Pixel International Conferences

Scientific findings are essential for solving societal challenges, however, they raise questions for example with regards to bioethics. In Austria, science teaching aims at encouraging students to develop decision-making competence, moral judgment and critical thinking by addressing socioscientific issues. This work considers how Austrian secondary school students (n=17; aged 16) evaluate vaccinations. The students participated in semi-structured pre and post interviews. The pre interviews mainly focused on their attitude towards vaccination. In biology lessons, students deeply studied the immune system and heard about vaccines, herd immunity and the aspect of responsibility in biology lessons. Moreover, a medical scientist talked to the students about the functioning of vaccines, advantages for both the individual and society, prejudice and arguments of vaccination opponents, safety of vaccines, the risk-benefit balance and long-term consequences of measles infections. The post interviews mainly addressed the issues responsibility to society and compulsory vaccinations. Those were discussed in local media when neighbouring Italy introduced certain mandatory vaccinations. The interviews were audio taped, transcribed and qualitatively analysed following Mittelsten Scheid (2008) and Reitschert (2009). Individual students seemed strongly committed to vaccination, others seemed sceptical. However, most students showed a neutral attitude towards vaccination. Students were mostly concerned with protecting the health of individuals and hardly with public health protection. Most students valued freedom of choice and thus rejected compulsory vaccination. However, students hardly addressed other ethical standards or moral norms. In general, students ignored recent lessons learned and argued rather intuitively and emotionally than cognitively and rationally. The results are discussed in view of the prevailing local conditions, under which teachers and students have to deal with socioscientific issues, and how content knowledge, motivation and maturity effect students’ socioscientific argumentation and moral judgment. Critically evaluating normative positions, for example compulsory vaccination, implies considering relevant knowledge as well as multiple points of view and balancing them. Most students seemed to experience difficulties in connecting knowledge, anticipating consequences, showing empathy and changing their perspective. Perhaps they did not associate vaccinations with their personal life, socio-political responsibility or ethical considerations and/or felt that vaccination is not an issue that provokes discussion.

Keywords: socioscientific issues, moral judgment, critical thinking, decision-making, risk;