Before you show this presentation, use the text accompanying each slide to develop presentation notes. Writing the notes yourself enables you to approach the subject matter in a way that is comfortable to you and engaging for your students. Make this presentation as interactive as possible by stopping frequently to ask questions and encourage class discussion.
Ethics is the study of the moral and social dimensions of different issues. Bioethics, then, is the application of ethics to biology, including medicine. It is important to learn about bioethics, because it has many practical impacts in biotechnology as well as everyday life, as we will see. Everyone working in biotechnology needs an understanding of bioethics, and society as a whole is increasingly confronted with questions about bioethics.
Image retrieved from http:// whsc.emory.edu/home/publications/health- sciences/update/2013/feb/HSU_feb2013.html on February 27, 2014.
Ethics tries to understand what are the most moral choices—the most “right” choices—we can make. Just because we can do something does not necessarily mean we should do something. For example, if we could use biotechnology to create a half-human, half-chimpanzee hybrid, should we do it? Why or why not? This is an example of an ethical question.
Image retrieved from http://www.tldm.org/News12/hybrid_man_ape.jpg on February 27, 2014.
As our society depends more and more on technology, we are increasingly faced with ethical questions about how that technology should be used. These are questions that all of us are facing, not just scientists. For example, should we allow genetically modified organisms (GMOs), like rice with bacterial genes for vitamins, to be used for human food? Should we require everyone who is arrested to provide a DNA sample, or just people who are convicted? Is it ethical to genetically engineer animals to produce human organs for transplantation into people? These are just a few examples of the many questions in bioethics today. These are questions that average citizens are being faced with, not just governments and biotechnology companies.
Top photo retrieved from http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/Say-No-To-GMO.jpg on February 27, 2014. Bottom photo retrieved from http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Cotton-Swab-Cheek-090105-N-5681S-008.jpg. Courtesy of Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Michael Starkey.
The biotechnology industry is very concerned with ethical issues. Biotechnology companies have a need to be seen as ethical by both the government and consumers. If a company conducts research that is considered unethical, it would likely be prosecuted by the federal government. There are specific regulations to guide what types of research are ethical and how all research must be conducted. Breaking these regulations could lead to serious fines and even criminal penalties.
Consumers also impact the biotechnology industry because they decide what products to purchase. If consumers think a new biotechnology product is unethical, the product will probably fail. Already, some people have the stereotype of biotechnology researchers as “mad scientists” who make unethical “Frankenstein” products. Because of this, the biotechnology industry engages in many educational efforts to explain new technologies to the public.
Image retrieved from http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mad_scientist_transparent_background.svg on February 27, 2014, and reproduced here under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:GNU_Free_Documentation_License_1.2).
So, how do we decide if something is ethical or not? This is a difficult question, but a common method is to evaluate the possible choices using three criteria.
The first criteria is respect. In ethics, respect is about whether people are allowed to decide for themselves. For example, if the patient gets to make the final decision about whether to have a medical procedure, that would meet the criterion of respect.
The second criterion is goodness. In ethics, goodness means you are maximizing benefits while minimizing risks. The Hippocratic Oath in medicine (“to do no harm”) is an example of goodness in ethics.
The third criteria is justice. In ethics, justice means that costs and benefits are fairly distributed so that people are not exploited. If the cure for a certain disease was developed by research on poor people who couldn’t afford the resulting drug, that would not meet the criteria of justice. The poor people took the risks of the research but received none of the benefit.
So, in bioethics, any issue is generally evaluated by considering how well it meets the criteria of respect, goodness, and justice.
The challenge in bioethics is that not everyone agrees on whether something is “good” or not. People vary in their values, in what they view as good or “bad.” For example, some vegetarians think it is wrong to eat animals, whereas other people think it is fine to do so. But even among people who eat meat, some will often disagree about which animals it is “right” to eat. So, while most people agree about the three criteria of ethics (respect, goodness, and justice), there is often disagreement about how those criteria should be applied.
You might see the same thing in sports: everyone agrees on what the rules are, but people often disagree about whether a particular action violated the rules.
Image retrieved from http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Chuck_steaks.jpg on February 27, 2014 and reproduced here under the terms of the creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/deed.en ). Image courtesy of pete.
