Biotechnology Education Educational Awareness of Biotechnology Issues among Undergraduate Students at s the United Arab Emirates Universityw
Synan AbuQamar†* Qasim Alshannag‡ Abdelaziz Sartawi§ Rabah Iratni†
From the †Department of Biology, United Arab Emirates University, AlAin, United Arab Emirates, ‡Department of Curriculum and Instructions, United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates, §Department of Special Education, United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates
Abstract Due to its valuable benefits and potential risks, there is a progressing debate among opponents and proponents of biotechnology in recent decades. Previous studies have shown that lack of knowledge about biotechnology remains the concern about genetically modified organisms/food (GMO/ GMF). This study assessed levels of educational awareness perceptions and attitudes of United Arab Emirates University (UAEU) students towards biotechnology. An electronic survey including literacy, environmental, social, and economic domains associated with biotechnology was administered to obtain data from undergraduate students in different colleges of the university. Responses from students (n 5 1,104) were gathered and statistically analyzed. Results indicated that educational awareness in biotechnology literacy and environmental domains were significantly different according to the enrolled college and the academic achievement of
the student. In general, a poor overall performance of our students’ understanding was concluded. Aware groups most likely accepted accurate biotechnology information delivered by reliable sources from internet or lectures; they grasped their knowledge from surrounding people as a secondary source. Since UAEU students have several concept misunderstandings of biotechnology and its ethics, our results suggest that awareness plays a crucial role in forming a “clearcut” opinion about this technology. Because education can shape public attitudes toward biotechnology, priorities on university curricula and teaching strategies should be extensively given, and therefore, improve in respect to this topic. Ultimately, this promotes the students’ perception in underC 2015 by The International standing the new technology. V Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 43(4):283– 293, 2015.
Keywords: biotechnology; education; ethical analysis; UAE
Abbreviations: CBE, College of Business and Economics; CFA, College of Food and Agriculture; CHSS, College of Humanities and Social Sciences; CIT, College of Information Technology; COE, College of Engineering; COS, College of Science; GM, genetically modified; GMF, genetically modified food; GMO, genetically modified organisms; GPA, grade point average; IEPSU, Institutional Effectiveness and Planning Support Unit; rDNA, recombinant DNA; SD, standard deviation; UAEU, United Arab Emirates University *Address for correspondence to: Department of Biology, United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates. E-mail: [email protected]. Received 10 December 2014; Accepted 25 January 2015 Grant sponsor: UAEU; Grant number: COS/IRG-05/14. Grant sponsor: Khalifa Center for Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering-UAEU; Grant number: KCGEB-2-2013. w s Additional Supporting Information may be found in the online version of this article. DOI 10.1002/bmb.20863 Published online 18 March 2015 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com)
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education
Introduction Modern Biotechnology, also called recombinant DNA (rDNA) technology, is a term which focuses on the manipulation of an organism’s DNA. This genetic revolution is a big benefit to the advancement of our culture; however, a multitude of ethical and moral issues should be taken into consideration [1]. For example, expecting parents could “choose” the potential traits/characteristics of their future children. The outcome and direction of this technology will be influenced by our society. A teacher’s role is to pass this important piece of information onto the next generations of students because they are the future [2]. Therefore, increasing public awareness to tilt opinion and adopt biotechnology has become a priority. Recently, biotechnology has shown great “footprint” on the environmental and medical industries. Genetic transformation in organisms, and its application on the environment has greatly helped in the sustenance of the
283
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education agricultural and food industries [3–5]. In agriculture, biotechnology has generated genetically modified (GM) crops, so-called gene revolution [6]. Golden rice is an example of GM rice (Oryza sativa) which its nutritional values have been genetically improved to save thousands of children who suffer from vitamin A deficiency in developing countries [7]. GM crops possessing herbicide tolerance allow farmers to virtually kill all weeds without affecting the main crop [8]. In addition, crops expressing proteins from the bacteria, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), are widely used for crop tolerance to insects [9]. Biofuel is a source of “green” energy that uses living things or the waste that living things produce [10]. In medicine, biotechnology has found its way in many areas, such as