The Ethics of Brain Research: Evaluation of “Mind the Gap”

Introduction

The “Futures: The Ethics of Brain Research” project is part of Y-Touring’s Genetics Futures programme and is funded by the Wellcome Trust. The centrepiece of the project is the “Mind the Gap” performance, consisting of a play and supporting debate. The performance was developed through a collaborative process. People Science and Policy Ltd was commissioned to evaluate the whole programme.

Y-Touring had five objectives for the “Futures: The Ethics of Brain Research” project. These were to:

  1. stimulate and inform debate about the ethics of brain research amongst targeted sets of students;
  2. encourage and facilitate inter-disciplinary working amongst school teachers;
  3. increase the impact of Theatre in Education, by integrating digital technology into the development and delivery of drama;
  4. develop the capacity of professional playwrights to write about topics embracing biomedical issues; and
  5. share and disseminate lessons learned during the project.

The evaluation addressed the first four objectives.

Methodology

To evaluate whether or not the project “stimulated and informed debate” we focused on students. A sample of schools hosting performances of “Mind the Gap” was selected to represent a cross-section of the schools participating. Before and after surveys of students were used to assess their knowledge and attitudes and any changes in these as a result of the performance. We used qualitative analysis of feedback questionnaires from teachers to assess their views on the performance and supporting materials. The development of writing capacity was assessed qualitatively through discussions and interviews with playwrights and supporting experts at a writers’ workshop and subsequently.

Stimulating and informing debate

As a piece of entertainment, the “Mind the Gap” play and debate has been highly successful in engaging and enthusing both students and teachers alike. In the survey of students, the great majority (86%) said that they enjoyed the play. Similarly, over two thirds (69%) said they had enjoyed the debate.

For analysis purposes, we considered three factors: whether students had been informed by the performance; whether they had been stimulated; and whether the performance was impacting on all students equally. A number of the attitude statements sought to explore students’ understanding of the nature and prevalence of brain disorders. For example, there were statistically significant improvements in students’ understanding of the nature and prevalence of and potential treatments for brain disorders. A good deal of the content of “Mind the Gap” focuses on memory in its different incarnations; unwanted memory loss, bad memories and the role of medication in enhancing or diminishing memory. The performance has influenced students’ attitudes to these issues.

The baseline survey showed three important factors which influenced initial perceptions, these were age; previous experience (either personally or through someone they know) of a brain disorder or mental illness; and gender. The views of the younger age group (14 and under) were less well-formed or certain than those of the older students (15 and over). Rather like the age factor, experience made students more certain of their views. Unlike the previous factors, gender did not have an effect on the certainty of initial views. There were, however, some marked differences between the genders in terms of both knowledge and attitudes. Girls had greater baseline knowledge than boys, were more empathetic than boys and were less inclined to think that medical/chemical interventions were appropriate, although they were more likely to think that brain disorders could be treated.

Follow-up data collected after the performance showed a reduction in the differences linked to age and previous experience, but not with gender. The implication of these findings is that the baseline differences observed for age and experience are largely down to previously acquired knowledge, whether through direct personal experience of brain disorders or greater maturity. The effect of “Mind the Gap” is to supplement students’ knowledge and therefore closes the gaps in knowledge and attitudes between these students. There were however more sustained gender differences. This suggests that there are more fundamental differences in attitudes between boys and girls at this age that are not necessarily linked to personal experience.

Informing Teaching Practices

The overall reaction of teachers was very positive regarding both the play and the debate. The content was felt to be relevant to the national curriculum for a number of subjects. Both components of the performance kept students’ attention and were considered to be an appropriate length. The Y-Touring debate facilitator was also thought to have made an important contribution to the success of the performance as a whole. Over half of the teachers reported that “Mind the Gap” was used across departments – these collaborations were between two or more of Science, Drama, English, PHSE and Citizenship. There is also a demand for digital material from teachers, but at the moment, the preference is for a medium that is in the possession of the teacher (CD-Rom/DVD) rather than the web.

Developing the Capacity of Playwrights

Nearly all of the playwrights felt that the process had opened their eyes to the possibilities of writing creatively about science and had helped to debunk the myth that science was devoid of emotion and everyday human interest.

Conclusions

“Mind the Gap” has delivered against its objectives. The performance has proved to be a powerful way of both informing and stimulating debate. The students have found the performance both enjoyable and engaging and their knowledge and attitudes have changed as a result of the experience. Teachers regarded the performance as a useful aid to teaching and hosting performances has encouraged cross-curricular working in schools. Finally, the project has contributed successfully to the development of the capacity of professional playwrights to write about topics embracing biomedical issues.

A full report is available to download [1.2mb, pdf ]