It is hard to get people to agree on what is “right” or “wrong.” Sometimes it is easier to focus on the costs and benefits of different decisions. Ethics also looks at what values are involved in making a certain choice and how different values could lead to different choices.
For example, requiring that every citizen give a DNA sample to the government would have the benefit of making it easier to solve crimes but at the cost of reduced privacy. People who place a high value on individual freedom would probably object to that requirement. People who think that the good of society is more important than individual freedom would probably support the requirement. The goal of ethics is to understand the trade-offs of different decisions and why people might make different choices.
Because bioethics can be looked at from many different perspectives, there are several kinds of groups focused on bioethics.
Bioethics is an academic field of study, and there are college and medical school programs focused on bioethics. Since the government regulates biotechnology research, there are government groups devoted to bioethics. Independent political groups often get involved in bioethical controversies, like debates over stem cells or GMO food crops. Many religious organizations have concerns about biotechnology and have formed groups to study bioethics and advocate for their position. Disputes in bioethics sometimes end up in court, so various legal organizations sponsor groups devoted to bioethics.
It is hard to estimate how many people work primarily in the field of bioethics, but the number is certainly in the thousands, and they come from many different backgrounds. Next, we will look at how bioethics impacts the different areas of biotechnology.
Bioethics 2012 logo retrieved from http://www.thehastingscenter.org/bioethics2012/bioethics2012.gif; copyright The Hastings Center. ABA logo retrieved from http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/images/bioethics/bioethics_header.jpg; copyright American Bar Association. NIH image retrieved from National Institutes of Health. All images included under fair-use guidelines of Title 17, US Code.
Health care professionals, like nurses and doctors, face bioethics questions almost every day. Most health care providers receive at least some training in bioethics, and many wish they had a stronger background in bioethics because of how important it can be in dealing with patients. For example, how should a doctor react to a mother who, because of her religious beliefs, refuses to authorize a certain treatment for her 5-year-old daughter?
Society also has to deal with bioethics questions in medicine, such as whether teenagers can get confidential treatment for sexually transmitted diseases or whether their parents must be informed. Another example of how medical bioethics affects everyone is with vaccinations for common diseases. Should we allow some people to refuse such vaccines, even though doing so puts others at risk? Medical bioethics is an important field of study, with numerous implications for health care providers and society at large.
Image courtesy of ANGELUS. Retrieved from http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Doctor_Icon.png on 2/27/14 and reproduced under CC BY-SA 3.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en).
Agricultural biotechnology is a multibillion dollar industry, but many people have strong feelings about the ethics of applying biotechnology to food. For example, GMOs are partially or fully banned in some countries. Opponents of GMOs often cite ethical concerns as a reason for restricting or banning GMOs. Advocates of GMOs argue that it is unethical to tolerate lower food production and quality given the millions of people who die from malnutrition every year. Countries with food production and distribution problems could benefit from using GMO crops; however, they would be dependent on large US companies who hold many of the GMO crop patents. Also, there are costs to learn the new skills required to grow and manage GMO crops.
The future of agricultural biotechnology depends on the laws passed by governments and by what consumers are willing to buy. Many factors are involved in both of those decisions, but ethical concerns certainly play a major role.
Image retrieved from http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/March_Against_Monsanto_Vancouver.jpg
Right image courtesy of http://www.volganet.ru/. Retrieved from http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Agriculture_in_Volgograd_Oblast_002.JPG on 1/16/14 and reproduced under CC BY-SA 3.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en).
Biotechnology has potential to provide many significant environmental benefits. However, these potential benefits come with risks and ethical questions. How much should we modify the environment while trying to save it? Is it ethical to use cloning in an attempt to save an endangered species from extinction? Using recombinant DNA (rDNA) methods can produce pollution-eating bacteria, but is it ethical to use them to clean up an oil spill if they will alter the natural ecosystem in the long run?
Some people would argue that it is unethical to use rDNA, even to make a soybean that produces better biofuel, because then humans are “playing God” by mixing genes across different species. Others feel that the environmental good of better biofuel outweighs any ethical concerns about gene transfers. Even people who agree about protecting the environment may have different ideas about what are acceptable and ethical ways of doing so.
