1. 1
The Need for Teacher Training to Prioritize Biotechnology
Christopher Evan Moss
Virginia Tech

2. 2
Introduction to Biotechnology:
What is Biotechnology?
Biotechnology is a field that is growing at an astonishing rate. Currently, biotechnical
applications are applied in a variety of industries and have many uses. Biotechnology, properly
defined, “Includes any technique that uses living organisms (or parts of organisms) to make or
modify product, to improve plants or animals, or to develop micro-organisms for specific uses”
(Wells, 1995, p. 11). The process of utilizing living organism is the most important element of
biotechnology; these organisms can include plants, fungi, microbes, and even human beings, or
components of an organism such as its cells.
Impact of Biotechnology on Society
Biotechnology has been a part of society since early history; however there has been a
rapid increase in biotechnology as our world advances and excels technologically. According to
Peterman, “Its produces influence our daily lives on multiple levels and often improve our
quality of life” (2014, p. 35). Biotechnology has an affect on many aspects of human life.
According to Wells, “In actuality, everything from the food we eat to the fuel we use to heat our
homes or power our automobiles is likely to have an element of biotechnology associated with
it” (1995, p. 11). Biotechnology has eight knowledge areas that include Foundations of
Biotechnology, Bioprocessing, Agriculture, Environment, Bioethics, Medicine, Genetic
Engineering, and Biochemistry. These knowledge areas “give the specifics concerning the types
of application biotechnology techniques are being used for” (Wells, 1995, p. 12).
Needfor Biotechnology in Education
With the growth in biotechnological practices in a variety of fields there has also been a
dramatic increase in the number of careers in these arenas. “STEM knowledge and skills are in

3. 3
even greater demand as the United States confronts a fiercely competitive international
marketplace where the advantage goes to companies that are the first to invent and produce
innovative products. From 2000 to 2010, the growth in STEM jobs was three times greater than
that of non-STEM jobs. The Department of Commerce estimates that in the coming years STEM
occupations will grow 1.7 times faster than non-STEM occupations” (NSTC, 2013, p.1).
Because of continual development, these industries are always changing. Unfortunately, many
of these positions require specialized training that few people are gaining. “Few people entering
the industry received exposure to all these areas in their training, and there are no formal
requirements for continuing education” (Friedman, 2008, p. 275).
The need for continual education in biotechnology to prepare individuals for careers in
these industries has been known for several years. According to Wells in 1998, “During the next
few decades advances in biotechnology will require individuals associated with the
biotechnology industries to receive specific education and training, and in addition, will result in
the need for increased public awareness of its potential benefits and negative consequences”
(Wells, 1998, p. 54). Education in biotechnology should begin in one’s middle and high school
years, and should be taught in a manner that, “Both the practical implications and the hands-on
nature of this ‘modern science’ make the topic of biotechnology an attractive addition to the high
school science curriculum” (France, 2007). According to Scott, “No longer is the ability to read
and write sufficient because technological change affects nearly every aspect of one’s life from
enabling citizens to perform routine tasks to requiring that they are able to make responsible,
informed decisions that affect individuals, our society, and the environment” (Scott, 2006, p. 43).
Without an informed society, technological advances cannot be ethically controlled.
According to Wells, “New scientific knowledge, and the appropriate technologies accompanying

4. 4
it, cannot take root and be purposefully controlled in the absence of an informed public” (1994,
p.58). Individuals should be able to think critically about technology and understand how it’s
created as well as its purpose. The majority of the population does not have this understanding.
“As a society, we are not even fully aware of or conversant with the technologies we use every
day. In short, we are technologically literate… American adults and children have a poor
understanding of the essential characteristics of technology, how it influences society, and how
people can and do affect its development” (NAENRC, 2002, p.1).
Regardless of the importance and influence of biotechnology in the sciences, this is not a
discipline that is a prominent trend in education. “This presents a challenging paradox: the
ideas, tools and products of biotechnology are transforming science and society (including
production of food, treatment and diagnosis of disease, manipulation of genomes, changes in
workforce needs etc.), but these developments remain vastly under-represented in curricula and
classrooms” (Borgerding, 2012, p. 133).
In school students are taught a curriculum, subjects comprising a course of study, but
currently much curriculum is considered “a mishmash of topics that lacks coherence across
subject-matter domains and grade levels” (AAAS, 2000, p.3). “The content of the curriculum is
not appropriate for meeting the individual and social needs of people living in the modern world.
Simply put, the content is obsolescent. Much of what is taught is not needed in everyday life,
and much of what is not taught is needed in everyday life” (AAAS, 2000, p.3). Curriculum has
not been designed in a manner that will allow for students to retain the information that one is
gaining. According to AAAS (2000, p.4) “Above all, the curriculum does not produce the
learning expected of it. Students may take algebra, history, biology, and the other “right”