pharmaceutical drug discovery and production, and genetic screening [11, 12]. The human insulin was massively produced from genetically-engineered bacterium at relatively low cost [11]. The development and application of this emerging technology have potential impacts on the social and economic welfare [13–15]. Biotechnology affects human beings and society deeply over a long period of time. As such, biotechnology along with its powerful means reduce the world’s constraints in various fields of food, energy, health, and environment [16]. On the other hand, biotechnology may negatively affect human health, environment, and eventually socio-economics. Such socio-economic crisis destroy cultural, social and economic pattern, pose threats to biodiversity, squander natural crop varieties, inflict the socioeconomic nature of a country, and abuse traditional ethical values. Regulations and laws on biosafety issues and socioeconomics should be urgently formulated and set worldwide. Since college students are the future of any society, an established position of biotechnology is needed among the future decision-makers [17]. In the literature, eventhough there are several studies on biotechnology pertaining to consumers and producers, only a few have focused on the assessment of students’ educational awareness and attitude toward biotechnology. In most cases, younger students are less knowledgeable and less aware than adults in issues related to biotechnology [17–20]. The awareness of adults on the impact of biotechnology on food, health and environment was much greater than that of undergraduate students [17], suggesting a lack of information, knowledge or education among students. Experiences from American, Lithuanian, Slovakian and Turkish universities have shown that females are less accepting to the idea of biotechnology; and among those, education major students are found the least accepting [18–21]. Moreover, individuals from scientific background, mainly biological sciences, have been found to be aware of biotechnology compared to those of social background [18, 20]. This confirms that attending science classes, experiencing science labs and discussing with university professors positively influence the students’ knowledge in biotechnology [22]. One should pinpoint the
284
role of programs, media and surveys in better understanding of the scientific principles, related issues and potential benefits and risks of biotechnology to stimulate public debate around its applications [23, 24]. To date, no study has focused on the investigation of students’ knowledge and attitudes to biotechnology or GM crops in the UAE. The aim of this study was to examine UAEU undergraduate students’ educational awareness toward information and skills about biotechnology. This was accomplished by collecting data of students’ educational awareness levels to particular biotechnology domains depending on demographical differences; determining the self-satisfaction to the biotechnology information; and deciding students’ preferred information sources.
Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to assess levels of educational awareness of biotechnology issues among undergraduate students at UAEU by (a) comparing respondent groups to educational awareness levels of biotechnology on literacy (knowledge), environmental, social and economic domains according to gender, college, academic level, and GPA; (b) comparing perceptions of undergraduates toward biotechnology issues; (c) comparing self-acceptance levels of biotechnology practices among undergraduates; and (d) comparing sources utilized by undergraduates to form perceptions about biotechnology practices for the respondent groups.
Methodology A descriptive survey research method was used to collect data from undergraduate students in the UAEU in Al-Ain, UAE. Questions about the nature, incidence, or distribution of variables were asked [25]. The aim of this research was to discover the degree of educational awareness in the domains of biotechnology among UAEU students. The domains used in this study were literacy, environmental, social, and economical (Supporting Information Table S1). Literacy domain was used to assess the student’s general and basic knowledge in Biotechnology and its related issues. Students’ acceptance of agricultural biotechnology, mainly GM crops, was assessed in the environmental domain. While health risk, safety and regulations of biotechnology-based issues were evaluated using the social domain; the economical domain determines the impact of GM crops on the Emirati market and future careers. A descriptive research design was appropriate for determining the knowledge level, attitudes, and implementation of the study population.
Population and Sampling The sample of the study included 1,104 undergraduate students studying in UAEU during the academic year 2012– 2013, representing 11.2% of the total undergraduates’
Educational Awareness of Biotechnology Issues
population (N 5 9,868) at UAEU. The population frame was established by the Institutional Effectiveness and Planning Support Unit (IEPSU) directory at UAEU. The research survey was forwarded to each student email address containing a link of the survey in both languages: Arabic and English, followed with a reminder message. All returned survey (1,104) was considered as study sample.
