The second phase of my November tour has taken me to Naples, for the UNESCO Chair in Bioethics 9th World Conference on Bioethics, Medical Ethics and Health Law. I hope to find time to reflect more fully on the conference in the next few days.
In the meantime, I’ve provided a link to the slides from my presentation on the work we’ve been doing over the past six years, in which second year Medical Biochemists (and Medics) produce short videos about different aspects of biomedical ethics.
I have mentioned the Headline Bioethics project here previously, including links to a poster I presented at the Leicester Teaching and Learning event (January 2013) and again at the Higher Education Academy STEM conference (April 2013).
A paper giving more details about the task was published last week in the journal Bioscience Education. The abstract states:
An exercise is described in which second year undergraduate bioscientists write a reflective commentary on the ethical implications of a recent biological/biomedical news story of their own choosing. As well as being of more real-world relevance than writing in a traditional essay format, the commentaries also have potential utility in helping the broader community understand the issues raised by the reported innovations. By making the best examples available online, the task therefore has the additional benefit of allowing the students to be genuine producers of resources.
This is not, incidentally, to be confused with the other activity I’ve been doing with a different cohort of second year students in which they produce short films about bioethics (the paper on that subject is forthcoming).
Following on from last week’s post about our Headline Bioethics project, here is a poster about the assignment and repurposing which I presented at the University of Leicester Learning and Teaching conference on January 10th. The poster is shown here, with a pdf version avialable via this link.
Headline Bioethics Commentaries are a new series of student-authored articles reflecting on bioethical aspects of news stories
Over at our sister site BioethicsBytes I’ve started to release a new series of articles under the title Headline Bioethics Commentaries. The first couple are already up, and I’ll be adding some more over the next few days.
I mention this here because I wanted to expand a bit on the pedagogic thinking behind this new strand, but this “show your workings” post is more applicable on Journal of the Left-handed Biochemist than over at the bioethics site proper.
The Headline Bioethics Commentaries start out as assessed pieces in a second year Research Skills module (a core unit, currently taken by about 150 students). I contribute a sizeable slice of bioethics teaching to the module and we needed an assignment to go with this chunk of the course. Right from the outset (in 2009), I wanted to break the “write an essay on…” mould and to ask the students to carry out a task that would have real-world applicability, to produce material that would potentially be useful to other people rather than languishing in a leverarch folder. Continue reading
At the Higher Education Academy STEM Conference in April 2012 I gave a presentation about our Careers After Biological Science project at the University of Leicester. The focus of the talk was the pivotal role played by social media in recruiting speakers for careers talks, archiving various resources associated with those careers, and advertising their existence to a broader audience.
Slides from the talk are available below (or, in the event that they haven’t loaded properly, via this link )
Whilst listening to the Today programme (Radio 4, September 30th 2010) I heard a very interesting piece about the ongoing debate about “Climategate” and dogmatism about climate change. Going later to their Listen again site to bookmark the story on my Delicious account, I noted that the headline didn’t seem to match the sentiment I’d got from the package. This was confirmed when I played the audio – a web editor had mistaken “less strident” for “less stringent” – which gives the report a whole different spin. I alerted Tom Feilden (you can email anyone at the BBC via firstname.lastname@example.org) and he had the title corrected.
"less stringent" was corrected to "less strident" during the course of the day