5. 5
courses and do well in the course examinations, but extensive research shows they really
understand and retain very little of the content”.
Biotechnology is a discipline that should be delivered utilizing an integrative approach.
Because of its broad field and diverse applications, biotechnology should be taught across all
disciplines. According to Wells, “Just as technology educators dealing with interdisciplinary
content in the areas of communication, transportation, and production use definitions mutually
recognized and accepted by other professions addressing that same content, so it must be when
teaching biotechnology concepts. To do otherwise will result in the learning of biotechnology
between concepts not consistent between subject areas across the curriculum” (1995, p.12). The
broad field of biotechnology is inherently interdisciplinary and requires a broad scope of
instructional strategies. A study completed by Brown in 1998 found, “that teachers perceive
biotechnology to be inherently interdisciplinary; therefore, it is important that both target teacher
audiences and teacher educators should represent multiple disciplines. Support for the notion that
biotechnology should be exclusively a technology education subject, taught by individual
technology education teachers, does not appear to be warranted” (p. 10).
A Design Based Biotechnology Literacy (DBBL) approach accomplishes the task of
presenting biotechnology concepts in a transdisciplinary method that allows students to apply
concepts they have learned across various subject areas to devise a solution to a problem or
challenge. This approach requires that students utilize organisms, or parts of organisms, to
create or improve existing technologies, while considering potential benefits or consequences.
Tasks such as these mirror what students will do in their adulthood. Smith (2001, p. 66) states
that “Conceptually, there are close ties between engineering and the field of public education
known as technology education since both engineering and technology treat solving practical

6. 6
problems as their philosophical nucleus”. Using a DBBL approach to deliver curriculum
students are designing technologies, “which are in many ways, a product of problem solving.
Technological problems require the application of knowledge from many different disciplines
and the laboratory provides a medium to develop and test solutions” (DeLuca, 1991, p. 1).
Position Statement
The DBBL approach requires a change in pedagogical practice that leads to a deeper
understanding of both content and practice for teacher and student alike. To make
Biotechnology a prominent subject taught to middle and high school students, teachers will need
additional training in the Designed Based Biotechnology Literacy (DBBL) approach.
Biotechnology’s Current Position in Education
Currently, very few courses are offered in our Nation’s education system that address
biotechnology in technology education. According to Brown in 1998, “a recent survey of
technology education teachers in Kentucky found that less than 6% of responding high school
teachers offered bio-related systems technology education courses at their schools” (p.11).
Because our educational system is supposed to prepare students for to be productive, conscious
citizens, this points out a flaw in the system, especially in the area of biotechnology.
“Technology education teachers in particular have been challenged to prepared students for life
in a society dominated and driven by technology” (Scott, 2006, p 43). However, because
technological literacy has elements in all disciplines it is important that biotechnology be taught
across this disciplines as well. Scott stated in 2006 that, “technological literacy includes
biotechnology content (or any other core area) that should be included in secondary education
regardless of who delivers it.” (p. 53).

7. 7
Currently, students are learning many sciences in isolation to other disciplines. The activities
that are taking place do not require critical thinking and problem solving skills; skills that need to
be developed to prepare students for their future. “In many biology classes, it is not uncommon
for students to spend inordinate amounts of time mastering Punnett square while having little to
no experience using or even thinking about tools that are much more prominent and important
for modem biology such as DNA and protein technologies” (Borgerding, 2012, p. 146).
There are many reasons why students are not being taught biotechnology in middle and high
school. The implications preventing biotechnology from becoming a prominent subject include
the amount of time needed to implement a DBBL approach to teaching, the expenses of
delivering biotechnology content, and teachers’ lack of knowledge of content as well as
instructional strategies. “Studies conducted in countries such as Scotland, Spain, and New
Zealand, have shown that teachers tend to avoid teaching biotechnology-related topics and base
their decision on reasons such as the insufficiency of resources for experimental activities and
the inadequacy of their academic training” (Fonseca, 2012, p. 368).
Lack of Teacher Education & Training
Biotechnology Education should mirror the tasks that one faces in our society. “Science
education must better track the developments of modern science in order to remain relevant and
useful for learners as well as the field of science itself” (Borgerding, 2012, p. 146). These tasks
are multidisciplinary, requiring students to utilize a designed based approach in order to reach a
conclusion.
Teachers, however, are lacking the training needed to deliver concepts using a designed
based approach. “Currently, most teaching teacher education degree programs being offered to
not include biotechnology content” (Borgerding, 2012, p. 146). “There appears to be a need for

