As a secondary school science teacher I've had to conduct animal dissections. Initially, it seemed like an essential part of the curriculum, but I discovered that the Victorian Curriculum does not recommend animal dissections and from researching about this I have come to realize that this practice holds little value for students' education. The practice of dissection in secondary schools is around 100 years old and it has become a ritual of science, a tradition valued by some science teachers, carried out without critical evaluation of its academic usefulness.

A systematic review of studies published between 2005 and 2020 evaluated the pedagogical value of non-animal teaching methods (NAMs) versus animal dissection. The results from 20 published studies show that in 95% of the studies (19/20) students at all education levels (secondary, postsecondary, and medical school) performed at least as well—and in most of those studies better (14/19)—when they used NAMs compared to animal dissection. [1]

The dissection process is often associated with certain (negative) emotions, such as disgust. During the activity, students may show an aversion to touch the dead animal or repulsed up to the point of retching and vomiting. Studies have shown that perceived disgust during dissection may negatively affect the learning experience as students may reduce their state of interest for science. [2] 

After a few years of conducting the ‘heart and bulls eye dissections’ at my school, I can say that the majority of students feel disgusted at this practice. Some have been close to fainting. I have also witnessed some students enjoying this experiment and transforming it into a mutilation activity, plunging the scalpel several times into organs and laughing about it. Furthermore, there is always a safety risk where one student may inflict harm to another during class time. 
 
Whenever I had to conduct dissection of farming animals’ organs, I expressed that students were not obligated to do this, as I could provide them with an alternative, which some chose to do, but even the video distressed them. For some students this activity becomes a decisive factor in steering them away from pursuing further studies in science. It is crucial to consider these impacts on students' educational journeys and their future career choices. Moreover, phasing out animal dissections aligns with a growing global trend towards more humane and ethical educational practices. In many regions, educators have successfully transitioned to cruelty-free alternatives, proving that quality education does not have to involve animal harm. This shift also prepares students to think critically and ethically about issues they might encounter in their future careers.

This practice of decreased sensitivity towards animal life teaches students that an animal can be killed for “trivial” purposes such as curiosity or tradition. More specifically, animals are used as “artifacts,” meaning that they serve a technical purpose (1) made for human use, (2) not sentient, (3) discardable, and (4) excluded from the moral community. In today's educational landscape, we have access to advanced technology that offers alternative methods to teach anatomy and biology. For example, there are digital simulations and 3D models that can provide students with a comprehensive understanding of these subjects without causing harm to animals. These innovative tools can replace traditional dissections effectively, providing an equally, if not more, engaging learning experience. By adopting digital alternatives, we are also making science more inclusive and accessible to all students, providing them with an environment conducive to learning, free from anxiety and distress.

We appeal to the Minister for Education in Victoria to phase out all animal dissections in secondary schools. We need to acknowledge the threat of global ecological collapse (from pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss etc) and an educator's role is to minimise this as we prepare students for a very uncertain future. I believe that there is an opportunity to enhance student learning and wellbeing by replacing animal dissections with more suitable alternatives that reminds us that we are part of nature. Let us embrace modern teaching tools and methodologies that respect animal life while enhancing educational outcomes. Please sign this petition to bring about a positive change for both students and animals alike.

[1] Ormandy E. J.C. Schwab, S. Suiter, N. Green, J. Oakley, P. Osenkowski, C. Sumner (2022) Animal Dissection vs. Non-Animal Teaching Methods: A Systematic Review of Pedagogical Value. The American Biology Teacher.

[2] Holstermann N., Grube D., Bögeholz S. (2009). The influence of emotion on students’ performance in dissection exercises. J. Biol. Educ. 43, 164–168