TABLE 1
Demographic distribution of the participants in the survey
Classification
Number of students participateda Percentage
Instrument The instrument of the study was developed based on several instruments and studies focusing on similar domains of biotechnology educational awareness [21, 26–32]. The instrument was organized into three major sections. Section I requested demographic information of the participants including gender, college, academic level, and grade point average (GPA) (Table 1). Section II focused on the perceived level of knowledge and attitudes to the domains (previously mentioned) that students possess concerning biotechnology educational awareness issues and ethics. The final section requested sources utilized to learn about biotechnology by the undergraduate students; and overall self-evaluation about the educational awareness of biotechnology and its ethics. In this study, statements (Supporting Information Table S1) were scored based on five-point Likert scales from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Negative statements were reversed for calculating overall score. Regarding the reliability and validity of the instrument, the original form of this instrument was developed in English and later adapted into Arabic. It was independently translated by a researcher who was bilingual and knowledgeable in biotechnology. This translated version was reviewed by other two researchers to investigate the gaps between the translations. The revised instrument was presented to a panel of experts at the UAEU consisting of Scientific Research Ethics Committee and approved by the Director of Research and Graduate Studies Support (Ref. # VPRGS/63/2013). A panel of ten faculty members from the following Departments: Biology, Special Education, Curriculum and Instruction, and Psychology at the UAEU were consulted to evaluate the appropriateness of the language of the revised instrument as well as its inclusiveness of educational awareness and understanding ethical issues in biotechnology. Seven of the ten reviewers were required to agree on the appropriateness of each item to be included. In addition, the survey was validated by conducting a pilot study on 60 undergraduate students to determine their suggestions and recommendations. However, some items were modified in accordance with the reviewers and students’ recommendations and comments. The reliability for the internal consistency of all items of the survey using Cronbach’s alpha was 0.85. However, the reliability factors of the four domains: Biotechnology literacy, environmental, social and economic were: 0.82, 0.87, 0.85, and 0.85, respectively.
Synan AbuQamar et al.
(I) Gender Male
212
19.2
Female
892
80.8
Humanities and Social Sciences
252
22.8
Science
176
15.9
Education
75
6.8
Business and Economics
201
18.2
Law
61
5.5
Food and Agriculture
88
8.0
Engineering
203
18.4
Information Technology
48
4.3
First
210
19.0
Second
301
27.3
Third
257
23.3
Forth
220
19.9
Fifth
116
10.5
Synan AbuQamar†* Qasim Alshannag‡ Abdelaziz Sartawi§ Rabah Iratni†
From the †Department of Biology, United Arab Emirates University, AlAin, United Arab Emirates, ‡Department of Curriculum and Instructions, United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates, §Department of Special Education, United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates
Abstract Due to its valuable benefits and potential risks, there is a progressing debate among opponents and proponents of biotechnology in recent decades. Previous studies have shown that lack of knowledge about biotechnology remains the concern about genetically modified organisms/food (GMO/ GMF). This study assessed levels of educational awareness perceptions and attitudes of United Arab Emirates University (UAEU) students towards biotechnology. An electronic survey including literacy, environmental, social, and economic domains associated with biotechnology was administered to obtain data from undergraduate students in different colleges of the university. Responses from students (n 5 1,104) were gathered and statistically analyzed. Results indicated that educational awareness in biotechnology literacy and environmental domains were significantly different according to the enrolled college and the academic achievement of
the student. In general, a poor overall performance of our students’ understanding was concluded. Aware groups most likely accepted accurate biotechnology information delivered by reliable sources from internet or lectures; they grasped their knowledge from surrounding people as a secondary source. Since UAEU students have several concept misunderstandings of biotechnology and its ethics, our results suggest that awareness plays a crucial role in forming a “clearcut” opinion about this technology. Because education can shape public attitudes toward biotechnology, priorities on university curricula and teaching strategies should be extensively given, and therefore, improve in respect to this topic. Ultimately, this promotes the students’ perception in underC 2015 by The International standing the new technology. V Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 43(4):283– 293, 2015.
