Bioethics Hunger Games

8/16/2019 Bioethics Hunger Games

1/46

Next Generation Science

Standards (NGSS) + CommonCore-ELA

(CCSS-ELA):

Argumentation from Evidence andThe Hunger Games (Bioethics)


2/46

• Understand the interconnectedness of the

Common Core State Standards (EnglishLanguage Arts) for Literacy in Science and Technical Subjects with the e!t"eneration Science Standards (#ractices$Engage in argument from e%idence)

• A&&ly the Literacy in Science and TechnicalSubjects in both an ELA and a scienceclassroom setting

• 'btain some &ractical crosscurricularlesson ideas that can be im&lemented intoyour own classroom and district

• ow to assist students to go &ast their own

o&inion on a contro%ersial to&ic and use a%ariety of research sources to assist them


3/46

• +,-. 'regon Science Standards ("SS)

Ado&tion U&date• CCSSELA (/eading0 1riting0

S&ea2ing*Listening and /esearch)

• +,-. 'regon Science Standards ("SS)

#ractices• Commonalities Among the #ractices in

Science0 3athematics0 English LanguageArts

• Element of Argument from E%idence (ELA%s4 SocioScienti5c)

• Smarter 6alanced ELA #erformance Tas2s

• Sam&le Science*ELA (CurriculumEmbedded) Tas2

• 7uestions


4/46

Criteria

-4 Clear #ur&ose Why am I assessing?

+4 Clear Learning Target(s)

What am I assessing?

84 7uality Assessment How can I assess it well?

.4 #ro&er TestAdministration

How will I ensure testconditions do not interferewith a student’s ability toperform well on a test?

94 E:ecti%eCommunication of /esults

How will I share results formaximum impact?

htt&$**www4ode4state4or4us*go* LocalAssessment"uidance


5/46

• S6E ado&ted the +,-. 'regon Science Standards on3arch ;0 +,-.

• Ado&tion includes the grade le%el middle schoolscience standards se)

• E


6/46

•The NGSS are written aserformance!xpectations

•NGSS re"uire contextualapplication of the threedimensions by students#

•$ocus is on how and whyas well as what


7/46

% &s'ing "uestions and defining problems

% (e)eloping and using models

% lanning and carrying out in)estigations

% &naly*ing and interpreting data

% +sing mathematics and computational thin'ing

%(e)eloping explanations and designing solutions

% !ngaging in argument

% ,btaining- e)aluating- and communicating information


8/46


9/46

! "egu#ar $ractice %ith com$#ex textsand their academic #anguage

&! "eading' %riting' and s$eaing

grounded in evidence from texts'oth #iterar* and informationa#!

! Bui#ding no%#edge through content-rich non,ction!


10/46

Te!t com&le!ity is de5ned by$

Q u a l i t a t i v e2. Qualitative measures . le)els of meaning-

structure- language con)entionality and

clarity- and 'nowledge demands often best

measured by an attenti)e human reader#

Q u a n

t i t a t i v e

1. Quantitative measures . readability and

other scores of text complexity often best

measured by computer software#

Reader and Task

3. Reader and Task considerations .

bac'ground 'nowledge of reader- moti)ation-

interests- and complexity generated by tas's

assigned often best made by educators

employing their professional /udgment#


11/46


12/46


13/46

riting Standards•.ext .*$es and /ur$oses (1rite arguments to su&&ortclaims using e%idenceD write informati%e*e!&lanatoryte!ts)

•/roduction and 0istriution of riting (#roduceclear and coherent writingD &lan0 re%ise0 edit0 rewrite)

•"esearch to Bui#d and /resent 1no%#edge (Shortand sustained research &rojectsD synthesie multi&lesourcesD gather information and assess its


14/46

6ased on

wor2by TinaChue2

2ath Science

ELA

2: 3a2e sense of &roblemsand &erse%ere in sol%ing them

2&: /eason abstractly F


15/46

ey Elements$•Hntroduces a &recise claim(s)0 distinguishes the claim(s)from alternate or opposing claims

•Ge%elo&s the claim(s) and counterclaims fairly0

supplying data and evidence for each in a mannerthat antici&ates the audienceIs 2nowledge le%el andconcerns4

•Establishes and maintains a formal style andobjective tone while attending to the con%entions of

writing4

•#ro%ides a conclusion that follows from or su&&orts theargument &resented4


16/46

J6eyond 3y '&inion Kersus oursM The Science Teacher0


17/46

J6eyond 3y '&inion Kersus oursM The Science


18/46

J#ersonaliing Science$ Strategies for EngagingGi%erse Students with SocioScienti5c HssuesM0 The


19/46

J6eyond 3y '&inion Kersus oursM The Science Teacher0


20/46


21/46

Session : C#assroom Activit*

•#ur&ose is to Jle%el the &laying 5eldM orJgroundM students in the to&ic

•Hntroduce a stimulus or stimuli (article0 5lm

cli&0 recording0 gra&hic0 etc4)

•Allow time to %iew*read and reOectinde&endently

•Gi%ide into small grou&s for scri&ted small

grou& acti%ity

•/e&ort out small grou& 5ndings to full grou&


22/46

Session &: Consu#ting "esources andSca9o#ding

•/ead*re%iew*reOect u&on 8 to 9 resources related

to the central to&icD sources should re&resent a%ariety of &ers&ecti%es and %iew&oints

•/es&ond to se%eral (suggested + or 8) sca:olding


23/46

Session : ina# Essa* or ;u## rite<

•Students should ha%e continued access to thesource materials through the writing &rocess aswell as to their res&onses to the sca:olding


