There are so many ethical education methods available and more are being improved and created every day.
When institutes want to continue their harming of animals for teaching purposes, we sometimes hear them claim that students need to receive the best education and for that to happen, they need to harm animals. But is this really the case, do students learn better when they participate in a teaching exercise that harms an animal?
Students perform equivalent or better when using non-animal teaching methods. This is likely due to a couple of factors. It has been found that cognitive processes and performance can be impacted by a negative emotional state, therefore students that are uneasy when participating in the animal-based teaching method, may not learn or retain information as well. So, if students are instead able to use non-animal options, the risk of a negative emotional state is drastically minimised.
Also, most harmful animal-based teaching exercises are a one-shot deal, there is no chance of repetition. Alternatively, the majority of these non-harmful options can be practised many if not countless times by a student. If institutes really care about their student's performance, then they must make the change to using humane teaching methods only.
But how do we know that students perform this well with the ethical teaching methods?
The Animals In Science Policy Institute conducted a literature review to explore independent peer-reviewed studies that have compared the teaching efficacy of animal versus non-animal teaching methods. The results showed that around 90% of the 62 studies concluded that students learn equivalently or better by using non-animal teaching methods. This supports the idea that the replacement of animals in teaching is possible, and in many cases, the non-animal option can enhance student learning.
Not only does kind education save animals, but it also helps students be the best they can be.