Doctor

150

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL EDUCATION, VOLUME 45, NUMBER 3, SEPTEMBER 2011

Research paper
The reasoned arguments of a group of future biotechnology technicians on a controversial socio-scientific issue: human gene therapy
Laurence Simonneauxa and Habib Chouchaneb
a b

´ UMR EFTS, ENFA, Universite de Toulouse, BP 22687, 31326 Castanet-Tolosan cedex, France; ´ Universite de Gafsa, Gafsa,Tunisia

We tried to determine the reasoning behind the stances taken by a group of 19–21-year-old students on the controversial issue of the feasibility and acceptability of human gene therapy. The students were in training at a biotechnology institute. We organised classroom debates, punctuated by phases of epistemological ‘disturbances’. We used a variety of resources from authentic genetictherapy cases. We also worked on the reconsideration of Crick’s model on the basis of recent results in molecular genetics and genomics. We stimulated critical analysis by presenting texts on the failure of gene therapies. This also encouraged the students to evaluate the empirical evidence, in the light of current molecular biology data that challenges Crick’s dogma. We observed an increase in theintensity of the argumentation. According to Habermas, in all the didactic situations forms of communicative action are used less frequently, whereas forms of strategic action are the most prevalent. However, we found that in the case of the final situation, the students’ discourse was more in keeping with communicative action than in the other situations.
Keywords: socio-scientific issue; genetherapy; debate; argumentation; communicative action

1.

Theoretical background
So, it is important to empower students so that they can deal with making choices and taking action regarding the use of genetic technology in human gene therapy. It is, more particularly, a question of encouraging data interpretation, the evaluation of empirical evidence and of what the experts say. In the eyes ofLewis and Leach (2006), students could be prepared more effectively for their future involvement in SSIs if the explicit teaching of the nature of science were developed. This would help them both to understand how scientific facts become accepted as such and to determine the limits of science. Kolstø (2001) considers that what students lack is sufficient knowledge of the scientific institutions.Kolstø recommends lending more weight to providing detailed background information. Along the same lines, Bingle and Gaskell (1994) suggest studying the context

Generally speaking, the teaching of socio-scientific issues (SSIs) aims to enable students to identify, assess and form a reasoned opinion on a complex problem. We share the view with several other authors (Sadler 2004; Zeidler et al. 2002;Simonneaux 2010) that it is necessary to provide tools to help students master the SSIs that model their present-day world. This is even more important when what you are teaching is actually linked to their future profession. As Simonneaux (2010, 81) points out: ‘each pupil is or will be faced with taking decisions on CSSIs (controversial socioscientific issues), school must prepare them for this’.For this author the challenge is ‘to train individuals in research methods, their applications and potential impact and to develop their ability to participate in debates and to make reasoned decisions when the facts are uncertain’ (Simonneaux 2003, 189).

´ Corresponding author. Laurence Simonneaux, UMR EFTS, ENFA, Universite de Toulouse, BP 22687, 31326 CastanetTolosan cedex, France. Email:laurence.simonneaux@educagri.fr

Journal of Biological Education ISSN 0021-9266 print/ISSN 2157-6009 online Ó 2011 Society of Biology http://www.informaworld.com DOI: 10.1080/00219266.2011.582878

____________________________________________________________________________ RESEARCH PAPER in which scientific knowledge is established (source of financing, personal prestige, etc.). Larochelle and...