Chapter 3 Topic I: The Effects of a One-Hour Humane Education Class
3.3 Results and Discussion
4.3.2 Survey for Current Elementary School Teachers in Taipei City
Question 1: Do you have pet now?
Question 2: What type of animal is it?
Question 3: How attached are you to your pet?
Question 4: Did you have pet in childhood?
Question 5: What type of animal was it? (Name the most attached one) Question 6: How attached were you to your pet? (Name the most attached
one)
Question 1 to 6 of the Survey asked about the participant’s pet ownership in childhood and present time, levels of attachment to the pets, and the types of animal owned/owning. Figure 35 and 36 show the relation between pet ownership in childhood, current pet ownership, degree of attachment to the pets and AES score. There were four degrees of attachment: “very attached”, “attached”, “barely attached”, “not attached at all” provided for participants’ choice. The definition of the word “attached” is: “feeling or showing love and affection mutually, between the owner and the pet”. Since there were very few people reported to be “barely attached” and “not attached at all”, in the following figures the two groups were merged. Also, there were some participants who only reported having pets in childhood or now, however did not specify what type of animals they had/have and the level of attachment, in the following figures they were put in a separate group as “unknown”.
86
Figure 35. Pet Ownership in Childhood/Level of Attachment/Number of Participants/
AES Average Score
The AES average score of people who had no pet in childhood was 21.37, and the average score of people who reported having pets in childhood (including all levels of attachment to the pet) was 25.85. This finding shows the correlation between pet ownership in childhood and empathy towards animals. We can see that degree of attachment to pets is positively related to owner’s empathic attitudes towards animals.
The participants who were “very attached” to their pets in childhood scored higher than the participants who were “attached” to their pets in childhood. However, Figure 35 also reveals an interesting finding that people who reported to be “barely attached” or “not attached at all” to their pets scored significantly lower than the others, even much lower than people who had no pet in childhood. We learned from this finding that “quality” of pet experience has a great impact on attitudes towards animals. “Bad” pet experience could leave a bad impression about animals and had life-long negative influence on the
30 10 31 18 8
Pet: attached Pet: very attached Pet: unknown attachment Number of participants AES average score
87
pet owners’ attitudes toward animals. One of the participants made a note on the survey that the sad memories of seeing how badly the pet dog in the family was treated in her childhood had left her an imperishable trauma, which has made her stay away from animals since.
Figure 36. Current Pet Ownership/Levels of Attachment/Number of Participants/
AES Average Score
From Figure 36, we can see that current pet ownership was significantly associated with higher empathy towards animals, with the only one exception which reported to be
“not attached at all” to the pet (which was fish in this case). In accordance with the finding is the previous question, degree of attachment to pets is positively related to owner’s empathic attitudes towards animals. The participants who are “very attached”
to their pets now scored higher than the participants who are “attached” to their pets
Pet: attached Pet: very attached Pet: unknown attachment Number of participants AES average score
88
now. Even though there was only one participant who reported to be “not attached at all”
to pet in this question, It is possible to see the connection between low degree of attachment and low empathy towards animals, just like what we found in the previous discussion.
Figure 37. Cross Analysis on Childhood Pet Ownership and Current Pet Ownership
After comparing Figure 35 and 36, we found that the average AES score of current pet owners who are attached or very attached to their pets (40.71, 44.21) were much higher than the average AES score of childhood pet owners who were attached or very attached to their pets (25.1, 33.56). The numbers gave us an impression that perhaps current (adult) pet ownership encouraged owners’ empathic attitudes towards animals more than childhood pet ownership. Surprisingly, a cross analysis on childhood and current pet ownership suggested a different result. Figure 37 shows a cross analysis on the influence of pet ownership in childhood and current pet ownership. The data was
Number of participants 25 45 5 40
AES average score 17.36 18.93 41.4 40
17.36 18.93
89
categorized into 4 groups: No pet in childhood/No pet now, No pet in childhood/Owning pet now, Owned pet in childhood/ No pet now, Owned pet in childhood/Owning pet now. The AES average score of the people who had pets in childhood but have no pet now was the highest among the 4 groups (41.4). The AES average score of people who had pets in childhood and have pets now was very close to the previous group (40). These two groups of people all had pets in childhood. The 3rd highest AES average score was found in the group of people who had no pets in childhood but have pets now, however the score was much lower than the first 2 groups (18.93). Lastly, the AES average score of the people who had no pets in childhood and no pets now was the lowest, however only slightly lower than the previous group (17.36).
