{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022988505747126436, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.382198952879581, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Teaching biotechnology: identity in the context of ignorance and knowledgeability

This paper considers the sorts of identities constructed by biotechnology teachers for themselves, biotechnology and their students. Drawing upon insights from critical studies of the public understanding of science, we analyse teachers' views on biotechnology and the teaching of it. These views were partly derived from questionnaires and participant observation, though our main source of data were focus group discussions. Our analysis shows that the teachers held ambivalent views about their role and biotechnology. For example, on the one hand, science and biotechnology are `impure' in the sense of being part of the messy world of politics and ethics. Within this controversial domain, the teachers saw their role as one of assuring `balance' in which the students are exposed to both pro and con dimensions of biotechnology. On the other hand, science and biotechnology are `pure', part of an idealized realm in which useful scientific knowledge is produced. Biotechnology thus was `intellectually interesting in its own right'. We suggest that such ambivalence is not necessarily a problem, reflecting broader social trends.