Part 2

The following 23 lessons are designed for classroom use. They are all edited or revised versions of lessons created by teachers in our institutes. These lessons cover a wide range of topics and grade-levels. At least one lesson is included that is designed for each of the science courses commonly offered in secondary schools, including middle schools, junior high schools and senior high schools. Some of the lessons are adaptable for use in several subjects and grade-levels.

4- The kind of teaching activity employed in the lesson. (For example, a hands-on laboratory exercise, an organized student debate, a panel discussion, student responses to case studies, discussion of ethics issues involved in a science fiction story, etc.)

5- Which one, or more of the following categories of ethics-related issues best describes the lesson: Behavior of scientists, behavior of students, social issues, or honesty.

6- A listing of the principal ethics/values issues that are raised by the lesson.

7- A detailed lesson-plan, instructions for the teacher, and materials for the students.

8- A discussion of the appropriate use of the lesson, and the ethics/values issues that the lesson is designed to explore.

Listing of model lessons by categories of ethics issues that they illustrate.

Solomon Buchman, Elwood John H. Glenn High School, East Northport, Long Island, NY

Students are told to write a description of the traits of character and behavioral characteristics that they associate with someone who is a scientist. The teacher then lists on the board the characteristics that students thought of. This leads to a discussion about the stereotypical view of a scientist as honest and objective. For homework, students are required to read and answer questions about an essay by science fiction writer Isaac Asimov in which he gives many examples that show that scientists, being human, don't always live up to the stereotypical ideal. A classroom discussion is then conducted to explore and clarify the ethics and values issues in the examples given by Asimov.

Issues related to credit for discoveries, citing of authority, excessive pride in one's own ideas, overeagerness, and various roduction

The idealized view of a scientist is of a scrupulously honest, objective, highly ethical individual. The point of this lesson is to emphasize that science is a human endeavor and as such it is unrealistic to expect its practitioners to be exempt from the influence of social and personal values that make all of us fallible. The lesson makes use of an essay by the very popular science fiction writer, Isaac Asimov. Asimov is well known as an ardent advocate of science. He wrote his persuasive essay in response to his own awakening to the reality that, no matter how hard the scientific community strives to live up to its idealistic stereotype, it is necessary to be mindful that scientists are mere mortals, not infallible icons.

As written, this lesson requires 1½ class periods and an intervening homework assignment.

During the latter half of a class period instruct students to spend ten minutes listing all of the characteristics and behaviors, which they would attribute to a professional scientist.

Invite students to read what they have written and compile on the chalk board a comprehensive list of the traits of character and behaviors the students associate with scientists.

From the traits that are mentioned most often, create the class's stereotypical view of the scientist. In all likelihood the stereotype will picture the scientist as a dedicated seeker of the truth who is honest, objective and who maintains high ethical standards.

At the end of the discussion students should be given for homework the assignment of reading the essay "Alas, All Human," by Isaac Asimov. [This essay is included in A 30 Year Retrospective: 1959-1989, by Isaac Asimov (Doubleday: New York, 1989). This book is available in many libraries.] Students should be instructed to bring to the next class session written responses to the following questions about the essays:

What do you think Asimov meant by the title of the essay and what was the principal point he was trying to make?

Do you think that Asimov believes that most scientists are dishonest or unethical?

Why does Asimov claim that despite "misconceptions due to incomplete or erroneous data" the movement of science "is always from the less true to the more true"?

Begin the next class period by inviting students to read their answers to the homework questions. Make sure that during the discussion of the answers the following points are emphasized:

Asimov's title is intended to point out that scientists are human beings and can't be expected to always resist the pressures and temptations that result in less than completely ethical or honest behavior.

Asimov makes it clear that he is a strong supporter of science and that he considers the types of dishonest activity he describes as the exception and not the rule.