Image courtesy United States Department of Energy. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodiesel#Distribution on 2/27/14.
The increasingly important role that DNA and forensic science plays in law enforcement is raising many new ethical questions. Comparing DNA from a crime scene with a DNA database is a powerful way to help solve crimes. However, the US Constitution guarantees us protection from “unreasonable searches and seizures.” So, is taking DNA from someone an “unreasonable” search? If you drink a soda in a police station, should the police be allowed to take your DNA from the can? This question never came up in the past, because the technology to retrieve and analyze such small amounts of DNA did not exist.
Improvements in biotechnology often raise new ethical questions for society and new legal questions for the courts. An important question facing both society and the courts right now is about who should be required to be in the DNA database that is kept by the US government. Should the database contain DNA samples from everyone who has been arrested or just people who have been convicted? Or just people convicted of certain kinds of crimes? At the time of this writing, the laws are different in different states, and there are many legal challenges to those laws in the court system. This is an example of how biotechnology raises a mix of legal and ethical questions in forensic science.
Image retrieved from http:// www.biopoliticaltimes.org/img/original/DNA_handcuffs.jp g on February 27, 2014.
Academic research projects involving biotechnology are usually reviewed to make sure they meet ethical guidelines. Special government and university committees monitor research on human subjects and research using animals. Committees that regulate the use of human subjects in research are known as IRBs (Institutional Review Boards), and their focus is on bioethics. IRB committee members have training in bioethics, and not all proposals for experiments are approved. So there is a risk that research projects can be delayed or stopped because of the requirement to get advance approval. Even for experiments that are approved, the IRB often requires the scientists to make modifications to ensure that the research is ethical. These modifications may increase the research project’s cost, in terms of both dollars and time.
Similar committees exist for research on animals, though the specific rules are different. All research involving human or animal subjects must be approved in advance by these boards, and the approval process can take months. Because of the requirement to get advance approval, human subjects’ and animal subjects’ welfare is protected. Scientists who do basic research, then, must have good knowledge of bioethics in order to design experiments that will be approved.
Image retrieved from http://blogs.utpa.edu/research/2010/10/28/the-irb/ on February 27, 2014.
Ethical questions are important in biotechnology. We have seen how ethics impacts the role of biotechnology in medicine, agriculture, the environment, forensics, and basic research. Indeed, almost every aspect of biotechnology is impacted by ethical concerns. The ethical questions raised by biotechnology impact not only scientists but also society and average citizens. By studying bioethics, we can gain a better understanding of the moral costs and benefits of different decisions. Even though it is very unlikely that everyone will agree about what the “right” course of action is, bioethics can help us understand the different values that are in conflict and thus understand why people may come to different conclusions.
Image retrieved from http://whsc.emory.edu/home/publications/health-sciences/update/2013/feb/HSU_feb2013.html on February 27, 2014.
Before you show this presentation, use the text accompanying each slide to develop presentation notes. Writing the notes yourself enables you to approach the subject matter in a way that is comfortable to you and engaging for your students. Make this presentation as interactive as possible by stopping frequently to ask questions and encourage class discussion.
In this presentation, we will learn how to apply a decision-making framework to questions in bioethics.
Different people often reach different conclusions about questions in bioethics. As a consequence, it is easy to have long rambling arguments about bioethics without really learning anything. These kinds of discussions can go in circles without any productive result, like a dog chasing its own tail. In order to communicate and think effectively about bioethics, it is very helpful to have an organized and systematic approach. This presentation develops one such approach, called a decision-making framework.
Since people often have strong feelings about ethical issues, it is important to stay polite when discussing them. A critical skill in any job is to express disagreement in an appropriate way.
1. Offer constructive criticism.
If you disagree with an idea, explain why. Don’t say, “Banning all biotechnology research is a stupid idea.” Tell people why it would be harmful.
2. Don’t get personal.
Even if you think someone else’s opinion is totally wrong, you don’t need to criticize them. Disagree with their idea and explain why. In other words, don’t say, “If you believe that you’re an idiot.” Instead, say, “I feel very strongly that would be a bad decision and here’s why….”
