Team:MoWestern Davidson/human practice

From 2009.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
(Physical Modeling as an Educational Tool)
(Survey)
Line 26: Line 26:
-
'''Data from the general public will be collected and analyzed at a later date.'''
+
'''Data from the general public'''
 +
Citizens in North Carolina were randomly assigned to one of two groups. One group used the word "create" and similar terms to see if this had an impact on their view of synthetic biology. The other group used words such as "build", "construct", etc.
 +
<center>
 +
[[Image:manipulate.png]]
 +
</center>
 +
We also measured each person's "religiosity" and analyzed the impact religiosity had on the manipulation. We found that more religious people were more likely to view synthetic biology in a favorable light which was not what we had predicted.  
 +
<center>
 +
[[Image:religion.png]]
 +
</center>
 +
 
 +
'''Data from faculty'''
 +
Faculty at high schools and colleges/universities from across the country were asked how much they presently know about synthetic biology and its implementation in course curricula. The survey revealed that 16% of college faculty reported adequate knowledge of synthetic biology while only 8% of high school teachers reported adequate knowledge of the field. Surveys given to general public were used to study public opinion based on the influence of different descriptions of synthetic biology.
== '''Physical Modeling as an Educational Tool''' ==
== '''Physical Modeling as an Educational Tool''' ==

Revision as of 20:04, 14 October 2009

Contents

Survey

Sam Snell (Psychology major) and Kyri Bye-Nagel (Sociology Major) of Davidson College researched public opinion of synthetic biology based on provided summaries of the field. Through paper and online surveys, these students collected and analyzed responses from two groups: members of academia and the general public.

There was an assessment of those in academia to see how much is presently known about synthetic biology and its implementation in course curricula. Here are the results of that study:

Results of Teacher Survey

The open response portion of the survey revealed that fewer than the reported percentage of faculty members could display adequate knowledge of synthetic biology.

Surveys given to general public were used to study public opinion based on the influence of different descriptions of synthetic biology. Two types of surveys were disseminated, and each version included a description that catered to a create perspective or a construct perspective. The participants’ prior knowledge of synthetic biology was measured before they were presented with the description. This study will provide information on the general public’s attitudes towards synthetic biology as well as their support for teaching synthetic biology in a high school classroom. There were also questions at the end of each survey concerning philosophical perspectives to see if there is a correlation between public opinion and personal beliefs.

Here are the descriptions provided on the surveys:

Create perspective - Synthetic biology uses molecular methods to create modified living organisms that have never existed before. These DNA-based devices perform new functions not found in nature. Synthetic biologists redesign and modify existing, natural biological systems. For instance, synthetic biologists can create new versions of microbes that make chemicals not naturally found in microbes. In many ways, synthetic biology allows scientists to redesign biological processes and create organisms not found in nature. Synthetic biology has the potential to develop technologies that could lead the way in the 21st century.

Construct perspective - Synthetic biology uses molecular methods to construct DNA-based devices to perform novel functions. Synthetic biologists design, model and construct biological parts, devices and systems by engineering and modifying existing biological systems. For instance, synthetic biologists can produce microbes that make useful chemicals. Synthetic biology gives scientists the tools to build biological devices from smaller biological units in much the same way as an engineer constructs a building from smaller construction materials. Synthetic biology has the potential to develop technologies that could lead the way in the 21st century.


Data from the general public Citizens in North Carolina were randomly assigned to one of two groups. One group used the word "create" and similar terms to see if this had an impact on their view of synthetic biology. The other group used words such as "build", "construct", etc.

Manipulate.png

We also measured each person's "religiosity" and analyzed the impact religiosity had on the manipulation. We found that more religious people were more likely to view synthetic biology in a favorable light which was not what we had predicted.

Religion.png

Data from faculty Faculty at high schools and colleges/universities from across the country were asked how much they presently know about synthetic biology and its implementation in course curricula. The survey revealed that 16% of college faculty reported adequate knowledge of synthetic biology while only 8% of high school teachers reported adequate knowledge of the field. Surveys given to general public were used to study public opinion based on the influence of different descriptions of synthetic biology.

Physical Modeling as an Educational Tool

We produced 5-base anticodon frameshift suppressor tRNA physical models intending their use as an educational tool. Because they are theoretical models and not based on NMR or X-ray crystallography data, we never intended them to be research devices. We will use our frameshift suppressor tRNA models to demonstrate how their anticodons would interact with a strand of mRNA and how, despite their modification, they maintain the structures and functions of other tRNAs. We hope to gather interest in our models at iGEM and have the opportunity to share them with our fellow teams.

5-Base tRNA