Asimov considers science -- as opposed to scientists -- to be "incorruptible." He makes this assertion on the basis of his claim that no scientific observation (or reported result) is accepted until it has been independently confirmed, presumably by another scientist or team of scientists. Unfortunately if this was ever true, it is becoming less so as scientific research becomes more expensive and sophisticated. Although it is true that all research reports are reviewed by other scientists before being accepted for publication, it is not uncommon for results to enter what Asimov refers to as "the account books of science" without actual independent experimental confirmation. In many cases such confirmation would require the expense of duplicating the original work to be supplied by some funding source. Few agencies that support expensive research are willing to pay to duplicate apparently successful research when the money could be used instead to support a new project. Since most important scientific work will ultimately be the basis for further research, it is likely that erroneous results will ultimately be discovered. But, until this happens a fraudulent report, especially by an established scientist, can cause considerable havoc.

Review each of the types of dishonest or improper behavior by scientists described by Asimov. In each case have the class discuss whether it is an example of: a) inappropriate, but not unethical behavior; b) a case of scientific misconduct, but not truly unethical because it is probably unintentional; or c) a clear case of serious scientific misconduct or fraud.

End the class session with a discussion about what, if anything, the students think should be done by either the scientific community, the government, or the public in response to the issue of occasional, but possibly serious scientific misconduct.

There is no need for concern that students will be turned away from science by a lesson that undermines the heroic model of a scientist as an invariably honest seeker of truth. In fact, those who have used this lesson, or who have otherwise made efforts to portray a more realistic view of scientists have found that students are more sympathetic to scientists when they learn that they are fallible human beings like themselves.

By describing a variety of questionable science behaviors that differ in the degree to which they involve intention on the part of the scientist as well as severity of possible consequences, Asimov provides the opportunity to teach two important lessons about ethics. The first is that judgements about whether an action or behavior is ethical or morally acceptable is not generally an all-or-nothing proposition. Most of us make such evaluations by applying a scale with clearly unethical on one end, highly ethical on the other, and many gradations in between. The second is that there are various obstacles that prevent even those with good intentions from satisfying the ethical demands of good science practice. This latter point is likely to be revealed during the class discussion of Asimov's categories of questionable scientific behavior.

A edited version of a classroom lesson initially authored by the following Long Island, NY science teachers:

Intended for use at the beginning of the year in any science classroom. The teachers who developed this lesson teach physics and earth science and have described incidents that have occurred in their courses. Teachers of other disciplines can easily modify the cases so that they will be more familiar to their own students.

Students working in cooperative learning groups respond to cases involving ethical choices by students and teachers in science classrooms. The teacher directs a classroom discussion of the conclusions reached by the groups. Students create and submit additional cases and questions for use throughout the school year.

The cases presented raise questions about the ethics of "sharing" test and laboratory results, of manipulating data, of receiving credit for work done by others, of a teacher adjusting a student's grade and of a student taking action to prevent another student from cheating. The same format can be used to raise questions about other real life ethical issues encountered by science students and teachers.

The social and academic pressures experienced by science students and teachers can sometimes induce them to engage in questionable behavior. Such pressures are frequently the result of conflicts between the performance expectations and the ethical expectations placed on the individuals by the school, the community and society. The activities in this lesson provide an opportunity to examine and discuss these types of conflicts. The students will benefit from being given the chance to consider their own actions prior to being confronted with similar ethical choices.

Students will be asked to consider nine case studies based on actual situations that have occurred in a science class setting. Questions are provided with each scenario to stimulate and initiate discussion. The lesson requires two normal length class periods.

Divide the class into six groups of 3-5 students. Assign one member in each group to each of the following roles:

Group the case studies into three sets of three and assign each set to two of the groups. Allow twenty-five minutes for the groups to read, discuss and record their responses to their three assigned case studies.

During the remainder of the first class period the two groups that have been assigned the same set of case studies get together to exchange views and begin preparing a presentation for the class.

At the beginning of the second period the pairs of groups continue their preparation for the class presentation. The two presenters from the original groups agree on how they will divide the presentation.

The presenters describe and explain the points of agreement and any conflicting points of view that have emerged from the discussions. These conclusions are then discussed by the class. The teacher should intervene only to raise ethical choices or issues not considered in the presentations or discussion.

