|
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

DEVELOPING
STUDENTS' POWERS OF OBSERVATION
A
student who has a rich supply of real experiences
is easy to teach; a teacher's words are more meaningful
and explanations trigger memories and unanswered questions:
"Aha, so that is why . . . ."Once a student
builds this additional understanding, the student
in turn pays closer attention to additional related
experiences--actually "sees more." This
is why an athlete pays closer attention when you explain
muscles or why a farm kid lingers longer in front
of a museum display of a hawk. At one time, our school
children were experience-rich (about the natural world)
and we provided the information that made it all come
together. Today we must provide both the information
and the experience base to make it meaningful.
Beyond
the senses that frame our experiences are three properties
of outside experiences that are relied upon to develop
an accurate mental map of the world using a scientific
"attitude."
INTERACTION--The
old teaching machines and their modern computer counterparts
claim to be "interactive" based on one property:
they provide a different response to the varied student
input at the keyboard. But interacting with a real
"liver" does not feel or taste or smell
or sound like a keyboard and only partly resembles
the visual image presented. If there were true interaction,
we could fully teach students to drive or swim at
a computer terminal. Obviously the bumps of the road,
the jerks of the steering wheel, and the buoyancy
of the water are essential interactive experiences
to driving and swimming.
TEST
TRUTHFULNESS--Once we reach out to poke and prod (interact
with) the real world, we watch carefully for what
happens. We get much additional information about
our world this way. But the back of a photo doesn't
show you the other side of the liver. And the plastic
model does not have live cell structure. But the dissected
animal does "test true:" it shows the other
side, the microstructures, and anything else you want
to ask of it well beyond what the teacher or textbook
author ever anticipated. There is nothing more misleading
than a fruit fly computer "lab" that gives
exact 3:1 offspring from a hybrid cross. Computer
"dissections" are also false in their "perfection."
A small percentage of humans (and animals) are right-left
reversed. A larger number have four instead of two
kidneys. Abnormalities are an added bonus in real
labs.
REAL
CONSEQUENCES--In the real world, if your knowledge
is wrong, you suffer the consequences. If you make
a driving error, you have a wreck.
If
you open your mouth underwater, you cough and sputter.
But this does not happen when you use all those abstract
"alternatives." Students sheltered by an
abstract curriculum not only remember less, they don't
worry about the consequences of not knowing. Personally,
I am glad that marginally competent drivers have to
suffer the consequences of their accidents, for that
is the only factor that keeps them on their side of
the road. Likewise, our safety during epidemics of
contagious diseases relies on a general minimal level
of biological and medical understanding in the public
at large. And we individually suffer (perhaps die)
if we do not know a pain in the lower abdomen may
be appendicitis and not a stomachache. Dissections
and tours of slaughterhouses and hospitals add the
vital dimension of "real consequences" that
is desperately lacking in much of U.S. education today.
VIVISECTION
involves dissecting or cutting into an animal while
it is alive. For some reason, the term is not used when
we cut living plant matter, as when we "dissect"
flowers in biology labs (the tissues are kept alive by
immersing stems in water), cut bouquets, harvest living
crops, or even peel (living) potatoes. The major uses
of vivisection are:
- basic research in biochemistry and physiology,
- applied research in the causes and treatments of
animal and human diseases,
- testing of trial surgical techniques and drug effects,
- testing of toxic effects of commercial non-medical
products,
- specialized medical education including surgical
techniques, and
- general biology education for all students.

Next
Section:
- shortcomings of "alternatives"
- palpation
|