3. Think about the language and the tone you use.
No matter how frustrated you get, it is not appropriate to shout at or insult people during the discussion. Pay attention to the words you use. You can find ways to express yourself strongly without being rude. Notice if your tone of voice is starting to get loud and adjust it back to a normal speaking voice. If you win the argument, you want to win because you made a good case for your point of view―not because the other people got tired of you screaming or being mean and just gave up.
The decision-making framework has six steps. We will look at the steps first and then apply them to an example scenario in bioethics. The first step is to articulate (state) the main question or dilemma. What has to be answered?
The second step is to determine what the relevant facts are. These are objective statements that we can all agree are true. For example, if the bioethics question involves a 12-year-old girl seeking treatment for a sexually transmitted disease, the age of the girl would be a fact, but the claim that she was a “bad girl” would not be because that is a value judgment, not a fact.
The third step is to describe who is impacted by the decision or issue. These people are called stakeholders, and it is important to understand who they are—there are often more stakeholders than you think.
The fourth step is to understand what values are involved in the decision. What laws and morals might apply? If a family disagrees over whether to remove a comatose person from life support, this would involve laws regarding medical decisions and values regarding end-of-life issues. Note that this step is not about deciding what decision is legal or moral. Instead, this step just describes what legal and moral issues are at stake.
The fifth step is to consider all the possible solutions to the question/dilemma, and what the costs and benefits are for each of those solutions.
The sixth and final step is to pick which of those solutions you will support and explain your reasons for doing so.
Presentation 3 Notes: Henrietta Lacks and Her Cells
Before you show this presentation, use the text accompanying each slide to develop presentation notes. Writing the notes yourself enables you to approach the subject matter in a way that is comfortable to you and engaging for your students. Make this presentation as interactive as possible by stopping frequently to ask questions and encourage class discussion.
In this presentation, we are going to look at the case of Henrietta Lacks and her cells. This case helped shape current rules and practices in many areas of biotechnology.
The story of Henrietta Lacks and her cells raises many important questions about bioethics. For example, what kind of permission is necessary before using someone’s tissues in research? Does the person have to approve the specific research project? Or if they are having a tumor removed, should they be happy for researchers to do whatever they want with the tissue? If their tissue is used to make a valuable discovery, should they receive a share of the profits, even though they didn’t do any of the work? These kinds of questions were not being asked back in 1951, when a woman named Henrietta Lacks walked into a Baltimore hospital.
In January 1951, Henrietta Lacks went to Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore complaining of a pain “in her womb.” She had cervical cancer and died that October at age 31. She left behind a husband and five children. A sample of her tumor taken that January was used for research.
Image retrieved from http://ictr.johnshopkins.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Henrietta-Lacks-2-thumb-400xauto-7959-Edit.jpg
Before 1951, human cells could only be kept alive outside the body for a few days. This limited the kind of research that could be done on human cells. But Dr. George Gey discovered that the cells from Henrietta Lacks’ tumor thrived outside the body. They did not die, and so they are considered “immortal.” The cells from Henrietta Lacks’ tumor lived and grew and were called the HeLa cell line (for Henrietta Lacks).
In the image of HeLa cells above, the nuclei are the large ovals (stained blue in color images), the long strings are the support structure of the cells (stained green in color images), and the small clumps outside the nuclei are a specific protein involved in cell division (stained orange in color images).
Image retrieved from http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/HeLa-I.jpg on February 27, 2014. Image courtesy of National Institutes of Health.
HeLa cells allowed human cells to be used in lab experiments and played a key role in many important discoveries. HeLa cells were used to test the polio vaccine and in the research that showed how certain kinds of HPV (human papillomavirus) contribute to cervical cancer. The research that identified HIV as the cause of AIDS also made use of HeLa cells. In general, much of our understanding of how cells work comes from research using this cell line, which is still used today. An estimated 50 million tons of HeLa cells have been grown, and research using them has generated over 50,000 scientific publications and led to numerous Nobel Prizes. In 2013, the complete genome of the HeLa cell line was sequenced.
Image modified from http://www.embl.de/aboutus/communication_outreach/media_relations/2013/130311_Heidelberg/PR_Steinmets_110313_image_FiNAL_l.jpg
Henrietta Lacks had never given permission for the sample from her tumor to be used in research. The consent form she signed at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore was only about surgical operations for treating her. For 20 years her family did not even know that her cells were being used for research. Her medical records were published in the 1980s without their consent. In 2013, a German team published the complete genome sequence of the HeLa without notifying the Lacks family.