The students are given a homework assignment requiring each of them to create and submit an ethical case study - either imagined or based on experience - along with discussion questions.

After reviewing and giving the student authors a chance to improve their creations, the teacher should select the best of the student cases for brief discussions at the beginning of class periods during the school year.

Rachel has a crush on Don, who is a popular student and star of the school basketball team. Both Rachel and Don have the same physics teacher. Rachel is in Mr. Link's third period class and Don is in his sixth period class. Rachel works hard and is doing very well in physics. Don is not very interested in science, does little work, and is barely passing. Rachel and Don meet each other in the hall every day between fourth and fifth periods. Today there is a test in Mr. Link's class and Don did not study because he was very tired after basketball practice yesterday. Don asks Rachel to give him the test answers. She knows that if he doesn't pass the test he may fail the course.

3. If you were Rachel's friend, would you recommend that she should do what you would do?

John is doing a research study for his earth science class. The object is to measure and make a plot of the altitude of the sun at noon over a four-month period. He collects data every third day. At the end of the four months John has six missing data points because cloudy weather on those days prevented him from making the necessary measurements. He decides to estimate the correct data points for the missing days and simply include them in both his table of data and his graph.

Pete, Brooke and Lisa are laboratory partners in their chemistry class. Yesterday Lisa was absent. This required Pete and Brooke to work very diligently to complete the experiment during the lab period so they could hand in the report in class today. Today Lisa has returned to school after being ill. She meets her lab partners on the way into school in the morning and asks them for the data from yesterday's experiment so she can write it up during study period and hand it in. Pete is willing to give Lisa the data, but Brooke objects.

Joe is making electrical measurements in a physics laboratory. Joe is a good student and is confident that he has set up the circuit properly. When Joe tries to do the required calculations to verify the formulas in his physics book he finds that the data he took appears to be incorrect. He suspects that one of the electrical components he was given is not working properly. His teacher, Mr. Grim, is busy helping some of the weaker students so Joe decides not to report his problem. Instead he does the mathematical calculations to determine what a correct set of data would be and simply changes his own data to match what he has calculated.

1. Since Joe is bright enough to figure out the correct data is there anything wrong with what he did?

Janet is putting a lot of effort into her final earth science report. She has neglected the course earlier in the year and has chosen a difficult topic to impress her teacher and get a good grade. Her friend Sarah, who is a very good student is working on the same topic. Janet asks whether she can work cooperatively with Sarah, as permitted by her teacher. Janet then puts in little further effort, knowing she can rely on Sarah to do a good job. Since she is Janet's friend, Sarah raises no objections to having Sarah simply put her name on the report and share the grade.

1. Since Sarah does not object, is there anything improper about Janet's action?

4. How could the teacher change the assignment, without discouraging student cooperation, while preventing students from simply taking credit for work done by others?

Two years ago Central high hired new chemistry teachers, Mr. Young and Mr. Keen. Last year Mr. Young's students did not do as well on the statewide final exam as Mr. Keen's chemistry students. The number of chemistry students has been decreasing and the school is under pressure to reduce expenses. It is therefore very likely that the school administration will decide that only one chemistry teacher is needed. To improve his chances of being retained, it is important for Mr. Young's students to do well this year. He has just received a copy of this year's statewide exam. Mr. Young decides that during the last two weeks of class he will only review the particular material that is covered by questions on the exam and include many examples of problems that are almost identical to the exam questions.

1. Since he hasn't actually given his students the answers to the exam questions, is there anything wrong or unethical about Mr. Young's actions?

3. Is it a good idea for the state to give the teachers advance copies of the exam?

Andy is doing a physics lab in which he attaches different masses to the end of a spring and measures the increase in the length of the spring. The instructions are to express the results in the form of a simple graphical plot of the data. He quickly discovers that if he plots the mass versus the increase in the spring's length most of the points fall on a straight line. Two of the points are clearly off the line. Assuming that he must have made an error in measuring the spring's length in the case of these two points, Andy decides to erase them from his graph and data table when he hands in his lab report.

