STS Chapter 6 Exercises

 

I. Concept Map

Objective:

Create a concept map to visualize your understanding of the nanotechnology, gene therapy, and advancements in climate change solutions. This activity evaluates your ability to integrate ideas from the provided reading and external knowledge, as well as your critical thinking.

Instructions:

1. Use black ink to include information directly from the provided reading.
2. Use red ink to write any questions or uncertainties you have about the topic.
3. Use blue ink to answer your question and/or add related information from other sources, experiences, or your own research.
4. Ensure all connections are clearly labeled, logical, and reflect thoughtful analysis.
5. Submit the concept map at the beginning of the the face-to-face class.

Evaluation Criteria:

• 10 points: All three colors used correctly and appropriately.
• 8 points: Two colors used correctly.
• 6 points: One color used correctly.
• 5 points: One color used incorrectly.
• 4 points: Two colors used incorrectly and/or the concept map is lacking.
• 3 points: All colors used incorrectly.
• 0 point: The concept map is not based on the reading selection.

II. Oral Discussion

Objective:

This exercise aims to develop your ability to analyze and evaluate real-world agricultural challenges using Science, Technology, and Society (STS) concepts. You will assess the role of technologies and practices in agriculture, focusing on their social, ethical, and environmental impacts. This activity encourages critical thinking, practical problem-solving, and understanding how the information age, particularly in the global agricultural context.

Instructions:

1. Read the assigned case study carefully to grasp its context, challenges, and the role of technology in addressing those challenges.
2. Use the discussion questions provided to explore the case study’s social, ethical, and environmental dimensions.
3. Identify both the positive and negative impacts of the technology or practice presented.
4. Apply key STS concepts such as sociotechnical systems, the ethical implications of technology, and the interaction between science, technology, and society.
5. Discuss how these concepts connect to the nanotechnology, gene therapy, and advancements in climate change solutions and address societal and environmental concerns.
6. Collaboratively develop your group’s insights. Three members will be randomly chosen to present your group's findings, so ensure everyone is prepared to contribute.

Evaluation Criteria:

1. Application of STS Concepts (5 points):

   • Are key STS concepts (e.g., sociotechnical systems, ethical considerations, and social construction of knowledge) clearly identified and explained?
   • Does the group demonstrate a strong understanding of how these concepts apply to the case study and its context?

2. Contextual Relevance and Practicality (5 points):

   • Does the analysis address the real-world challenges and opportunities highlighted in the case study?
   • Are the proposed solutions innovative and practical, considering the Philippines' social, economic, and environmental conditions?

3. Critical and Ethical Analysis (5 points):

   • Does the response thoughtfully integrate ethical, social, and environmental considerations into the evaluation of the case study?
   • Is there a balanced critique of the potential benefits, risks, and trade-offs associated with the technologies or practices discussed?

Agriculture Students

Case Study 1: Nanotechnology in Pesticides (India)

Overview:

India introduced nano-pesticides to combat crop pests more effectively and reduce the amount of chemical waste in agriculture. While these products increased crop yields and were less harmful to the environment, farmers were concerned about the lack of long-term health studies and potential soil contamination. Regulatory frameworks were unclear, causing confusion among small-scale farmers about safety protocols.

Discussion Questions:

• How do unclear regulations impact farmers’ trust in new technologies like nano-pesticides?
• What role should the government play in balancing innovation and safety for small-scale farmers?
• How can scientists better communicate the benefits and risks of nanotechnology to farmers?

---

Case Study 2: Nanotechnology in Food Preservation (European Union)

Overview:

The European Union (EU) approved nanotechnology to extend the shelf life of food products. This innovation reduced food waste but sparked public concern about potential health risks. Strict EU regulations required extensive safety testing and clear labeling of nanotechnology-based products, which slowed market adoption but ensured consumer protection.

Discussion Questions:

• Why is public trust important in the adoption of technologies like nanotechnology in food preservation?
• Compare the EU’s regulatory approach to countries with more relaxed regulations. What are the trade-offs?
• What ethical considerations arise when balancing food waste reduction and potential health risks?

