This file is also available in Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF).
CASE TEACHING NOTES
by |
Genetic engineering in crops is highly controversial and has received a great deal of coverage by the press. It is a harbinger of the genetic revolution to come. Along with cloning and the genetic therapies that are contemplated for diseases such as muscular dystrophy and cystic fibrosis, genetic engineering of crops is a lightning rod for the hostilities that many members of the public feel toward science. They imagine the future as a place where there will be no mortality and where all traditions and social havens will be lost.
Genetic engineering is an ideal subject for case studies as there are scientific as well as ethical issues that are wonderful fodder for discussion. We have used the case "Torn at the Genes" in a general biology class called Evolutionary Biology. Although the subject matter may be unusual, the case setting is a familiar one for students—a tense dinner discussion over the pros and cons of genetic engineering of crops. The students realize that the resolution of this problem has enormous political and economic consequences. Genetic engineering is not merely a way to make a tastier or cheaper tomato but holds out the promise of feeding the world's hungry. Still, there are strong arguments against the whole idea.
There are two obvious major issues involved with the case: scientific and ethical. The detailed analysis for this case (see paragraph below) explores these issues in a format that highlights the main arguments and the counter-arguments as they might be presented in a debate.
Detailed case analysis is provided in a separate file that is password-protected. To access this information, go to the detailed case analysis. You will be prompted for a username and password. If you have not yet registered with us, you can see whether you are eligible for an account by reviewing our password policy and then apply online or write to answerkey@sciencecases.org.
I have run this case using the discussion method and it takes me about 75 minutes. I give the case out to the students in the previous class so that they have time to research and think about the answers to the study questions listed at the end of the case. Since I typically use small groups in the class, the students receive the case and read it together in their teams and then divide up the questions to research and answer before we discuss the case in the nest class.
On the day we discuss the case, I give the students about 15 minutes to share their answers with their group. The procedure gets all of the students warmed up to participate in a general discussion. In any general discussion it is useful for the instructor to give a brief introduction to the case even though everyone has read it. This helps the students put the problem into the context of their previous reading and experience. At the start of the discussion, I remind the students that the issue of genetic engineering is an enormous problem of the future—a problem that society will wrestle with for many years to come.
The opening question to the group always sets the tone for the whole discussion. Even in cases where there are profound ethical issues at stake, I always like to start with a question that goes to the heart of the science rather than the ethics. If you start off with an ethical question you will be hard pressed to get back to the science in the story. Imagine what would happen if you began the discussion with the question: "Should Marsha eat the tomato?" Consider where the conversation would go. A much safer question is "Who are the characters in the case?" This is an easy entry point into the story line and it is the approach I use. As the people are mentioned (Marsha, Amy, Karen, Brian, Ed, and James), I write their names on the left side of the blackboard. At this time I ask who are these people?
Next I ask the students to tell me what the views of the protagonists in the case are. As I list these, I ask for clarification and explanation of the major points. I first start by asking what Ed's views are ("What would Ed say about the possible benefits of genetically modified foods?") and then list these on the blackboard to the right of the character's names with an arrow drawn from Ed to the list. I then turn to the concerns of the rest of the family, focusing particularly on Marsha, Karen, and Brian. As each concern is mentioned, I write it down on the board to the right of the list with the characters' names, drawing arrows to indicate which character is making which points. This part of the discussion takes up most of the class period, as I tightly focus the discussion around the scientific problems, probing what evidence we have for various claims and scenarios. It is only after the science has been examined that I turn to the ethical issues. These are listed to the far right of the board.
I bring closure to this case by asking the students to vote on whether or not they would eat genetically modified foods. Another possible way to go is to ask them what they think the father in the case, James, should do or think about the problem. After all, he hasn't committed himself. Of course, this will lead to a discussion of his relations within the family as well as dealing with questions of genetically modified food. You may not want to enter into the family tribulations this deeply!
Revised: 09/06/02 nas
This file is also available in Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF).