2. Is it ever permissible to ignore part of the data taken during an experiment? If so, under what circumstances.

Mr. King teaches earth science at Central High. Larry, one of his students, is learning disabled and has difficulty reading. Larry works hard and Mr. King likes him. Twice during the year Larry has become discouraged and talked to Mr. King about dropping the course. Both times Mr. King persuaded him to stick with it. The final exam has several problems based on reading a preceding detailed description of an experiment. Larry finds this kind of problem particularly difficult and fails the exam with a score of 52. He needed a score of 72 to pass the course. Mr. King feels guilty about having encouraged Larry and he simply changes his grade in his record book to a 72. He justifies this to himself on the basis of his speculation that Larry would have done much better if he wasn't learning disabled.

Steven has studied many hours for the chemistry midterm exam. He is confident that he will do well. He has lunch period just before the exam. He finishes quickly and gets to the chemistry classroom several minutes before the other students or the teacher. On his way to his desk he notices that his classmate George's desk has extensive notes related to the exam written on it. Since the desks are moveable he replaces the desk with the writing with one from the classroom next door. Steven is amused by the bewildered expression on George's face when he sits down and recognizes that his desk has been switched.

The format of this lesson provides the science teacher with the opportunity to have the students consider a variety of classroom ethics issues that are based on his or her past teaching experience. The value of including cases that involve dubious behavior by teachers is that it reassures students that the teacher recognizes that all human beings, not only students, occasionally engage in questionable ethical behavior.

As specified in the lesson, the role of the teacher during the discussion should be to encourage the students to explore the various ethical choices related to each of the cases. In general teachers should refrain from presenting their own views about the ethical issues raised by the cases so as not to discourage students from making their own decisions. The authority associated with the position of teacher can undermine the intent to encourage students to examine all of the behavioral options and reach their own personal decisions on the issues. However, if a teacher has included a particular case because it illustrates an ethical choice by students that he or she considers unacceptable, then the teacher may wish to make this clear, if the student discussion of the issue reveals some ambiguity.

Students keep a journal on current news coverage of science issues that have ethical dimensions.

1. The teacher collects and copies articles in newspapers and magazines that deal with science related issues. These articles are distributed with appropriate questions for the students. The questions focus mainly on the ethical issues rather than on specific scientific facts (although getting clear about the ethical questions usually requires getting clear about some of the scientific facts).

2. Articles are distributed periodically over the entire school year. Students are invited to submit articles they find to the teacher for possible distribution to the entire class.

3. The level of sophistication of the articles depends on the grade level and the level of the class. Here is a possible format for a quarter:

Distribute approximately 10 articles for students to read and comment on. Each student keeps the articles and responses in a separate folder which will be graded. Each assignment will be graded on the basis of a possible 10 points:

4. Article topics will vary, depending on the course (e.g., biology, chemistry, earth sciences, physics). In 1995, for example, a controversy developed over a proposed Smithsonian Institution 50^th commemorative exhibit of the 1945 dropping of the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima. Critics claimed that the proposed exhibit was biased, even "anti-American," since it seemed to show the United States as the aggressor and it placed more emphasis on Japanese losses than the United States's triumph. Articles detailing this controversy would be appropriate in physics or chemistry courses, since the development and use of the atomic bomb is a dramatic illustration of possible military uses of scientific knowledge; and important questions about the social responsibilities of scientists can be raised. Students could also read Albert Einstein's famous 1939 letter of warning to President Franklin D. Roosevelt that, in light of reports that Germany might be developing an atomic bomb, the United States needed to accelerate research in nuclear physics -- and Einstein's later regret when he said, "I made one mistake in my life when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt."