The important finding here pointed out that the pet experience in childhood had a much greater influence on people’s attitudes towards animals in adulthood than current pet ownership. The finding also serves as evidence that education and intervention in early stage of development is more effective and influential than adult education, and the influence from childhood prolongs into adulthood and possibly stays for a life time.
90
Figure 38. Type of Animal Owned in Childhood
Figure 38 shows the types of animals that the participants reported owning in childhood; more than 1 type of animal could be possibly owned by a participant. The pet owning rate in childhood was 69%. The most-owned type of animal was “dog”, and the second most-owned type of animal were “cat” and “bird”, but much lower than dog.
This finding was consistent with the finding in the previous chapter. “Others” refers to chicken, goose and silkworm.
30
42
8 8
6
2 2
9
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Number of Participant
91
Figure 39. Types of Animals Owning
Figure 39 shows that current pet owning rate was 25.8%, which was much lower than the pet owning rate of 69% in childhood. This could be the result of child-raising and work. It was interesting to see that the cat ownership in adulthood was much closer to dog ownership than in childhood; again it could be the result of changes in life style.
Cats require less time and care than dogs, and they are more content with small space, which make them perfect company for busy professionals.
Question 7: In your opinion, other than providing knowledge, how much influence does the school education have on a student’
personality, character and temperament?
(For the majority of students, special case excluded)
Please use number -4 to 4 to indicate the amount of influence (-4: No influence at all, 0: Neutral, 4: Great influence)
72
14 11
2 2 1 3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
No pet Dog Cat fish gerbil turtle unspecified
Number of Participant
92
The average rating for the influence from school education on a student’s personality, character and temperament was 2.51% (possible range: -4 to 4) rated by all the participants, which means the teachers are relatively confident and positive in this aspect. Figure 38 and 39 show the average rating in relation to different age groups and years of teaching experience. There was no significant difference found between the groups; however, elder and most experienced teachers seemed to be more confident than younger and less-as-experienced teachers, while youngest and relatively new
“beginner teachers” seemed to be more positive than the teachers in the middle stage of career and age. The data from the 5 teachers who did not specify their years of teaching experience was excluded from the analysis.
Figure 40. Average Rating vs. Age Groups
2.44 2.34 2.38
2.69
3
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
21 to 30 31 to 40 41 to 50 51 to 60 61 to 70
Average rating
Age groups
93
Figure 41. Average Rating vs. Years of Experience
Question 8: In your opinion, what is the best age of the student to cultivate empathy (so that he/she can learn to put him/herself in other people’s places and experience the feelings of others)?
Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6
The majority of participants picked one particular grade, and some picked two grades, while a few participants picked multiple grades. The numbers in Figure 42 represent the total count of each grade. We can see that, according to the teachers’
opinions, when it comes to cultivate empathy, the younger the students are, the better it is. The teachers’ opinions provide valuable information for humane educators since the teachers participated in this study have been in close touch with elementary students.
Among them, 45 teachers have been working with children for more than 10 years. This finding is helpful in deciding the timing of implementing humane education, which instills kindness and thoughtfulness in students.
2.45
0-10 years 10-20 years 20-30 years 30-40 years 40 years+
Average rating
Years of teaching experience
94
Figure 42. The Best Age to Educate Empathy
Question 9: In your opinion, do you agree that people who can empathize with animals show more empathy for humans?
Please use number -4 to 4 to show your degree of agreement.