---

Case Study 3: Smart Irrigation Systems in Water-Scarce Regions

Overview:

In the United States, scientists developed gene-edited crops that thrive in drought conditions using CRISPR technology. The crops promised economic relief for farmers in drought-prone areas. However, opposition groups argued that introducing gene-edited plants could harm biodiversity and lead to corporate monopolies over seed distribution. U.S. regulators allowed commercialization but mandated transparency in labeling.

Discussion Questions:

• How can regulations address concerns about biodiversity and corporate monopolies in gene-edited crops?
• What responsibilities do scientists have in ensuring gene-edited crops are used sustainably?
• Should countries prioritize economic benefits or ecological risks when approving gene therapy technologies?.

---

Case Study 4: Gene Therapy to Combat Plant Diseases (Brazil)

Overview:

Brazil approved gene therapy to create crops resistant to devastating diseases like citrus greening. While the innovation saved the citrus industry, small-scale farmers faced difficulties affording the new seeds. Policies requiring large companies to subsidize these seeds for small farmers helped, but cultural resistance to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) persisted in rural areas.

Discussion Questions:

• How can policies ensure equitable access to gene therapy technologies for small farmers?
• What cultural factors should scientists consider when introducing GMOs in agriculture?
• How can governments address public resistance to GMOs while promoting innovation?

---

Case Study 5:  International Climate Change Agreements and Agriculture (Philippines)

Overview:

The Philippines, a signatory to the Paris Agreement, implemented policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture by promoting sustainable farming practices. Despite these efforts, many farmers struggled to adopt new methods due to high costs and limited government support. International funding helped, but cultural practices and lack of education on climate-resilient farming remained barriers.

Discussion Questions:

• How do international agreements like the Paris Agreement impact local farmers?
• What steps can governments take to make sustainable farming practices more accessible?
• How can scientists work with local communities to promote climate-resilient agriculture?

---

Case Study 6: Carbon Farming Policies in Australia

Overview:

Australia introduced carbon farming policies to incentivize farmers to adopt practices that store carbon in soil and plants. Farmers received financial compensation for reducing emissions, but critics argued that the policies favored large landowners and overlooked the challenges of small-scale farmers. Scientists provided tools and training to ensure fairness and increase adoption rates.

Discussion Questions:

• How can governments ensure that carbon farming policies benefit both large and small-scale farmers?
• What role do scientists play in making climate-related innovations accessible and equitable?
• Compare Australia’s approach to carbon farming with another country’s strategies. What lessons can be learned?

---

BTLED-AFA Students

Case Study 1: Nanotechnology in Pest Control (Philippines)

Overview:

Researchers in the Philippines developed nano-pesticides to fight crop pests with fewer chemicals. These pesticides worked well and were safer for the environment, but some farmers worried about their long-term safety. The government didn’t have clear rules about using nano-pesticides, which caused confusion among farmers.

Discussion Questions:

• How can the government help farmers understand new technologies like nano-pesticides?
• Why are clear rules important when introducing new technologies?
• What can scientists do to ensure farmers feel safe using nanotechnology?

---

Case Study 2: Nanotechnology in Food Packaging (China)

Overview:

China introduced nanotechnology to make food packaging that keeps food fresh longer. This reduced food waste, but some people were worried about possible health risks from nano-materials. The government required companies to label products using nanotechnology, but smaller businesses struggled to follow these rules.

Discussion Questions:

• Why is it important to label products that use nanotechnology?
• What can governments do to help small businesses follow safety rules?
• How can scientists make sure nanotechnology is both safe and useful?

---

Case Study 3: Gene Therapy for Disease-Resistant Crops (United States)

Overview:

In the United States, scientists used gene therapy to create crops that can resist diseases. These crops helped farmers save money, but some groups worried they might harm the environment or give big companies too much control over seeds. The government required strict testing before allowing farmers to use the crops.

