachers and students, Journal of Science Education Technology, 19, 489-497.

MEB (2008). Primary Education Science and Technology Course Curriculum. Ankara.

Millar, R.& Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: Kings College.

Monk, M. & Dillon, J. (2000). The nature of scientific knowledge. In R. Millar, J. Leach and J. Osborn (Eds.), Good practice in science teaching: What research has to say (pp. 72-87). Buckingham: Open University Press.

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2006). Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy: A framework for PISA 2006. Paris: OECD.

Osborne, J. (1997, September). Science education for the future-The road ahead? Paper presented at the ESERA Conference, Rome, Italy.

Özel, M.; Erdoğan M.; Uşak, M.; Prokop, P. (2009). High school students’ knowledge and attitudes regarding biotechnology applications. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 9 (1), 297-328.

Prokop, P., Leškova, A., Kubiatko, M. & Diran, C. (2007) Slovakian students’ knowledge of and attitude toward biotechnology, International Journal of Science Education, 29(7): 895-907.

Qin, W. & Brown, J. L. (2007). Public reactions to information about genetically engineered foods: Effects of information formats and male/female differences, Public Understanding of Science, 16; 471-88.

Reis, P. and Galvão, C. (2004). The impact of socio-scientific controversies in Portuguese natural science teachers’ conceptions and practices. Research in Science Education, 34(2), 153-171.

Reis, P. & Galvão, C. (2009). Teaching controversial socio-scientific issues in Biology and Geology classes: A case study, Electronic Journal of Science Education, 13 (1), Retrieved from http://ejse.southwestern.edu

Reis, M. & Straughan, R. (1996) Improving nature? The science and ethics of genetic engineering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sadler, T.D. (2004). Moral sensitivity and its contribution to the resolution of socioscientific issues. Journal of Moral Education, 33(3), 339-358.

Sadler, T. D. & Zeidler, D. L.(2009) Scientific literacy, PISA, and Socioscientific discourse: Assessment for progressive aims of science education, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 909-921.

Saher M, Lindeman M, & Hursti U. K. (2006) Attitude towards genetically modified and organic foods. Appetite 46(3):324-331

Seethaler S, & Linn M (2004) Genetically modified food in perspective: an inquiry based curriculum to help middle school students make sense of tradeoffs. International Journal of Science Education, 26(14):1765-1785

Simmons, M.L. & Zeidler, D.L. (2003). Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific issues. In D.L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning and discourse on socioscientific issues in science education (pp. 81-94). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.

Stewart J. H. & Van Kirk J (1990) Understanding and problem solving in classical genetics. International Journal of Science Education, 12: 575-588.

Sürmeli, H. & Şahin, F. (2009). University students’ attitudes towards biotechnological studies, Çukurova University Journal of Faculty of Education, 3(37), 33-45.

Türkmen, L., & Darçın, E. S. (2007). A comparative study of Turkish elementary and science education major students’ knowledge levels at the popular biotechnological issues. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 2 (4), 125-131.

Wolfensberger, B., Piniel, J., Canella, C. & Kyburz-Graber,R. (2010). The challenge of involvement in reflective teaching: Three case studies from a teacher education project on conducting classroom discussion on socio-scientific issues, Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 714-721

Zeidler, D. (2003). The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.

Zeidler, D.L., & Keefer, M. (2003). The role of moral reasoning and the status of socioscientific issues in science education. In: D.L. Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education (pp. 7-39). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Zeidler, D.L., & Sadler, T.D. (2008). Social and ethical issues in science education: A prelude to action. Science and Education, 17, 799-803.

Zeidler, D.L., Sadler, T.D., Simmons, M.L., & Howes, E.V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89, 357-377.

Zeidler, D.L., Sadler, T.D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 74-101.

Kaynak Göster