ESU / Liberal Arts & Sciences / Biology /

home
page
Index of Issues  |   Issues in Other Languages   |   Requests  |   Staff

KSN
Volume 36
Number 3
February 1990
(Reprint of 1991 issue)
ISSN: 0022-877X


ABOUT THIS ISSUE
- about KSN
-
about the author

IN THIS ISSUE
- introduction
- "arguments" voiced by opponents of dissection
- will you have a 'Jenifer'?
- general strategies
- guidelines for good dissections
- the "hammer test"
- wherein lies "meaning"?
- sensory scale
- developing students' powers of observation
- vivisection
- shortcomings of "alternatives"
- palpation
- the modern muscle misconception - a case for reality
- the text and the lab
- lysenko - the case against abstractions
- student blood labs
- what is wrong with the NABT polcy on dissection?
- consequences of eliminating the real experience base
- summary
- further reading
- read this - it concerns your future


This page was last modified:
November 8, 2003 3:30 PM

Originally posted:
March 19, 2003


 

Dissection
by John Richard Schrock


GUIDELINES FOR GOOD DISSECTIONS

A biology teacher who limits students to outlining the book and answering questions at the end of the chapter is a lousy teacher--but we do not discard the textbooks. Likewise, a teacher who conducts a "parts-is-parts" dissection lab is a lousy teacher, but hardly an argument to discontinue dissections.
I recall observing student teachers at separate schools conduct the same cow eyeball dissection lab. Both had secured fresh eyes from local slaughterhouses. The young man matter-of-factly held up a specimen and systematically walked through the steps in the dissection and listed all the items students were to look for. The ninth-graders worked away as he patrolled the classroom, answering questions and making sure nothing "got out of hand." It was an adequate lesson. Two days later I observed the second student teacher with equivalent classroom facilities and similar students. She very carefully withdrew the eyeball from the container and, using essentially the same words, summarized the procedure. In the way she handled the eye, every student noticed the care and respect she had. This was not a "piece of meat" but a delicate and complex structure to be handled with care. And the students assumed this same careful manner as they delicately explored the lens and retina. A good teacher is enthusiastic and we can expect this enthusiasm and respect to be contagious in the classroom.

THE TEACHER MUST:
- Maintain a classroom atmosphere that is safe and free of horseplay and "teasing."
- Provide materials and equipment that are adequate and relatively safe.
- Maintain an intellectual atmosphere where students know why they are involved in the chosen learning activities and feel free to inquire and explore.
- Answer students' questions honestly, with more regard for reality than authority.

THE STUDENT SHOULD:
- Dissect as though everything will have to be put back together.
- If you don't know what a part is, don't remove it until you have identified it; what it is connected to helps you identify it.
- Pull apart rather than cut apart; you want to see whole units first.
- Remove skin or membranes in layers, pulling the top layers up with forceps or fingers and separating this from underlying tissue by using the scalpel handle or blade.
- Use "razor sharp" blades, scalpels, or scissors at all grade levels; dull blades cause students to saw and use unnecessary force that likely may result in cuts to the student.



Next Section:
- the "hammer test"

  The Kansas School Naturalist |  Department of Biology
College of Liberal Arts & Sciences  |   Emporia State University

© Copyright 1977-2002 Terms of Use  |  Privacy