Keywords: biotechnology; education; ethical analysis; UAE
Abbreviations: CBE, College of Business and Economics; CFA, College of Food and Agriculture; CHSS, College of Humanities and Social Sciences; CIT, College of Information Technology; COE, College of Engineering; COS, College of Science; GM, genetically modified; GMF, genetically modified food; GMO, genetically modified organisms; GPA, grade point average; IEPSU, Institutional Effectiveness and Planning Support Unit; rDNA, recombinant DNA; SD, standard deviation; UAEU, United Arab Emirates University *Address for correspondence to: Department of Biology, United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates. E-mail: [email protected]. Received 10 December 2014; Accepted 25 January 2015 Grant sponsor: UAEU; Grant number: COS/IRG-05/14. Grant sponsor: Khalifa Center for Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering-UAEU; Grant number: KCGEB-2-2013. w s Additional Supporting Information may be found in the online version of this article. DOI 10.1002/bmb.20863 Published online 18 March 2015 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com)
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education
Introduction Modern Biotechnology, also called recombinant DNA (rDNA) technology, is a term which focuses on the manipulation of an organism’s DNA. This genetic revolution is a big benefit to the advancement of our culture; however, a multitude of ethical and moral issues should be taken into consideration [1]. For example, expecting parents could “choose” the potential traits/characteristics of their future children. The outcome and direction of this technology will be influenced by our society. A teacher’s role is to pass this important piece of information onto the next generations of students because they are the future [2]. Therefore, increasing public awareness to tilt opinion and adopt biotechnology has become a priority. Recently, biotechnology has shown great “footprint” on the environmental and medical industries. Genetic transformation in organisms, and its application on the environment has greatly helped in the sustenance of the
283
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education agricultural and food industries [3–5]. In agriculture, biotechnology has generated genetically modified (GM) crops, so-called gene revolution [6]. Golden rice is an example of GM rice (Oryza sativa) which its nutritional values have been genetically improved to save thousands of children who suffer from vitamin A deficiency in developing countries [7]. GM crops possessing herbicide tolerance allow farmers to virtually kill all weeds without affecting the main crop [8]. In addition, crops expressing proteins from the bacteria, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), are widely used for crop tolerance to insects [9]. Biofuel is a source of “green” energy that uses living things or the waste that living things produce [10]. In medicine, biotechnology has found its way in many areas, such as pharmaceutical drug discovery and production, and genetic screening [11, 12]. The human insulin was massively produced from genetically-engineered bacterium at relatively low cost [11]. The development and application of this emerging technology have potential impacts on the social and economic welfare [13–15]. Biotechnology affects human beings and society deeply over a long period of time. As such, biotechnology along with its powerful means reduce the world’s constraints in various fields of food, energy, health, and environment [16]. On the other hand, biotechnology may negatively affect human health, environment, and eventually socio-economics. Such socio-economic crisis destroy cultural, social and economic pattern, pose threats to biodiversity, squander natural crop varieties, inflict the socioeconomic nature of a country, and abuse traditional ethical values. Regulations and laws on biosafety issues and socioeconomics should be urgently formulated and set worldwide. Since college students are the future of any society, an established position of biotechnology is needed among the future decision-makers [17]. In the literature, eventhough there are several studies on biotechnology pertaining to consumers and producers, only a few have focused on the assessment of students’ educational awareness and attitude toward biotechnology. In most cases, younger students are less knowledgeable and less aware than adults in issues related to biotechnology [17–20]. The awareness of adults on the impact of biotechnology on food, health and environment was much greater than that of undergraduate students [17], suggesting a lack of information, knowledge or education among students. Experiences from American, Lithuanian, Slovakian and Turkish universities have shown that females are less accepting to the idea of biotechnology; and among those, education major students are found the least accepting [18–21]. Moreover, individuals from scientific background, mainly biological sciences, have been found to be aware of biotechnology compared to those of social background [18, 20]. This confirms that attending science classes, experiencing science labs and discussing with university professors positively influence the students’ knowledge in biotechnology [22]. One should pinpoint the
284
role of programs, media and surveys in better understanding of the scientific principles, related issues and potential benefits and risks of biotechnology to stimulate public debate around its applications [23, 24]. To date, no study has focused on the investigation of students’ knowledge and attitudes to biotechnology or GM crops in the UAE. The aim of this study was to examine UAEU undergraduate students’ educational awareness toward information and skills about biotechnology. This was accomplished by collecting data of students’ educational awareness levels to particular biotechnology domains depending on demographical differences; determining the self-satisfaction to the biotechnology information; and deciding students’ preferred information sources.
Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to assess levels of educational awareness of biotechnology issues among undergraduate students at UAEU by (a) comparing respondent groups to educational awareness levels of biotechnology on literacy (knowledge), environmental, social and economic domains according to gender, college, academic level, and GPA; (b) comparing perceptions of undergraduates toward biotechnology issues; (c) comparing self-acceptance levels of biotechnology practices among undergraduates; and (d) comparing sources utilized by undergraduates to form perceptions about biotechnology practices for the respondent groups.
Methodology A descriptive survey research method was used to collect data from undergraduate students in the UAEU in Al-Ain, UAE. Questions about the nature, incidence, or distribution of variables were asked [25]. The aim of this research was to discover the degree of educational awareness in the domains of biotechnology among UAEU students. The domains used in this study were literacy, environmental, social, and economical (Supporting Information Table S1). Literacy domain was used to assess the student’s general and basic knowledge in Biotechnology and its related issues. Students’ acceptance of agricultural biotechnology, mainly GM crops, was assessed in the environmental domain. While health risk, safety and regulations of biotechnology-based issues were evaluated using the social domain; the economical domain determines the impact of GM crops on the Emirati market and future careers. A descriptive research design was appropriate for determining the knowledge level, attitudes, and implementation of the study population.
Population and Sampling The sample of the study included 1,104 undergraduate students studying in UAEU during the academic year 2012– 2013, representing 11.2% of the total undergraduates’
Educational Awareness of Biotechnology Issues
population (N 5 9,868) at UAEU. The population frame was established by the Institutional Effectiveness and Planning Support Unit (IEPSU) directory at UAEU. The research survey was forwarded to each student email address containing a link of the survey in both languages: Arabic and English, followed with a reminder message. All returned survey (1,104) was considered as study sample.
TABLE 1
Demographic distribution of the participants in the survey
Classification
Number of students participateda Percentage
Instrument The instrument of the study was developed based on several instruments and studies focusing on similar domains of biotechnology educational awareness [21, 26–32]. The instrument was organized into three major sections. Section I requested demographic information of the participants including gender, college, academic level, and grade point average (GPA) (Table 1). Section II focused on the perceived level of knowledge and attitudes to the domains (previously mentioned) that students possess concerning biotechnology educational awareness issues and ethics. The final section requested sources utilized to learn about biotechnology by the undergraduate students; and overall self-evaluation about the educational awareness of biotechnology and its ethics. In this study, statements (Supporting Information Table S1) were scored based on five-point Likert scales from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Negative statements were reversed for calculating overall score. Regarding the reliability and validity of the instrument, the original form of this instrument was developed in English and later adapted into Arabic. It was independently translated by a researcher who was bilingual and knowledgeable in biotechnology. This translated version was reviewed by other two researchers to investigate the gaps between the translations. The revised instrument was presented to a panel of experts at the UAEU consisting of Scientific Research Ethics Committee and approved by the Director of Research and Graduate Studies Support (Ref. # VPRGS/63/2013). A panel of ten faculty members from the following Departments: Biology, Special Education, Curriculum and Instruction, and Psychology at the UAEU were consulted to evaluate the appropriateness of the language of the revised instrument as well as its inclusiveness of educational awareness and understanding ethical issues in biotechnology. Seven of the ten reviewers were required to agree on the appropriateness of each item to be included. In addition, the survey was validated by conducting a pilot study on 60 undergraduate students to determine their suggestions and recommendations. However, some items were modified in accordance with the reviewers and students’ recommendations and comments. The reliability for the internal consistency of all items of the survey using Cronbach’s alpha was 0.85. However, the reliability factors of the four domains: Biotechnology literacy, environmental, social and economic were: 0.82, 0.87, 0.85, and 0.85, respectively.
Synan AbuQamar et al.
(I) Gender Male
212
19.2
Female
892
80.8
Humanities and Social Sciences
252
22.8
Science
176
15.9
Education
75
6.8
Business and Economics
201
18.2
Law
61
5.5
Food and Agriculture
88
8.0
Engineering
203
18.4
Information Technology
48
4.3
First
210
19.0
Second
301
27.3
Third
257
23.3
Forth
220
19.9
Fifth
116
10.5