The Lacks family received no direct benefits from the use of Henrietta’s cells. Some of the family members lacked health insurance and so had only limited access to some of the treatments that had been developed using HeLa cells. While the Lacks family had never requested any financial compensation, some family members argued that they should be involved in decisions regarding the use of HeLa cells, especially on matters that could potentially impact them (e.g., the publication of Henrietta Lacks’ medical record and genome). The family reached an agreement with the US government in 2013. Part of that agreement restricted access to the HeLa genome to researchers approved by a committee that includes Lacks family members.
Lawrence Lacks quotation from: Skloot, Rebecca, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. New York: Crown Publishing, 2010), 168.
Image retrieved from http://nihrecord.od.nih.gov/newsletters/2013/08_30_2013/images/story2Pic1.jpg on February 27, 2014.
It is important to remember, however, that the HeLa cells had no value to Henrietta Lacks. In fact, they were part of the tumor that killed her. Tissue from her tumor was removed in an attempt to treat her cancer, not in order to do research. Removing as much of the tumor as they could was the best treatment the doctors could provide for Henrietta Lacks. They also gave her radiation treatment and performed surgery in hopes of eliminating the cancer, all without charging her. Their motivation was not to do research but to care for Henrietta Lacks, as they cared for many other poor and predominantly African American patients in inner-city Baltimore. Other hospitals at the time would only treat white patients. But instead of discarding the tumor tissue they removed, they used it for research. They gave the cells to other labs for free and never tried to patent (gain exclusive rights to) the cells.
It was only through the work of several scientists, especially Dr. George Gey, that the potential of Henrietta Lacks’ cells was identified and realized. Without the work of the scientists, the cells would never have had any value to anyone. Most everyone agrees, though, that the doctors should have gotten Henrietta Lacks’ permission to use her cells for research and kept her anonymous, even though this was not standard practice in the 1950s.
Left image retrieved from http://freedigitalphoto.net; right image from http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Medical_Laboratory_Scientist_US_NIH.jpg on February 27, 2014. Photo from National Institutes of Health.
Today, any research using people requires their informed consent. Informed consent means that not only must the person give his or her approval, but that person must first understand what he or she is being asked, especially the risks involved. As such, children and people who are mentally incapacitated are not legally able to give informed consent. Any medical treatments also require the informed consent of the patient.
However, many consent forms for medical treatment allow removed tissue to be used anonymously for research. For example, many hospitals (including Johns Hopkins Hospital) use tissue removed during surgeries for research, though they no longer identify the person the tissue comes from.
Again, it is important to remember that the motivation for removing the tissue is to treat the patient. But instead of discarding it, sometimes they keep the tissue for research. They are not operating on people to obtain tissue for research; the tissue is only kept for research if the patient has agreed and the source of the tissue is kept anonymous.
Despite much stronger and clearer rules about research and tissue use, questions still arise about ownership. A famous court case in the 1990s resulted from a spleen, a cell line, and a billion dollars.
Years earlier, John Moore had his spleen removed as part of a treatment for leukemia. Moore gave informed consent for the operation. Moore’s doctor, David Golde, used Moore’s spleen to create a useful cell line—without telling Moore. The cell line was patented and sold to a biotech company, and Golde made several million dollars. The cell line is estimated to be worth about a billion dollars.
Moore filed suit for a share of the profits but ultimately lost because the court ruled that he had no right to profit from something he had knowingly and willingly discarded (i.e., his spleen). The court did agree, though, that Dr. Golde should have informed Moore of any economic or personal interest in using or studying his tissues.
Suggestions that patients play a larger role in how their tissues are used face serious practical problems. An estimated 20 million tissue samples are taken every year from people in the United States. This is in addition to the hundreds of millions of stored tissue samples. A single tissue sample can be used for multiple research projects over many years. A single research project might make use of thousands of tissue samples.
