Exploring Ethical Human-Animal Relationships Among Pre-Service Teachers: A Study of Awareness, Ethical Sensitivity, and Educational Relevance

Authors

  • Sanskriti Keshri Research Scholar, Department of Education, University of Lucknow, India https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1361-1345
  • Dr. Vibha Yadav Assistant Professor, B.Ed. Department, Mahila Vidyalaya Degree College, Lucknow, India

Keywords:

Ethical human-animal relationships, Pre-service teachers, Humane education, Animal welfare, Teacher education, Sustainability education, Ethical sensitivity

Abstract

Human-animal relationships constitute an important but comparatively underexplored dimension of value-oriented and sustainability-oriented education. Although teacher education is expected to contribute to the development of professional knowledge, ethical dispositions and social responsibility, limited empirical attention has been given to how prospective teachers understand the ethical dimensions of human-animal relationships. The present study examined self-reported awareness and ethical orientations concerning human-animal relationships among B.Ed. pre-service teachers. A quantitative, descriptive survey design was adopted. The participants comprised 99 B.Ed. pre-service teachers from the Department of Education and constituent colleges of the University of Lucknow, selected through purposive-cum-convenience sampling. Data were collected using a researcher-developed 24-item questionnaire comprising six dimensions: awareness of the concept of ethical human-animal relationships, awareness of animal exploitation, ethical sensitivity, responsibility and action orientation, educational relevance, and personal attitude towards humane treatment. The instrument was reviewed by an expert and demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .92). Data were analysed using item-wise percentages and dimension-wise mean scores. The six-dimension means ranged from 4.24 to 4.45 on a five-point scale, with ethical sensitivity obtaining the highest mean and educational relevance the lowest. A substantial majority of respondents reported awareness of animal exploitation, concern for animal suffering, acceptance of moral responsibility, support for humane treatment, and recognition of the educational relevance of the issue. However, these findings represent self-reported orientations and should not be interpreted as direct evidence of ethical behaviour or pedagogical competence. Comparison with existing research indicates both convergence and an important contextual distinction: while the present participants reported stronger humane orientations than those reported among pre-service teachers in a Hong Kong study, the difference may reflect contextual, sampling, measurement and social-desirability factors rather than a genuine population difference. In the Indian context, the findings are relevant to NEP 2020's emphasis on environmental awareness, values, sustainability and teacher preparation. The study suggests that teacher education may provide an important setting for moving from general humane attitudes toward critically informed ethical reasoning, reflective practice and responsible action concerning human-animal relationships.

References

Bègue, L. (2022). Explaining animal abuse among adolescents: The role of speciesism. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(7–8), NP5187–NP5207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520959643

Boateng, G. O., Neilands, T. B., Frongillo, E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez, H. R., & Young, S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Frontiers in Public Health, 6, Article 149. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149

Caviola, L., Everett, J. A. C., & Faber, N. S. (2019). The moral standing of animals: Toward a psychology of speciesism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(6), 1011–1029. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000185

Dhont, K., & Hodson, G. (2026). Speciesism and the psychology of animal exploitation. Nature Reviews Psychology, 5, 580–594. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-026-00585-8

Dhont, K., & Ioannidou, M. (2024). Similarities and differences between vegetarians and vegans in motives for meat-free and plant-based diets. Appetite, 195, 107232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2024.107232

Fung, S. C., & Zhou, S. (2020). An investigation of pre-service teachers’ attitudes toward animals and empathy toward humans: Implications for humane education development. Anthrozoös, 33(3), 415–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2020.1746531

Ioannidou, M., Lesk, V., Stewart-Knox, B., & Francis, K. (2024). Don’t mind milk? The role of animal suffering, speciesism, and guilt in the denial of mind and moral status of dairy cows. Food Quality and Preference, 114, 105082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2023.105082

Marriott, S., & Cassaday, H. J. (2022). Attitudes to animal use of named species for different purposes: Effects of speciesism, individualising morality, likeability and demographic factors. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9, Article 138. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01159-8

Ministry of Education. (2020). National Education Policy 2020. Government of India. https://www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/NEP_Final_English_0.pdf

Miralles, A., Raymond, M., & Lecointre, G. (2019). Empathy and compassion toward other species decrease with evolutionary divergence time. Scientific Reports, 9, Article 19555. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-56006-9

Ngai, J. T. K., Yu, R. W. M., Chau, K. K. Y., & Wong, P. W. C. (2021). Effectiveness of a school-based programme of animal-assisted humane education in Hong Kong for the promotion of social and emotional learning: A quasi-experimental pilot study. PLOS ONE, 16(3), e0249033. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249033

Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS Survival Manual: A step-by-step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Pelé, M., Georges, J.-Y., Matsuzawa, T., & Sueur, C. (2021). Editorial: Perceptions of human-animal relationships and their impacts on animal ethics, law and research. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article 631238. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.631238

Samuels, W. E., & Onuoha-Jackson, N. (2023). Learning to care: An in-school humane education program improves affective and cognitive empathy among lower-elementary students. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 5, 100292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2023.100292

Stel, M., & Unterweger, A. (2025). Towards sustainability by reducing speciesism: The effect of a prejudice-based intervention on people’s attitudes and behaviours towards animals. British Journal of Social Psychology, 64(2), Article e12864. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12864

UNESCO. (2017). Education for sustainable development goals: Learning objectives. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247444

UNESCO. (2020). Education for sustainable development: A roadmap. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374802

UNESCO, & Education International. (2021). Teachers have their say: Motivation, skills and opportunities to teach education for sustainable development and global citizenship. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379914

Widmann, K., Busse, T. S., Ehlers, J. P., & Nitsche, J. (2026). From animal ethics to climate change: Integrating human-animal-studies and one health into medical education. One Health, 22, 101399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2026.101399

Downloads

Published

2026-07-31

How to Cite

Sanskriti Keshri, & Dr. Vibha Yadav. (2026). Exploring Ethical Human-Animal Relationships Among Pre-Service Teachers: A Study of Awareness, Ethical Sensitivity, and Educational Relevance. The Voice of Creative Research, 8(3), 203–218. Retrieved from https://thevoiceofcreativeresearch.com/index.php/vcr/article/view/409

Issue

Section

Research Article