5. A journal entry consists of a summary of the main points of an article and some discussion of the ethical and value issues raised by the article. Teachers might assist the discussion of ethical and value issues by adding specific questions for students to answer. For example, "Why do you think Einstein thought he had made a mistake signing the letter to President Roosevelt?" "What kinds of questions should scientists ask about possible areas of research before they undertake them?" "Is science 'value-neutral'?" However, it would be useful to encourage students to develop their own questions, as well.

6. Journal entries can simply be turned in for teacher evaluation and grading; or they can provide the basis for class discussion, as well.

Journal assignments encourage students to connect their science studies with current events, as well as historically significant events that involve science. This is important both for students planning to undertake science careers and for the general student preparation for informed citizenship in a democratic society. Regular attention to science in the news helps students see the relevance of science studies to their lives outside the classroom.

Writing about ethical and value issues in science news not only places science in the context of our everyday lives, it also promises to deepen our understanding of those issues. As an individual activity, this can be quite valuable in its own right. However, these writing exercises can also prepare students for classroom discussion, which will further broaden and deepen their understanding of the social implications of science. Teachers might even want students to share journal entries with each other. However, if this is to be done, students should be told in advance that this will be done; and if the topics are particularly sensitive, this should be done only with their permission.

Students view and discuss a video on dishonesty. Then they have a homework assignment to apply this discussion to household products that have resulted from scientific research by asking what dangers these products might pose if the research behind them had been falsified or misrepresented.

Importance of laboratory honesty, especially in research that has a direct impact on human health and welfare.

Designed for use at the beginning of science classes that include a laboratory component. The teacher outlines the requirements of laboratory work in the class. The teacher then asks the students what they think about the importance of not cheating or fudging when collecting data.

Following a brief discussion of their ideas, the teacher shows the first few minutes of the Nova video, Do Scientists Cheat?, which emphasizes the importance of honesty in data reporting. [Note: Like most Nova videos that are more than three years old, Do Scientists Cheat?, which was produced by WGBH, Boston in 1988, is no longer available for purchase or loan from the producer. It is, however in the collection of many libraries, academic institution and other video archives from which it may be borrowed. One such source is the Wisconsin Regional Primate Research Center, phone (608) 263-3512, fax to (608) 263-4031, e-mail to hamel@primate.wisc.edu, write to the Primate Center Library, 1220 Capitol Court, Madison, WI 53715, or request it (video #VT0113) through interlibrary loan at your local library.] Then the video is fast-forwarded to the segment in which 8^th graders are conducting a pond study. Before showing this segment, students are asked how honest they think the 8^th graders will be in reporting their data. Following the showing of that segment, students are invited to discuss their reactions.

The teacher highlights the idea that students, and researchers in general, should not anticipate what they think they will find and alter their observations to match their preconceived notions. The teacher indicates that student projects will not be graded on the basis of the conclusions reached so much as the quality of the process.

The last segment of the video is then shown. This features Robert Sprague, a researcher who reported the fabrication of data by someone who was doing research intended to benefit mental patients in a state hospital. Sprague stresses the importance of honesty in science research because of the risks dishonesty poses to the general population.

Students are then given a homework writing assignment: Find five things in their household that they think were developed from scientific research. For each item, they are asked describe the sorts of dangers these products might pose if the research behind them had been falsified or misrepresented. Time permitting, the student examples can be discussed during the next class period.

This is one of many ways to introduce the idea that honesty in conducting and reporting scientific research is fundamental both to good science and to the public interest. It is important to emphasize that what is at stake is not merely the reputation, and possibly the career, of scientists who get caught cheating, but the well-being of others.