Usually, important discoveries come from data based on tissue samples from hundreds of people. Cell lines, like HeLa or the one from John Moore’s spleen, are the exception to that rule, since they are usually made from one person’s cells. But cell lines are just one out of many kinds of different research that is done with human tissue samples. Biotechnology research using such samples has resulted in major advances, included better treatment for many diseases.
Image retrieved from http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tissue_processing_-_Paraffin_inclusion_of_a_histological_sample.jpg on April 23, 2014
Different people also have different opinions about research using samples of their own tissue.
For example, imagine you go to the doctor’s office for a routine checkup. As part of that, a blood sample is taken to check your health. First, though, you have to give your informed consent for the blood sample to be taken. On the consent form, you are given two choices for what will be done with any blood that is left over after the tests have been run. Option 1 is to allow any extra blood to be used for research, as long as it stays anonymous (so your name is not associated in any way with it). Option 2 is that you want any extra blood discarded.
The bioethical issues raised by Henrietta Lacks and the HeLa cells are still important issues today. The question of how to manage tissue samples comes up on a daily basis in hospitals and research labs around the world. In the biotechnology industry, literally billions of dollars can depend on the ownership of cell lines. Although the rules are much clearer today than in 1951, when Henrietta Lacks went to the hospital, there are still many ethical and legal gray areas where people disagree on what is right. That’s why it is important to think carefully about bioethics.
Image retrieved from http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/Doctor_explains_x-ray_to_patient.jpg/220px-Doctor_explains_x-ray_to_patient.jpg on February 27, 2014. Image courtesy of National Institutes of Health and Rhoda Baer, photographer.
Rubric: Statement of OpinionStudent Name(s): _____________________________________________ Date: _______________
Exemplary Solid Developing Needs Attention
Thesis Statement
The thesis statement is correctly placed, presents the topic of the piece, and clearly states the author’s opinion.
The thesis statement states the author’s opinion and is correctly placed in the first paragraph of the assignment.
The thesis statement mentions some of the main points to be discussed but does not clearly state the author’s opinion and may not be placed early enough in the assignment.
It is difficult to identify a thesis statement; the assignment includes no clear statement of the author’s opinion.
Reasons, Support, and Focus
Three or more excellent points are made with good support. It is evident the writer put much thought into this assignment. The assignment stays focused on key arguments and does not waste time on minor details.
Three or more points are made with support, but the arguments are somewhat weak in places. The writer doesn’t persuade completely. The assignment is mostly focused on key arguments.
Two points are made; shows some preparation, but arguments are weak. The assignment sometimes loses its focus on key arguments.
Arguments are very weak or completely missing. The assignment treats key arguments and minor details as equally important.
Opposing Arguments
Three or more opposing arguments are thoroughly addressed and rebutted.
Two opposing arguments are addressed and rebutted.
Only one opposing argument is addressed or the arguments are not thoroughly rebutted.
No opposing arguments are discussed.
Profes-sional Language and Vocabulary
The assignment uses correct scientific terminology. Word choice is varied and includes interesting vocabulary. The assignment uses respectful language and tone to argue ideas rather than attacking individuals.
The assignment uses mostly correct scientific terminology. Word choice is somewhat varied. The assignment uses respectful language but is not entirely successful at arguing ideas rather than attacking individuals.
The assignment contains several mistakes in the use of scientific language. Word choice is limited and predictable. The assignment does not consistently use respectful language or the assignment devotes an equal amount of time to arguing ideas and attacking individuals.
The assignment avoids using scientific language entirely or it includes several major mistakes in the use of scientific language. Word choice is extremely limited. The assignment makes no effort to use respectful language or it is noticeably more focused on attacking individuals than arguing ideas.
Spelling and Grammar
The assignment contains no spelling or grammatical errors.
The assignment includes very few minor spelling or grammatical errors.
There are spelling or grammatical errors in the assignment, but the assignment is still readable and understandable.
The assignment contains so many spelling or grammar errors that it is difficult to read or to understand the
Guide: Teaching ReflectionThis guide provides ideas for improving students’ ability to reflect on their learning. It includes specific suggestions for helping students reflect on meeting the learning objectives of a lesson. Students participating in NAFTrack Certification will benefit from practicing reflective writing, since they will respond to reflection prompts as part of the NAFTrack Certification process.