8. 8
universities to offer teacher trainings in delivery of biotechnology instruction at both the pre-
service and in-service levels… Teachers perceive biotechnology to be inherently
interdisciplinary; therefore, it is important that both target teacher audiences and teacher
educators should represent multiple disciplines” (Brown, 1998, p. 10).
The training and education that teachers receive in order to biotechnology using a DBBL
approach should be similar, utilizing a common set of standards and competencies. “The
Council on Technology Teacher Education (CTTE) Undergraduate Studies Committee also
recognized there was a need to identify and establish technical competencies for technical
competencies for technology teacher education programs” (Scott, 2006, p. 43).
Teachers must also be sure that they have a solid understanding of the information that
they are delivering. Individuals should be confident in their content knowledge. “As
biotechnology lessons begin making their way into the technology education curriculum, those
technology educators who develop them will need to be confident that the content they deliver is
accurate and transferrable across the curriculum” (Wells, 1995, p. 12). “An important aspect to
keep in mind when considering teachers’ limited engagement in biotechnology teaching stems
from the nature of the contents to be addressed and the recommended strategies to do so. To
some extent, the features of biotechnology-related contents swerve from the traditional factual
and objective science subjects with which most teachers are acquainted. Moreover, authentic
inquiry-driven biotechnology curricula, which have been reported to efficiently promote
scientific literacy have also been shown to be demanding for teachers” (Fonseca, 2012, p. 370).
Educators often model their pedagogies after experiences in their own educational
experiences. However, these experiences often become outdated. This is another factor in
teacher’s lack of training in DBBL. According to Fonseca (2012, p. 372), “Teacher beliefs about

9. 9
education are developed at an early stage during the teachers’ own education years, so these are
usually already established when they enter their teacher education program and, In spite of this
rigidity, teachers’ prior beliefs continue to be shaped during their practicing years. Experience
foils the structuring of novice teachers’ beliefs and perceptions into coherently interwoven
conceptual frameworks in which newly developed knowledge is integrated. However,
experienced teachers may adopt identical behaviors as those of novices when asked to address
contents outside their area of expertise”.
Implications
To make Biotechnology a prominent subject taught to middle and high school students,
teachers will need additional training in the Designed Based Biotechnology Literacy (DBBL)
approach. The purpose of this paper was to create awareness about the current need for
additional, as well as continual, biotechnology education for teachers and pre-service teachers.
The goal was to highlight the importance of creating technologically literate citizens in middle
and high school, emphasize the need for teachers to proficient in delivering this content in an
authentic manner.
Through my personal experiences in this DBBL course throughout the semester, I had the
opportunity to take part in biotechnology challenges in a real world context. These challenges
required me to learn concepts in a traditional manner, however I then applied my learning in a
multidisciplinary approach to solve a problem. This tactic gave me deeper content knowledge,
but also the tools necessary to apply this information in various situations.
In addition to the requirement of additional training and education for teachers, there are
supplementary implications that would keep one from teaching using a DBBL approach. The

10. 10
first would be cost. Often DBBL lessons require a variety of materials; the public school system
may not have the funds needed to implement these lessons.
The amount of time required to teach a DBBL lesson is very extensive. With state
mandated tests, its difficult to ensure that all standards needed for the school year will be
addressed if an abundance of time is utilized on a design based learning activity. Educators are
often hesitant to incorporate these activities into their practice due to the fear of low performance
on standardized tests.
It is unrealistic to believe that all teachers, especially veteran teachers, will leave their
current practices in order to try new ones. Because of this, small cohorts and interested
individuals will have to begin learning and implementing these approaches in their classroom.
The trend will catch on and grow, however not at the rate of our evolving society.
Finally, the last implication that will be addressed is teacher’s uncertainty about their
student’s abilities. Not all students will enter a class on the same level. Many teacher will be
afraid to implement a DBBL lesson because of their misunderstanding of how to differentiate
instruction.
Biotechnology is a rapidly growing subject and is incorporated into many industries.
There has be a dramatic growth in the number of careers available in biotechnology. Currently,
individuals are not being prepared to enter a career in one of these fields due to lack of education
in the field of biotechnology. In order for students to receive the education that is needed in
biotech, the teacher should deliver content using a DBBL approach. Unfortunately, teachers are
not prepared to teach using a designed based approach. This issue can be addressed by
implementing additional teaching training for current and pre-service teachers. Educators should
have a base in the eight content areas of biotechnology as well as understand that biotechnology