24/46


25/46

1e* E#ements:

•Strong main idea or claim0 and focus is maintaineda&&ro&riate to audience and &ur&ose

•Kariety of transitions used to clarify relationshi&sbetween and among ideas

•Hntroduction and conclusion are &resent

•Logical &rogression with strong connectionsDJsyntactic %arietyM

•Por argumentati%e mode0 o&&osing arguments areac2nowledged or addressed


26/46

1e* E#ements:

•E:ecti%e use of sources0 facts and details assu&&ort for ideas or claims

•E:ecti%e elaboration of ideas using &reciselanguage (elaboration may include the use of&ersonal e!&eriences rele%ant to the main idea)

•/eferences to sources are rele%ant and s&eci5c ande:ecti%ely integrated into the essay

•Kocabulary is a&&ro&riate for the audience and&ur&ose

•Style enhances content


27/46


28/46


29/46

Argumentative:

.he =unger Games: "e>uired"eading?

•Pour Articles

Q unger "ames$ Ethics -,-

Q Ethical Gilemma for the /eader*Kiewer of Theunger "ames

Q The 3oral and Ethical Hssues of The unger "ames

Q JThe unger "amesM$ A "lim&se of the PutureB

% Three Sca:olding 7uestions


30/46

Informational/Explanatory:

.he =unger Games and "ea#it*

.e#evision

•Pour ArticlesQ The Hunger Games and /eality Tele%ision

Q 1hy America Lo%es /eality TK

Q TK Contestants$ Tired0 Ti&sy and #ushed to the6rin2

Q 1hy /eality TK is the ew Pamily TK

% Three Sca:olding 7uestions


31/46

E!&lanatory*Hnformational Tas2 for TheHunger Games

-4Gi%ide into grou&s

+4Kiew %ideo cli&

84Com&lete chart

.4/e&ort out94Pull grou& discussion


32/46


33/46

Survivor • #oca#e is usua##* outdoors' exotic#ocations

• cameras catch ;$rivate<conversations

• com$etitors are e#iminated' one *

one• to avoid e#imination' a##iances are

formed• often the %inner is the one %ho $#a*s

the game est@* #*ing' cheating'mani$u#ating

Big Brother • cameras ca$ture the com$etitionavai#a#e for vie%ing &6 hours

• com$etitors are e#iminated one *one

• $roducers insert e#ements to ;s$iceu$< the com$etition

• to avoid e#imination' a##iances areformed

• care $acages are sent * ;$atrons<


34/46

BE.=CS N .=E =DNGE"GA2ES: Eva#uating the e9ects

of genetic engineering

through $o$u#ar ,ction

SCENCE SA2/LE

LESSNS


35/46

0a* : "ead Excer$t from The HungerGames aout mocinga*s! /rior

1no%#edge Assignment (Fuestions)Sma## Grou$ 0iscussionLarge Grou$ 0iscussion

0a*s &-: Students conduct internet

research to address a suset of >uestionsre#ated to ioethics and geneticengineering!

0a*s 6-7: Students $resent their ,na#arguments in a roundta#e formataddressing the fo##o%ing $rom$ts: Consider ho% res$onsi#e /anem %as ingenetica##* engineering the aera*s andtracer acers! 0efend and argue *our$osition on genetic engineering %ith regard

to ioethics!


36/46

?1hat is genetic engineering ("E)B

?ow does the biology in The Hunger Gamesrelate to our li%es in AmericaB

?1hy did the leaders in #anem create onlymale jabberjaysB ow did this &lan bac25reBGo you see any &arallels with actualgenetically modi5ed organismsB

?Hn what 5elds and for what &ur&oses do youthin2 "E is used todayB

?Gescribe the &ros*cons of genetic engineering


37/46

Hn the 5nal &hase of the &roject (estimatedtwo days)0 students &resent their 5nalarguments in a roundtable formataddressing the following &rom&ts$

%Consider how res&onsible #anem was ingenetically engineering the jabberjays andtrac2er jac2ers4 Gefend and argue your&osition on genetic engineering with regard

to bioethics4

%Pormulate a &lan the United States shouldha%e in &lace to ma2e sure the geneticengineering done here is ethical4


38/46


39/46


40/46

3ale Nabberjay("eneticallyEngineered)

Pemale 3oc2ingbird (1ild Ty&e)

3oc2ingjay(ybrid)


41/46

•Classroom Com&onent$

• Two Kideos

• 7*A Session

•Source R-$ G4H446iology0 on the 1ingsof the 3oc2ingjay

•Source R+$

Contro%ersial Geadly6ird Plu /esearchPinally #ublished

•Source R8$Amateurs Are ewPear in Creating3utant Kirus

•Source R.$ "eneticEngineering Today$

The #romise andthe Ethics

•

8 7uestions#ertaining to theSources


42/46


43/46


44/46


45/46

Educators0 &arents0 business leaders0 and otherinterested &arties are in%ited to &artici&ate online4

#artici&ants will ta2e selected English or 3athtests and recommend achie%ement le%el scores4

/egister at

htt&$**www4smarterbalanced4org*online&anel bySe&tember -@th0 +,-. to &artici&ate4

Kisit the Smarter 6alanced website atwww4smarterbalanced4org to learn more aboutthe online &anel4

#lease s&read the word 1e want as many'regonians in%ol%ed as &ossible


46/46

Por +,,@*+,-. 'regon Science

Standards("SS) related

Bioethics Hunger Games

Documents

Transcript of Bioethics Hunger Games