The Impact of Introducing Computer-based Alternatives to the Use of Animals in the Teaching of Physiology and Pharmacology at Balkan Universities

Abstract

Balkan universities use a substantial number of small mammals and amphibians in the teaching of physiology and pharmacology. This project investigated whether making computer-based alternatives readily available, and combining this availability with a staff development workshop focusing on methods of integrating such resources into undergraduate curricula, would have any effect on animal use. Teachers from 20 Institutes (from five Balkan countries) participated in the workshop. They presented information about animal use in teaching in their universities, and agreed to introduce at least one computer-based alternative into their teaching in the following year. They were surveyed by questionnaire before, during, and one year after, attending the workshop, in order to estimate any changes in animal use. The results showed a significant (P < 0.01) reduction in animal use and a high level of implementation of the alternatives provided at the workshop. Teachers recognised the potential benefits of using computers to support their teaching. They lacked knowledge about what computer-based alternatives are available and how to find information about them, including published evidence of their educational effectiveness. In this pilot study, a combination of staff development and making alternatives readily available to teachers had a significant impact on animal use in the teaching of physiology and pharmacology.

Keywords

alternatives animal use computer-assisted learning pharmacology education physiology education

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Casati

& Hartung

(2003). Third report of the EU on experimental animal numbers. ALTEX 20, 93.

Grindon

(2005). The fourth EC report on laboratory animal use — is it sufficiently revealing? ATLA 33, 1–2.

Sauer

U.G.

, Spielmann

& Rusche

(2005). Fourth EU Report on the statistics on the number of animals used for scientific purposes in 2002 —trends, problems, conclusions. ALTEX 22, 59–67.

Gruber

F.P.

& Dewhurst

D.G.

(2004). Alternatives to animal experimentation in biomedical education. ALTEX 21, 33–48.

Leathard

H.L.

& Dewhurst

D.G.

(1995). Comparison of the cost-effectiveness of a computer assisted learning program with a tutored demonstration to teach intestinal motility to medical students. Association for Learning Technology 3, 118–125.

Fawver

A.L.

, Branch

C.E.

, Trentham

, Robertson

B.T.

& Beckett

S.D.

(1990). A comparison of interactive videodisc instruction with live animal laboratories. American Journal of Physiology 259 (Advances in Physiology Education 4), S11–14.

Dewhurst

D.G.

, Hardcastle

P.T.

& Stuart

(1994). Comparison of a computer simulation program and a traditional laboratory practical class for teaching the principles of intestinal absorption. American Journal of Physiology 267 (6 Pt 3), 95–104.

Jukes

& Martinsen

(2006). The InterNICHE policy on the use of animals and alternatives in education. ALTEX 23, Suppl., 58–62.

Jukes

(2006). Internationalising alternatives in higher education. ALTEX 23, Suppl., 63–67.

10.

van der Valk

(2006). Educating scientists on alternatives. A continuous process. ALTEX 23, Suppl., 81–84.

11.

Ruksenas

(2006). Animals and alternatives in biomedical education in the Baltics. ALTEX 23, Suppl., 78–80.

12.

Cervinka

, Rudolf

& Cervinkova

(2006). Alternatives to animal experimentation in undergraduate curricula at medical schools — analysis of current trends in the Czech Republic. ALTEX 23, Suppl., 46–50.

13.

Jukes

(2008). Russia: update on animal experiments and alternatives in education. ALTEX 25, 56–62.

14.

Sladowski

& Halder

(2002). ECVAM's activities in the EU candidate countries. ATLA 30, 203–205.

15.

Jukes

(2006). UK/EU: alternatives progress in Russia and Ukraine. ALTEX 23, 223–225.

16.

Sheffield BioScience Programs. Edinburgh, UK: D. Dewhurst. Available at: www.sheffbp.co.uk (Accessed 28.09.09).

17.

Markham

, Jones

S.J.

, Hughes

& Sutcliffe

(1998). Survey of methods of teaching and learning in undergraduate pharmacology within the UK higher education. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences 19, 257–262.

18.

Hughes

I.E.

(2001). Do computer simulations of laboratory practicals meet learning needs? Trends in Pharmacological Sciences 22, 71–74.

19.

Dewhurst

(2007). Is it possible to meet the learning objectives of undergraduate pharmacology classes with non-animal models? Proceedings of the 6th World Congress on Alternatives & Animal Use in the Life Sciences, August 21–25, 2007, Tokyo, Japan.

AATEX

14, Special Issue, 207–212.

20.

Clarke

(1987). The use of microcomputer simulations in undergraduate neurophysiology experiments. ATLA 14, 134–140.

21.

Dewhurst

D.G.

, Brown

G.J.

& Meehan

A.S.

(1988). Microcomputer simulations of laboratory experiments in physiology. ATLA 15, 280–289.

22.

Dewhurst

& Jenkinson

(1995). The impact of computer-based alternatives on the use of animals in undergraduate teaching: a pilot study. ATLA 23, 521–530.

23.

Guy

& Frisby

(1992). Using interactive video-discs to teach gross anatomy to undergraduates at the Ohio State University. Academic Medicine 67, 132–133.

24.

Kinzie

M.B.

, Strauss

& Foss

(1993). The effects of an interactive simulation on the performance and achievement of high school biology students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30, 989–1000.

25.

Knight

(2007) The effectiveness of humane teaching methods in veterinary education. ALTEX 24, 91–109.

26.

Hollingsworth

, Hughes

& Dewhurst

D.G.

(1999). Implementing technology-based teaching and learning in pharmacology. British Journal of Pharmacology Supplement 128, 303.

27.

Hollingsworth

, Dewhurst

D.G.

, Kelly

M.E.

& Norris

T.M.

(2001). Teaching & learning resource pack on the drug targets and G-protein coupled receptors as drug targets computer assisted learning packages. Fundamental & Clinical Pharmacology Abstracts of the 3rd Meeting of the Federation of the European Pharmacological Societies (EPHAR) 15, 1, 26, 9PO22.

28.

Norris

T.M.

& Dewhurst

D.G.

(2002). A multi-site evaluation of a project to implement CAL in undergraduate pharmacology teaching. British Journal of Pharmacology Supplement 135, 150.

The Impact of Introducing Computer-based Alternatives to the Use of Animals in the Teaching of Physiology and Pharmacology at Balkan Universities — A Pilot Study

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References