11. 11
is multidisciplinary and should not be left to the responsibility of only the technology education
teacher. By mandating additional education, teachers will begin to deliver instruction in a
manner that prepares them for the future and pushes biotechnology into a predominant subject to
middle and high school students.

12. 12
Bibliography
Bigler, A. M., & Hanegan, N. L. (2011; 2010). Student content knowledge increases after
participation in a hands-on biotechnology intervention. Journal of Science Education
and Technology, 20(3), 246-257. doi:10.1007/s10956-010-9250-7
Borgerding, L. A., Sadler, T. D., & Koroly, M. J. (2013). Teachers’ concerns about
biotechnology education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(2), 133-
147. doi:10.1007/s10956-012-9382-z
Brown, D. C., Kemp, M. C., & Hall, J. (1998). On teaching biotechnology in kentucky. Journal
of Industrial Teacher Education, 35(4), 44.
Campbell, D. A. (2007). Biotechnology in the middle school curriculum. Science Scope,
31(4), 42.
DeLuca, V. W. (1991). Implementing technology education problem-solving activities.
Journal of Technology Education, 2(2), 1-10.
Dunham, T., Wells, J., & White, K. (2002) Biotechnology education: Multiple instructional
strategies approach. Journal of Technology Education, 14 (1), 65-81.
Fitzsimons, P. J. (2007). Biotechnology, ethics and education. Studies in Philosophy and
Education, 26(1), 1-11. doi:10.1007/s11217-006-9011-5
France, B. (2007). Location, location, location: Positioningbiotechnologyeducationfor the
21st
century. Studies in Science Education(43), 88-122. doi: 10.1080/03057260708560228
Friedman, Yali,Managing, Editor. (2008). Continuing education in biotechnology. Journal of
Commercial Biotechnology, 14(4), 275-276.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/jcb.2008.30
Hanegan, N. L., & Bigler, A. (2009). Infusing authentic inquiry into biotechnology. Journal of
Science Education and Technology, 18(5), 393-401. doi:10.1007/s10956-009-9155-
5
Josefsson, L. (1987). The impact of biotechnology on school teaching. Biochemical
Education, 15(4), 177-179. doi:10.1016/0307-4412(87)90006-9
Leslie, G., & Schibeci, R. (2003). What do science teachers think biotechnology is? : Does it
matter? Australian Science Teachers Journal, 49(3), 16-21.
Moreland, J., Jones, A., & Cowie, B. (2006). Developing pedagogical content knowledge for
the new sciences: The example of biotechnology. Teaching Education, 17(2), 143.

13. 13
National Science and Technology Council (2013). Federal Science, Technology, Engineering
and Mathematics (STEM) Education 5-year Strategic Plan. Washington D.C
Peterman. (2014). Self report and academic factors in relation to high school students’
success in an innovative biotechnology program. Journal of Technology Education, 25
(2), 35-51.
Scott, D. G., Washer, B. A., & Wright, M. D. (2006). A delphi study to identify recommended
biotechnology competencies for first-Year/Initially certified technology education
teachers. Journal of Technology Education [H.W.Wilson - EDUC], 17(2), 43.
Shoulders, C. W., & Myers, B. E. (2012). Teachers' use of agricultural laboratories in
secondary agricultural education. Journal of Agricultural Education, 53(2), 124.
Steele, F., & Aubusson, P. (2004). The challenge in teaching biotechnology. Research in
Science Education, 34(4), 365-387. doi:10.1007/s11165-004-0842-1
Wells, J. G., (1994). Establishing a taxonometic structure for the study of biotechnology in
secondary school technology education. Journal of Technology Education 6 (1), 58-
75.
Wells, J.G., (1995). Defining biotechnology. The Technology Teacher: Journal of the
International Technology Education Association.
Yakar, Z. (2014). Effect of teacher education program on science process skills of pre-
service science teachers. Educational Research and Reviews, 9(1), 17.