All thinking requires some type of reflection in order for learning to take place. Reflection is a cluster of skills that involves observing, questioning, and putting ideas and experiences together to give a fresh meaning to them all. The reflection activities throughout this course bring students a sense of ownership of what they have learned and a better understanding of themselves and their abilities.
Build your students’ reflection skills by starting with easier reflection questions that lead to more complex ones. The list below, based on Bloom’s Taxonomy, helps students break down what they need to think about so that they gain confidence and strengthen their metacognition. Because each question takes the previous answer a step further, students can come up with answers to each question and eventually wind up with everything they need to work with to craft an answer for the highest-level reflection questions.
Learning Levels (From Lower to Higher Order) Examples of Reflection Questions
Remembering (retrieving, recognizing, recalling) What can I remember? What did I do?
Understanding (constructing meaning) What do I think it means? What conclusions did I come to? What are my takeaways? What did I get out of it?
Applying (extending learning to a new setting) How could I use this [knowledge, experience] again? In what new way could this be valuable?
Analyzing (breaking material apart, seeing how the parts fit together and what the overall purpose is)
What are the different parts of this [experiment, assignment, project, experience]? As a whole, what is the purpose/main idea?
Evaluating What has this [project, assignment, experience, experiment] taught me about myself—my strengths, my challenges? What am I proud of? What could I do better next time? What are my contributions? I used to think…but now I think….
Creating Is there another, better way to put the pieces of this [project, assignment, experience, experiment] together? What could I [create, write, plan] next?
Another source of ideas for teaching reflection: http://www.visiblethinkingpz.org/
Follow these tips to guide students in responding to reflection questions on learning objectives:
Read the reflection question aloud to the class and have students rephrase the question using their own words.
Explain that they should use the reflection question to describe what they have learned during the lesson as it relates to the learning objective.
Review the meaning of the learning objective before students get started on their reflections.
Refer to the examples below, which represent good responses to these types of reflection questions.
ExampleBelow is an example learning objective with example student reflection prompts and responses. Although students only encounter the actual NAFTrack Certification prompts once they are on the NAFTrack Certification assessment platform, examples like these give students a sense of the type of reflection they will be asked to engage in. You can copy and paste these examples into a Word document for students to review and discuss as a class. You can add more prompts for students to answer, or customize this content to best suit your students and your goals for them.
Learning objective Identify major public health issues and explain why they are important
Prompts and responsesThink of the assignments that you completed during this lesson. Choose one to use as your work sample as you answer the questions below.
Explain how completing this work sample helped you to meet this learning objective. Describe the ideas and skills that you used.
I chose the informational profile that I wrote as my work sample. It helped me meet this learning objective because it is about a major public health issue: HIV. My profile explains that HIV affects millions of people around the world. HIV is also a big problem because it is so difficult to treat. To write my profile, I learned about many ideas that were new to me. I read about what researchers think causes HIV, how it affects the body, and what cures they are working on. The skills I used are writing and researching. I had to practice putting the articles I read into my own words so that I wouldn’t plagiarize. Being able to organize information is another skill I used.
Describe what you could improve about your work sample.
I tried really hard to make my profile organized, but now I see ways I could have laid information out to make it easier to read. I don’t think I wrote enough about how HIV is transmitted from one person to another. It would have been good to include my favorite websites so people could learn more if they want to.
Promoting Reflection in the ClassroomYou can also use the following sample questions to promote a culture of reflection in your classroom—during class and small-group oral reflections, during PowerPoint presentations, and when students are having a discussion and you want to draw them out more.
Can you discuss that more?
Why do you think that happens?
What evidence do you have to support that?
Do you see a connection between this and _________?
bioethics The ethics of medical and biological research and practice.
cell line A group of cells grown in culture medium that are descended from a single cell and have a uniform genetic makeup.
cost-benefit analysis A systematic comparison of the costs and benefits of a decision.
DNA database In forensic science, a government database that holds the DNA profiles of convicts and others, against which DNA recovered from crime scenes can be compared.
ethics Rules of conduct based on the moral principles or values of a particular group or culture.
Frankenstein A fictional monster created by a scientist, a term often applied to manipulated life forms by opponents.
HeLa cells The first immortal human cell line, produced from the tumor cells of Henrietta Lacks in 1951.