Discussion Questions:

• How do strict testing rules help balance innovation and safety?
• What are the risks of letting big companies control new farming technologies?
• How can scientists ensure gene therapy is used responsibly?

---

Case Study 4: Gene Therapy for Higher Yields (Africa)

Overview:

An international project introduced gene therapy to help African farmers grow more food in less space. While the technology increased food production, many small-scale farmers couldn’t afford it. The government worked with scientists to create subsidies, but cultural resistance to genetic modifications remained a challenge.

Discussion Questions:

• How can governments make expensive technologies more accessible to small farmers?
• What cultural factors should scientists consider when introducing gene therapy?
• Why is it important for farmers to trust new technologies?

---

Case Study 5: Climate Change and Rice Farming (Vietnam)

Overview:

In Vietnam, rising sea levels from climate change damaged rice fields. The government supported a project to develop salt-tolerant rice varieties. While the new rice helped farmers adapt, the seeds were expensive, and many couldn’t switch to the new crop without financial help.

Discussion Questions:

• How can governments help farmers adapt to climate change?
• What are the economic challenges of switching to new crops?
• How can scientists make sure new seeds are affordable for everyone?

---

Case Study 6: Carbon Farming Policies (Australia)

Overview:

Australia introduced policies encouraging farmers to store carbon in the soil to reduce greenhouse gases. Farmers received payments for participating, but small-scale farmers felt left out because the program favored large landowners. Scientists provided training to make the program fairer for everyone.

Discussion Questions:

• How can governments make climate programs fair for both large and small farmers?
• What role do scientists play in teaching farmers about new programs?
• Why is it important to involve farmers in the fight against climate change?

---

III. Online Quiz

Objective:

This activity aims to assess your understanding of the nanotechnology, gene therapy, and advancements in climate change solutions and their application to real-world scenarios, particularly in agriculture and education.

Instructions:

Access the quiz through the provided link and answer all questions thoroughly before the deadline. Ensure you apply STS principles in your responses, focusing on the social, ethical, and environmental implications of science and technology in the scenarios presented. Late submissions will not be accepted, so complete the quiz on time.

LINK: ONLINE QUIZ 5 (not yet live)

Deadline: (to be announced)

IV. Public YouTube Video Group 1 & 2

Objective:

To create an engaging 5-8 minute YouTube video that demonstrates your understanding of your assigned case study, incorporating feedback and connecting it to Science, Technology, and Society (STS). This exercise aims to evaluate your ability to apply critiques and produce a professional, concise, and creative presentation.

Instructions:

Two groups will produce a video showcasing their case study analysis, integrating corrections from the oral discussions. The videos will be graded based on editing skills (smooth transitions, clear audio, and proper pacing), content (accurate integration of case study details and critiques), and videography (lighting, composition, camera work, and professional appearance). Once completed, upload your video publicly to YouTube and submit the link as a comment under the designated photo in our private Facebook group. Ensure your work aligns with the provided rubric and maintains a clear, engaging delivery.

V. Speech Group 3 & 4

Objective:

The objective of this activity is to develop your ability to analyze and communicate the nanotechnology, gene therapy, and advancements in climate change solutions in a structured and engaging manner. This task challenges you to craft a TED Talk-style speech that incorporates feedback from the oral discussion and effectively connects your assigned case study to broader societal contexts, demonstrating a strong understanding of Science, Technology, and Society (STS) principles..

Instructions:

Prepare a 250-word speech based on the the human person flourishing in science and technology. The speech must integrate all corrections from the oral discussion and adhere to writing mechanics: include a title, your complete name, section, date, group, proper margins, and indentation. Have your manuscript reviewed and checked by your group leader before submitting it in our next face-to-face class. Record your speech  in TED Talk style as a video, ensuring clear delivery, and post the video in the designated album in our private Facebook group. Evaluation will focus on writing mechanics (10 points), content quality (based on the rubric below), and delivery skills (rubric provided).