Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Middle School Student Knowledge of and Attitudes Toward Synthetic Biology

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Synthetic biology is a field that leverages design, biology, engineering, and computation to genetically engineer organisms to make usable products such as sustainably manufactured textiles, biodegradable chemicals, and personalized medicine. Despite increases in access, we know little about what younger learners know and think about these modern applications. This is problematic for reasons related to civic engagement and field participation. This research addresses this by examining a group (n = 66) of middle school youth (ages 11 to 14) in the United States (US). Analysis of survey and interview data suggests that, while students know very little about synthetic biology, they nevertheless have well-formed attitudes that involve considerations that are typically observed in older student groups. Findings also suggest that perspectives among this group were still forming and flexible. Opportunities to support student learning and literacy in this emerging field are discussed in terms of their geopolitical, sociocultural, and educational influences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References 

  • Andrianantoandro, E., Basu, S., Karig, D. K., & Weiss, R. (2006). Synthetic Biology: New Engineering Rules for an Emerging Discipline. Molecular Systems Biology, 2(1), 2006–2028. https://doi.org/10.1038/msb4100073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2015). Vision and change in undergraduate biology education: Chronicling change, inspiring the future. American Association for the Advancement of Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amino Labs. (2019). Retrieved from https://amino.bio/

  • Anagun, S. S. (2012). Eighth-grade students' perceptions of biotechnology: a case study. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 9(3).

  • Beyer, P., Al-Babili, S., Ye, X., Lucca, P., Schaub, P., Welsch, R., & Potrykus, I. (2002). Golden rice: Introducing the β-carotene biosynthesis pathway into rice endosperm by genetic engineering to defeat vitamin A deficiency. The Journal of nutrition, 132(3), 506S-510S. https://doi.org/10.1093/jn/132.3.506S

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BioDesign Challenge (2018). Retrieved from https://biodesignchallenge.org

  • Cavanagh, H., Hood, J., & Wilkinson, J. (2005). Riverina high school students’ views of biotechnology. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, 8(2), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.2225/vol8-issue2-fulltext-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S. Y., & Raffan, J. (1999). Biotechnology: student’s knowledge and attitudes in the LJK and Taiwan. Journal of Biological Education, 34(1), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.1999.9655678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Črne-Hladnik, H., Peklaj, C., Košmelj, K., Hladnik, A., & Javornik, B. (2009). Assessment of Slovene secondary school students’ attitudes to biotechnology in terms of usefulness, moral acceptability and risk perception. Public Understanding of Science, 18(6), 747–758. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509337361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, V. (2007). An exploration of high school (12–17 year old) students’ understandings of, and attitudes towards biotechnology processes. Research in Science Education, 37(1), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9016-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, V., & Schibeci, R. (2003a). Western Australian school students’ understanding of biotechnology. International Journal of Science Education, 25(1), 57–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210126720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, V., & Schibeci, R. (2003b). Western Australian high school students’ attitudes towards biotechnology processes: Case studies. Journal of Biological Education, 38(1), 7–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2003.9655889

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, V., & Soames, C. (2006). The effect of biotechnology education on Australian high school students’ understandings and attitudes about biotechnology processes. Research in Science & Technological Education, 24(2), 183–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140600811569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, V., & Venville, G. J. (2009). High-school Students’ Informal Reasoning and Argumentation about Biotechnology: An indicator of scientific literacy? International Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 1421–1445. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690801992870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, V. M., & Venville, G. (2010). Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics. Research in Science Education, 40(2), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9104-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endy, D. (2005). Foundations for Engineering Biology. Nature, 438(7067), 449–453. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fonseca, M. J., Costa, P., Lencastre, L., & Tavares, F. (2011). Multidimensional analysis of high-school students’ perceptions about biotechnology. Journal of Biological Education, 46(3), 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2011.634019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fonseca, M. J., Costa, P., Lencastre, L., & Tavares, F. (2013). A statistical approach to quantitative data validation focused on the assessment of students’ perceptions about biotechnology. Springerplus, 2(1), 496. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-2-496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forster, A. C., & Church, G. M. (2007). Synthetic Biology Projects In Vitro. Genome Research, 17(1), 1–6. http://www.genome.org/cgi/doi/10.1101/gr.5776007

  • Genspace. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.genspace.org/

  • Gunter, B., Kinderlerer, J., & Beyleveld, D. (1998). Teenagers and biotechnology: A survey of understanding and opinion in Britain. Studies in Science Education, 32, 81–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269808560128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutmann, A. (2011). The ethics of synthetic biology: guiding principles for emerging technologies. Hastings Center Report, 41(4), 17–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1552-146X.2011.tb00118.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, R., Stanisstreet, M., Boyes, E., & O’sullivan, H. . (1998). Reactions to a new technology: students’ ideas about genetically engineered foodstuffs. Research in Science & Technological Education, 16(2), 203–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/0263514980160208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, A., Nguyen, P. Q., Stark, J. C., Takahashi, M. K., Donghia, N., Ferrante, T., Dy, A. J., Hsu, K. J., Dubner, R. S., Pardee, K., Jewett, M. C., & Collins, J. J. (2018). BioBits™ Explorer: A modular synthetic biology education kit. Science advances, 4(8), eaat5105. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat5105

  • iGEM. (2020). Retrieved from: https://igem.org/Main_Page

  • Kafai, Y. B., & Walker, J. T. (2020a). Twenty Things to Make with Biology. CONSTRUCTIONISM, 2020, 598

    Google Scholar 

  • Kafai, Y. B., & Walker, J. T. (2020b). Bringing 21st-century science into schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 102(1), 38–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721720956848