Henrietta Lacks An African American woman who lived in Maryland and died of cervical cancer at the age of 31. Cells taken from her tumor while she was being treated were used to create the HeLa cell line.
human subjects research Any research (systematic generation of new knowledge) involving humans as the object of the research.
immortal cells Another name for cell lines.
informed consent A person’s willing agreement to undergo a surgical or medical procedure or participate in a clinical study after being properly advised of the nature of the treatment and its potential risks and benefits.
in vitro fertilization Fertilization that occurs outside the body. (See also test-tube baby.)
IRB (institutional review board)
A committee charged with reviewing all proposals for human subjects research at a given institution (e.g., a university).
justice In the context of ethics, justice usually means fairness: the costs and benefits are distributed equally.
model organism A nonhuman species that is well suited for, and commonly used in, research to study particular biological processes. Examples of model organisms are E. coli bacteria, baker’s yeast, roundworms, fruit flies, squid, and mice.
moral Standards of accepted behavior in a community.
respect In the context of ethics, respect usually means that people are allowed to make their own decisions.
society The groups of people living together in connected communities.
stakeholder A person or institution impacted by a decision or issue.
test-tube baby A baby produced using in vitro fertilization.
tissue sample A sample from a person's body, typically taken by a doctor to diagnose or treat a disease.
values In the context of ethics, values are principles of belief.
Bibliography: BioethicsThe following sources were used in the preparation of this lesson and may be useful for your reference or as classroom resources. We check and update the URLs annually to ensure that they continue to be useful.
PrintGilbert, Scott. Bioethics and the New Embryology: Springboards for Debate. New York: WH Freeman and Sinauer Associates, 2005.
McGee, Glenn. Bioethics for Beginners: 60 Cases and Cautions from the Moral Frontier of Healthcare. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012.
Talbot, Marianne. Bioethics: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
Online"About the Henrietta Lacks Foundation." The Henrietta Lacks Foundation, http://henriettalacksfoundation.org/ (accessed February 29, 2016).
American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Bioethics. "Ethical Issues with Genetic Testing in Pediatrics." Pediatrics, June 2001, http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/107/6/1451.full (accessed February 29, 2016).
"Bioethics Resources for Teachers and Students." NIH Fogarty International Center, http://www.fic.nih.gov/ResearchTopics/Bioethics/Pages/teachers-students.aspx (accessed February 29, 2016).
Bioethics Resources on the Web, Tutorials and Case Studies. National Institutes of Health, http://bioethics.od.nih.gov/casestudies.html - research (accessed February 29, 2016).
"Bioethics Tools." University of Washington School of Medicine, Ethics in Medicine Program, http://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/tools/index.html (accessed February 29, 2016).
"Courses, Lectures, and Training." NIH, The Department of Bioethics, http://www.bioethics.nih.gov/courses/index.shtml (accessed February 29, 2016).
"Cross-Cultural Issues." Bioethics, Columbia University Center for Bioethics, http://www.cumc.columbia.edu/dept/bec/service/crosscultural.html (accessed February 29, 2016).
Forensic DNA Ethics. Penn Center for Bioethics, http://forensicdnaethics.org/ (accessed February 29, 2016).
"GeneWatch." Council for Responsible Genetics, http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/GeneWatch/GeneWatchBrowser.aspx (accessed February 29, 2016).
"Informed Consent in Privacy and Progress in Whole Genome Sequencing." Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, http://bioethics.gov/node/2868 (accessed February 29, 2016).
"Minorities, Race, and Genomics." Human Genome Project Information Archive 1990‒2003. http://web.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/elsi/minorities.shtml (accessed February 29, 2016).
"Policy, Legal and Ethical Issues in Genetic Research." National Human Genome Research Institute, http://www.genome.gov/10000006 (accessed February 29, 2016).
Silver, Marc. "A New Chapter in the Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks." National Geographic, August 17, 2013, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/08/130816-henrietta-lacks-immortal-life-hela-cells-genome-rebecca-skloot-nih/(accessed February 29, 2016).
Skloot, Rebecca. The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. Rebecca Skloot, http://rebeccaskloot.com/the-immortal-life/ (accessed February 29, 2016).