(-4: Strongly disagree, 0: Neutral, 4: Strongly agree)
The question was intended to ask the elementary teachers about their views, judging from their years of teaching experience, on the generalization of animal-oriented empathy and human-oriented empathy, whether or not the teachers see any correlation or linkage between the two. The teachers showed a relative high level of agreement, with an average rating of 2.44 (possible range: -4 to 4), that empathy towards animals and humans are positively related. Among the 97 participants, only 6 participants rated negatively, 15 participants showed neutral view while 76 participants showed different degrees of agreement on this notion.
59
21 21
11 8 6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6
Count
95
Question 10: In your opinion, who should be responsible in teaching the next generation the importance of loving and protecting animals?
Government Animal protection group Parents
Teacher Others________ (Multiple responses welcomed)
Figure 43 reveals the total count received from the 97 participants. The result showed that teachers think parents are supposed to be the most responsible in teaching their children how to love and take care of animals, teachers are the second, government the third, animal protection group the fourth. Among “others” who should also be responsible in educating young generations about animals, general public, mass media, veterinarians and pet shop were listed by the teachers.
Figure 43. Animal Education Responsibility Holder
48
96
Question 11: In your opinion, what is/are the proper source(s) for the next generation to learn to love, to protect and to take care of
animals?
School Family Zoo TV program Others___________
(Multiple responses welcomed)
Figure 44. Proper Learning Source
The finding in this question was similar to the previous question. Teachers think that students should learn about humane treatment of animals more from their families than from school. It was noticed by the author that in Question 10, there were 34 teachers selected the other options provided but excluded “teacher”. Same situation in Question 11, 26 teachers selected the other options provided but excluded “school”. By doing so, the teachers conveyed a message that they think teachers and school should be excluded from humane education on animal welfare issues. Among the “other” proper sources for students to learn, museum, religious places such as church, printed materials such as books, newspaper and journals were on the list.
71
97
Question 12: Some elementary schools in the United States and Japan keep resident pet in their classrooms in order to enable the students to get in touch with animals and learn knowledge and experience from daily care. Would you agree to keep resident pet in your class?
Please use number -4 to 4 to show your degree of agreement.
(-4: Strongly disagree, 0: Neutral, 4: Strongly agree)
Question 13: What is/are your reason(s) for agreeing?
(Multiple responses welcomed)
Teach responsibility
Learn the spirit of teamwork
Learn to love and nurture
Cultivate empathy
Learn knowledge about animals
Learn hands-on experience in animal care
Other reasons (please specify)
Question 14: What is/are your reason(s) for disagreeing?
(Multiple responses welcomed)
Not good for the animal
No valuable lesson provided
Increase teacher’s burden
Tend to cause trouble and argument
Parents disagree
Other reasons (please specify)
The average degree of agreement in keeping resident pet in classroom was 0.009 (possible range: -4 to 4) which means that the teachers hold a neutral view on keeping resident pet in classroom, with 31 participants showed various degrees of disagreement, 29 participants neutral, and 37 participants showed various degrees of agreement.
98 seen, there were disadvantages, possible trouble and hazard too. Among all the possible reasons for disagreeing, “Tend to cause trouble or argument” was most chosen, while the teachers showed fairly equal concerns about the issues “Increase teacher’s burden”,
“Not good for the animals”, and “Parents disagree”. Among other reasons of disagreeing, allergy and health concerns (germs, disease, flea) were most mentioned by the teachers, distraction (steal students’ attention from studies, animals making noise during class), lack of room, concerns for animal welfare (where do the animal go when the year school ends?) and concerns for students’ mood swings caused by possible pet loss were named by the teachers.
Figure 45. Reasons of Agreeing to Keep Resident Pet in Classroom
46
99
Figure 46. Reasons of Disagreeing to Keep Resident Pet in Classroom
Question 15: In the curriculum, teaching content and activities of the subject you currently teach, does it include or cover the concept of showing respect for all living beings and humane treatment of animals?
1. There is none in the textbook or curriculum, so I do not teach.
2. There is some in the textbook or curriculum, but is not mentioned in class.
3. When it occasionally appears in the textbook or curriculum, it is mentioned in class.
4. There is none in the textbook or curriculum, but I seek chances in class to mention it.
5. Other situation (Please specify)
Among the choices provided, 7 participants chose #1 for answer, 2 participants chose Choice #2, 66 participants chose #3 and 30 participants chose #4. There were 5 participants named other situations, such as teaching students from the news (when
100
there is animal-related news reported on TV or Internet) and giving reminders randomly on such issues during daily life. The result pointed out that in the current curriculum, humane education is not taught on regular basis and there is scarce material in current textbooks or curriculum. Since humane education is not part of mandatory or compulsory education, it relies largely on the teachers whether to teach it or not. As a result, some students might not have any chance to receive humane education at all.
Possible solutions are explored in the following questions and discussed accordingly.
Question 16: Are you willing to use your class time to teach students about humane treatment of animals?
Please use number -4 to 4 to show your degree of willingness.
The average score on the willingness to teach humane treatment of animals in the participant’s class time was 2.08 (possible range: -4 to 4), which shows relatively high degree of willingness. Figure 47 shows an interesting correlation between the teachers’
empathy towards animal and their degrees of willingness to teach humane treatment of animals in class. The participants were categorized into three groups (degree 0 and under , 1 and 2, 3 and 4) according to their degrees of willingness in teaching humane treatment of animals in class, and the AES average scores of each group were shown.
We can see that the teachers who were more empathic towards animals showed higher degree of willingness in carrying out humane education and to pass on humane attitudes towards animals to their students.
101
Figure 47. Willingness to Teach Humane Treatment of Animals in Relation to AES Average Score
Question 17: What do you think the possible reason(s) could be for the teacher who shows low willingness in teaching humane treatment of animals in his/her class time?
(All participants are invited to answer regardless of what your answer is for the previous question.)
(Multiple responses welcomed) 1. The teacher is not an animal lover.
2. Teaching such topic is not in the teacher’s job duty.
3. Preparing animal-related lessons increases the teacher’s workload.
4. There is time limit in class. There is not enough time to cover all the materials.
5. Main-subject teachers always have the pressure of finishing teaching certain amount of materials within limited period of time.
6. The school authority will not be happy to see it happen.
7. The parents will not be happy to see it happen.
102
8. Other reason (please specify)
Question 17 was designed to explore the possible reasons that might cause a teacher’s low willingness in teaching humane treatment of animals. The teacher’s personal intention might not be the main or only issue to consider. The question asked the teachers to comment from a third person’s point of view, so that they felt more at ease to speak their mind. As mentioned in Chapter One of this study, in Taiwan, subjects like language (Mandarin, English) and mathematics are considered as “main subjects” because they weigh more academically than other subjects. Science and social studies are the second important, while art, music and PE have little academic strength.
The three section tests in a semester set the timelines, and the teachers who teach main subjects are responsible (and often time under pressure) for covering all the materials that are tested. There are often lots of materials to be taught and not enough time, so sometimes teachers have to “cram” or even “borrow” classes from teachers of subjects that are not “tested” such as art, music and PE. Since humane education is not going to be tested or in any way help the students gain success academically, using precious class time to teach such materials might not be what the school authority or parents would like to see. Figure 48 shows the possible reasons of low willingness, selected by all the participants. While all the possible reason listed by the author were considered possible by part of participants, Choice #4 (Time limit in class) and Choice #5 (Main-subject teachers always have pressure in finishing teaching certain amount of materials) were considered most true among all the possible problems and challenges in carrying out humane education at school. There was a comment given by a participant showing concern for the quality of humane education, if it were to be taught by current teachers. Teachers very possibly hold drastically different views on animals, humane
103
education and related topics, and such discrepancies (and possible “wrong” concepts) brought by individual teacher might mislead students.
Figure 48. Possible Reasons of Low Willingness in Carrying Out Humane Education
Question 18: Would you agree that humane education (including
animal-protection education and others) should be included in the formal and regular curriculum of elementary school education, with an increase in teaching materials and fixed (instead of random and flexible) hours of instruction time?
Please use number -4 to 4 to show your degree of agreement.
The average score of the teacher’s support in including humane education in the
The average score of the teacher’s support in including humane education in the