| Biotechnology Debate |
| Biology Genetics Days 19 + 20 Biotechnology Debate Theme: History (pertaining to conflicts of opinion), problem solving PLO addressed: �analyse implications of current and emerging biomedical, genetic, and reproductive technologies� Objective(s): To become acquainted with some of the issues shaping the present and future of the world. To develop skills in reasoning and argument. Resources: Newspaper, magazine, and internet articles about current and emerging biotechnology. Estimated Time for Activity: 90 min. Content: Over the past two weeks, students have been collecting articles about biotechnology, particularly the controversial kind, from newspapers, magazines, internet sites, and other sources. Using 30 min from lesson 19, students will discuss the articles. As a group they will decide on three or four topics from the articles that they want to debate. They will then get into groups of three and choose an opinion for each topic. The teacher must ensure that opposing views will be presented in the debates. Before next class, each group will prepare for a 10-minute debate arguing their opinion on each topic. Teacher must provide clear criteria for the debate, such as restricting arguments to fact and logic. Alternatively, each group can prepare for one logic-and-fact debate and one debate that allows them to use emotional appeals as well. An emotional appeal is an argument overrides logic by playing on a person�s feelings. The debates should have the structure: Group A: Argument(s) Group B: Argument(s) (cannot respond to Group A at this point) Group A: Rebuttal Group B: Rebuttal Thus, students should prepare a fairly short, convincing argument as well as a rebuttal that anticipates the argument(s) of the opposing group. The rebuttal can be changed during the debate if it does not address the arguments of the opposing group. In lesson 20, pairs of groups of three that have opposing views on a topic will debate for ten minutes. There should be four separate debates, each having one additional student acting as the judge. The judge keeps score in a debate by awarding a point for every fact-based statement (and/or effective emotional appeal) during the rebuttal that undermines a statement made by the other group. After each debate, new match-ups are made and 5 minutes are allotted to prepare for the next debate. The groups that win one debate will debate a new topic, while those that lose will debate the same topic once more. This allows the latter group to improve on their arguments and debate strategies. A group losing two debates in a row will start on a new topic. The four students acting as judges in one debate will change places with debaters in the next. There will be time for three debates, with each taking 15 minutes Closure: A group discussion about debates and how they function in the real world. Teacher should bring up democratic elections, which are, in effect, scorings of the debates of opposing political parties/leaders by the general public. In elections, it often happens that one side �takes all� even though it didn�t get all of the votes. Students can be asked how they feel about this, and how it will affect them as voters. If it is not brought up by a student, the teacher should talk about compromise. Instead of the decisions that are made in society going to one of two extremes, they could find a middle ground that is better for more people. Also, it should be raised that in most real debates there are more than two positions possible, and that sometimes these positions cannot be reconciled. Finally, student should be encouraged to attempt to tease out the facts from debates rather than being swayed by one opinion or another. Assessment: Students assess their performances in the debates, according to criteria set by the teacher. |