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kafai, Y., Telhan, O., Hogan, K., Lui, D., Anderson, E., Walker, J. T., & Hanna, S. (2017). Growing designs with biomakerlab in high school classrooms. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 503–508). https://doi.org/10.1145/3078072.3084316

  • Khalil, A. S., & Collins, J. J. (2010). Synthetic Biology: Applications Come of Age. Nature Reviews Genetics, 11(5), 367–379. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klop, T., & Severiens, S. (2007). An exploration of attitudes towards modern biotechnology: A study among Dutch secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 29(5), 663–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600951556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindahl, M. G., & Lundin, M. (2016). How do 15–16 year old students use scientific knowledge to justify their reasoning about human sexuality and relationships? Teaching and Teacher Education, 60, 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.08.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lock, R. (1994). What Do 14 to 16-year-olds Know and Think about Biotechnology? Nutrition & Food Science, 94(3), 29–32. https://doi.org/10.1108/00346659410055101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lock, R., & Miles, C. (1993). Biotechnology and genetic engineering: students’ knowledge and attitudes. Journal of Biological Education, 27(4), 267–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.1993.9655347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Means, M. L., & Voss, J. F. (1996). Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels. Cognition and Instruction, 14(2), 139–178. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1402_1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohapatra, A. K., Priyadarshini, D., & Biswas, A. (2010). Genetically modified food: knowledge and attitude of teachers and students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(5), 489–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9215-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. National Academies Press.

  • Ozel, M., Erdogan, M., Usak, M., & Prokop, P. (2009). High school students’ knowledge and attitudes regarding biotechnology applications. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 9(1), 321–328

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrino, J. W., Wilson, M. R., Koenig, J. A., & Beatty, A. S. (2014). Developing Assessments for the Next Generation Science Standards. National Academies Press. 500 Fifth Street NW, Washington, DC 20001.

  • Porter, D. L., Levine, B. L., Kalos, M., Bagg, A., & June, C. H. (2011). Chimeric antigen receptor–modified T cells in chronic lymphoid leukemia. New England Journal of Medicine, 365(8), 725–733. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1103849

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prokop, P., Lešková, A., Kubiatko, M., & Diran, C. (2007). Slovakian students’ knowledge of and attitudes toward biotechnology. International Journal of Science Education, 29(7), 895–907. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600969830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravitch, S. M., & Carl, N. M. (2015). Qualitative research: Bridging the Conceptual, Theoretical, and Methodological. Sage Publications.

  • Reece, J. B., Urry, L. A., Cain, M. L., Wasserman, S. A., Minorsky, P. V., & Jackson, R. B. (2014). Campbell Biology (No. s 1309). Boston: Pearson.

  • Roth, W. M., & Barton, A. C. (2004). Rethinking scientific literacy. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T. D. (Ed.). (2011). Socio-scientific Issues in The Classroom: Teaching, learning and research (Vol. 39). Springer Science & Business Media.

  • Sadler, T. D., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry?.Research in Science Education, 37(4), 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9030-9

  • Stark, J. C., Huang, A., Nguyen, P. Q., Dubner, R. S., Hsu, K. J., Ferrante, T. C.,Anderson, M., Kanapskyte, A., Quinn Mucha, Q., Packett, J. Patel P., Patel R., Qaq D., Zondor T., Burke J., Martinez T., Miller-Berry A., Puppala A., Reichert K., Schmid M., Brand L., Hill L., Chellaswamy J., Faheem N. , Fetherling S., Gong E., Gonzalzles E.M., Granito T., Koritsaris J., Nguyen B., Ottman S., Palffy C., Patel A., Skweres S., Adriane Slaton A., Woods T., Donghia N., Pardee K., Collins J., Jewett, M. (2018). BioBits™ Bright: A fluorescent synthetic biology education kit. Science Advances, 4(8), eaat5107. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat5107

  • The Tech Interactive. (2020). BioDesign Studio. Retrieved from https://www.thetech.org/biodesignstudio

  • Usak, M., Erdogan, M., Prokop, P., & Ozel, M. (2009). High school and university students’ knowledge and attitudes regarding biotechnology. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 37(2), 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.20267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Lieshout, E., & Dawson, V. (2016). Knowledge of and attitudes towards health-related biotechnology. applications amongst Australian year 10 high school students. Journal of Biological Education, 50(3), 329–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2015.1117511

  • Verish, C., Strawhacker, A., Bers, M., & Shaer, O. (2018). CRISPEE: A Tangible Gene Editing Platform for Early Childhood. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (pp. 101–107). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173225.3173277

  • Walker, J. T., Shaw, M., Kafai, Y., & Lui, D. (2018). Biohacking food: a case study of science inquiry and design reflections about a synthetic biology high school workshop. In Kay, J. and Luckin, R. (Eds.) Rethinking learning in the digital age: making the learning sciences count, 13th international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS) 2018, Volume 3. London, UK: International Society of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.22318/cscl2018.1559

  • Walker, J. T., & Kafai, Y. B. (2021). The biodesign studio: Constructions and reflections of high school youth on making with living media. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13081

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeller, P., & Zocher, D. (2012). Ecovative’s breakthrough biomaterials. Fungi Magazine, 5(1), 51–56

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by a grant (#1623018) from the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation, University of Pennsylvania, or The University of Texas at El Paso.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Texas at El Paso, El Paso, TX, USA

    Justice T. Walker

Authors
  1. Justice T. Walker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Justice T. Walker.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Walker, J.T. Middle School Student Knowledge of and Attitudes Toward Synthetic Biology. J Sci Educ Technol 30, 791–802 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09919-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09919-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation