Digital learning environments and bioethical reasoning: A study of biology students' engagement with human enhancement ethics

Elena V. Komarova

doi:10.55056/cte.765

Authors

Elena V. Komarova Independent researcher https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3476-3351

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55056/cte.765

Keywords:

digital learning environments, bioethical reasoning, human enhancement, biotechnology education, genome editing, ethical decision-making, educational technology, value formation, interactive pedagogy, biology students

Abstract

This study examines how digital learning environments shape biology students' bioethical reasoning, focusing particularly on perceptions of biotechnological human enhancement. As technological advances in gene editing coincided with the global pandemic, both events catalyzed significant changes in biological education and highlighted the importance of bioethical understanding. Through a survey of 80 students at different educational levels, we explored how exposure to bioethical content in digital educational settings influenced students' ethical reasoning about emerging biotechnologies. Our findings reveal that students who experienced interactive and dialogic digital learning formats demonstrated more nuanced ethical positions, with greater recognition of social implications and potential risks of biotechnological enhancements. The research provides insights into how technological mediation of bioethics education shapes value formation in biology students and suggests strategies for effective digital pedagogical approaches when teaching complex bioethical topics. These findings have significant implications for technology-enhanced biology education during and beyond crisis periods, particularly for preparing future biologists to navigate complex ethical landscapes in their professional practice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Abstract views: 56 / PDF views: 22

References

Al-Kumaim, N.H., Alhazmi, A.K., Mohammed, F., Gazem, N.A., Shabbir, M.S. and Fazea, Y., 2021. Exploring the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on University Students’ Learning Life: An Integrated Conceptual Motivational Model for Sustainable and Healthy Online Learning. Sustainability, 13(5), p.2546. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052546. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052546

Alkhnbashi, O.S., Mohammad, R. and Bamasoud, D.M., 2024. Education in Transition: Adapting and Thriving in a Post-COVID World. Systems, 12(10). Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12100402. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12100402

Alkorta, J. and Mujika, M., 2022. Highlighting the role played by distance learning methods in strengthening the bioethics in the biotechnology curriculum in Singapore. Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, 27(5), pp.92–103. Available from: https://doi.org/10.5912/jcb1892.

Bryzgalina, E.V., 2023. Digital Bioethics as Digital Health Ethics. Praxema, 166(1-35), pp.9–29. Available from: https://doi.org/10.23951/2312-7899-2023-1-9-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23951/2312-7899-2023-1-9-29

Canu, M.H., Dehennaut, V., Dupont, E., Pauwels, M. and Bodart, J.F., 2022. Introduction to bioethics through mobilization of critical thinking skills. International Conference on Higher Education Advances. vol. 2022-June, pp.11–19. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4995/HEAd22.2022.14463. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4995/HEAd22.2022.14463

Chashina, Z.V. and Kartanova, A.D., 2016. Teaching methodology in the study of bioethics. Integration of Education, 20(1), pp.97–104. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15507/1991-9468.082.020.201601.097-104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15507/1991-9468.082.020.201601.097-104

Chowning, J.T., Griswold, J.C., Kovarik, D.N. and Collins, L.J., 2012. Fostering critical thinking, reasoning, and argumentation skills through bioethics education. PLoS ONE, 7(5), p.e36791. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036791. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036791

Iancu, M., 2014. Bioethical education component and cornerstone of youth’s moral education. European Journal of Science and Theology, 10(3), pp.95–102. Available from: http://www.ejst.tuiasi.ro/Files/45/10_Iancu.pdf.

Keskin-Samanci, N., Keskin, M. Özer and Arslan, O., 2014. Development of ‘bioethical values inventory’ for pupils in secondary education within the scope of bioethical education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 10(2), pp.69–76. Available from: https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1029a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2014.1029a

Moses, J., Berlinger, N., Dunn, M.C., Gusmano, M.K. and Chin, J.J., 2015. Bioethics Casebook 2.0: Using Web-Based Design and Tools to Promote Ethical Reflection and Practice in Health Care. Hastings Center Report, 45(6), pp.19–25. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.514. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.514

Parder, M.L., Tammeleht, A., Juurik, M., Paaver, T., Velbaum, K. and Harro-Loit, H., 2024. Digital Discussion Game on Values: Development, Use and Possibilities for Measuring Its Functionality. In: Y.P. Cheng, M. Pedaste, E. Bardone and Y.M. Huang, eds. Innovative Technologies and Learning. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 14785, pp.193–202. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-65881-5_21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-65881-5_21

Pavarini, G., McMillan, R., Robinson, A. and Singh, I., 2021. Design Bioethics: A Theoretical Framework and Argument for Innovation in Bioethics Research. American Journal of Bioethics, 21(6), pp.37–50. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2020.1863508. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2020.1863508

Serrano, D.R., Dea-Ayuela, M.A., Gonzalez-Burgos, E., Serrano-Gil, A. and Lalatsa, A., 2019. Technology-enhanced learning in higher education: How to enhance student engagement through blended learning. European Journal of Education, 54(2), pp.273–286. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12330. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12330

Siddiq, F. and Murchan, D., 2024. Towards a code of ethics for using technology-enabled data and related analytic approaches in educational assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 31(5-6), pp.376–400. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2025.2453138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2025.2453138

Sleigh, J., Hubbs, S., Blasimme, A. and Vayena, E., 2024. Can digital tools foster ethical deliberation? Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), p.117. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02629-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02629-x

Van Rooy, W.S., 2012. Using information and communication technology (ICT) to the maximum: Learning and teaching biology with limited digital technologies. Research in Science and Technological Education, 30(1), pp.65–80. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2011.653877. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2011.653877