It is not just the well-being of the general public that can be seriously affected by the fabrication, falsification, or misrepresentation of data. As the case of Robert Sprague shows, those who report scientific misconduct may go through hardships. Although his wife was dying of cancer at the time, Sprague was so concerned about the fabrication of data he discovered, that he took on the responsibilities of a whistleblower. In fact, it was partly because of the realization that his wife's well-being depended on honest, reliable research regarding drugs and treatment that Sprague was motivated to act on behalf of others who are similarly dependent. Sprague's article, "The Voice of Experience" (Science and Engineering Ethics, Vol. 4, Issue 1, 1998, pp. 33-44), chronicles some of his experiences and those of other whistleblowers. Often it is not only those on whom the whistle is blown who challenge whistleblowers, but also institutions within which those accused work. Institutions also wish to preserve their public reputation as reliable. They may also find it difficult to accept the idea that one of their researchers has cheated, and they may feel accused of themselves failing to monitor carefully the work of the accused. In Sprague's case, he found that, even though he had submitted lengthy documentation of data fabrication at another institution, he was the first to be investigated; and it took several years for the case to be resolved.

For a good account of another well-known fabrication case, see Case Study #1 in Chapter 4 of Section I. For an statements about the importance of integrity in science, see: Sigma Xi's booklet, Honor in Science (Research Triangle Park, NC, 1991); and the Commission on Research Integrity's report, Integrity and Misconduct in Research, 2^nd ed. (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1993).

A revised version of a classroom lesson initially authored by the following Long Island, NY science teachers:

Vincent Calabrese, Daniel M. Leccese and Rosemary McPartland, Glen Cove High School, Glen Cove

Intended as an introductory lesson, which can be adapted for use in any high school science course. As presented here, the research topics come from a variety of science disciplines. A teacher of a particular science course may choose instead to drop some of the topics and add others in order to make more - or perhaps all of them - specifically relevant to the subject matter of the course.

Students are given a homework assignment requiring them to read descriptions of research proposals and to rate the proposals on the basis of a set of specific criteria. In class students are assigned to research review groups, which have to decide which of the proposals to fund. The teacher then leads a discussion focusing on the ethical issues raised in the reasons given for each group's decisions.

General ethical issues associated with public funding of research include: Does publicly funded research need to promise material social benefits?; How can value be assigned to benefits in order to compare it to costs?; Should research be supported if it does not promise equal benefits to all members of society? Other ethical issues will depend on the specific nature of the research projects considered. Issues raised by projects described in the lesson as written include: What restrictions should there be on research involving human or animal subjects?; To what extent should environmental issues be considered in making funding decisions?; Should decisions on funding be based only on the opinions of the majority of scientists?; Should research be funded that could result in violating the civil rights of some group of individuals?

In preparation for the lesson the students are given a homework assignment requiring them to read brief descriptions of 12 research proposals, rate each one on the basis of a set of specific criteria and write reasons why they would or would not approve funding the proposal.

The class is divided into five "research evaluation panels." These panels are supposed to be advising a government agency that provides funds to support general scientific research. The agency has only enough funds to support eight of the research projects. Each evaluation panel is to use the ratings of the research projects by its members to produce a list of the eight projects it recommends supporting. Each panel should write down the reasons it chose to include or exclude each project from its list.

The teacher reads the selections of the five panels to the class and then leads a discussion focusing on the ethical principles that are reflected in the reasons that the panels have presented. (If this is the first lesson on ethics in science, the discussion should be preceded by a brief introduction to the subject of ethical reasoning. In this case at least 1½ class periods should be devoted to this lesson.)

Pretend that you are a scientist who has been selected to advise a government agency that provides funds to support scientific research. You have been sent the following brief abstracts of 15 proposed research projects that have been submitted to the agency. Read the abstracts carefully and then rank each one on a scale of 1 to 10 -- where 10 is the highest possible score -- with respect to the listed criteria. Finally write reasons why you would or would not fund each of the proposals

f) Whether or not it is important for the government to support this research.

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has proposed sending a series of manned rocket ships to Mars in order to establish a permanent space colony there within the next decade. This proposed research would examine the combustion properties of a newly discovered group of high energy chemicals that can be made from coal and other plentiful raw materials. The goal would be a more energetic rocket fuel that would allow the Mars spaceships to carry a larger payload

A new type of plastic shows promise of being used as a thin film in an artificial kidney that can filter and cleanse blood just as effectively as a real kidney. This proposed research would test the ability of this plastic film to filter all of the poisons out of human blood that are filtered out by a real kidney. Human volunteers who are waiting for kidney transplants will be used in this research. The plastic material is extremely expensive so, if the research is successful, the artificial kidneys will cost more than a kidney transplant, but those that can afford them won't have to wait for the availability of kidneys that matches their blood types

The ability to save and prolong human lives by transplanting organs has created an increasing shortage of available organs. A potential sources of such organs is death row inmates. This research would explore the potential for reducing the waiting time for human organs if the organs of those who are condemned to death were automatically available upon execution without requiring permission of the condemned person or next of kin.

A variety of tobacco has been developed by selective breeding techniques that has only half the nicotine and tar of the average tobacco plant. This new variety is very expensive to grow because it is not as resistant as other varieties of tobacco to several insect pests. This research is designed to perfect a technique of incorporating into the new low nicotine and tar variety the gene that makes other varieties resistant.

Efforts to protect the humpbacked whale from pollution and from its predators has been made difficult by the fact that not enough is known about this species migratory behavior. This proposed research will use a small electronic device that can be attached to the whales' back with no ill effects to track the whales as they move between their Summer and Winter feeding areas and to determine where they go to mate and raise their young.

A small sample of blood or loose skin from any human being can be used to obtain a DNA "fingerprint" that is a virtually infallible way of identifying that individually from a future sample obtained from that same person. The government would be able to use a computer data bank of stored DNA information from all U.S. residents for many purposes such as tracking down criminal suspects, identifying missing persons, positively identifying people for income tax and social security purposes, etc. One problem with the scheme is that the data bank would need to be available only to those authorized by the government to use it. This research is aimed at finding ways of protecting such a data bank from access by unauthorized computer hackers.

A potentially highly effective new drugs for the treating AIDS patients has been developed. There is concern however that this drug may have several severe side effects in humans that would not occur in the usual laboratory animals like mice and rats in which it has been already tested. Before it is tested on humans this research proposes to test it on Rhesus monkeys. These monkeys, although rare and expensive have been used in research in the past because they are often very similar to humans in their toxic responses to drugs.

Fatty, high cholesterol, foods have been blamed by health scientists for increasing obesity and susceptibility to heart disease in the public. Scientists who disagree with this assertion propose to provide food from McDonalds, Burger King, Pizza Hut, KFC and other fast food restaurants to elementary school children in ten low income neighborhoods in New York, Chicago and Los Angeles. By following the health of these children over the following twenty years they hope to disprove the allegation that fast foods cause poor health.

One of the inconveniences for frequent business travelers is the need to constantly pack and unpack clothing. Textile scientists have proposed testing the use of a very cheap new fabric that they think can be adapted to the production of shirts, suits, underwear, dresses and virtually every other essential item of clothing. Their goal is to demonstrate that such clothing can be produced in such a cheap manner that a business traveler could simply purchase new clothes at his or her destination and throw them out when the trip is over.

Research On Differences In Mathematical Ability Between Asians and Afro-Americans

In the U.S. Asians tend to do better than average and Afro-American do worse than average in courses in mathematics in grade school and college. Among professions that require mathematics, there tend to be more Asians and fewer Afro-Americans than there are in the general population. The intent of this proposed research is to determine whether these differences are due to inherited, genetic differences between Asians and Afro-Americans or to social factors.

Most scientists reject astrology as one of many forms of superstitions and mysticism that has no true predictive or interpretive value. An organization of scientists who believe in astrology proposes to do a scientific study to demonstrate its validity. They intend to test the ability of astrological predictions, based on the positions in the sky of the sun, moon, stars and planets to predict which days are most favorable for a person to buy a lottery ticket.

Although the possible existence of life on a planet circling a distant star is unlikely to have direct impact on life on Earth, scientists, as well as the general public continues to show interest in looking for signs of such life. An astrophysicist has developed a new mathematical theory on how to examine the numerous radiowave signals that arrive from space in order to determine whether they may have been produced by intelligent life. She seeks funding for the development and use of computer programs to test her theory.

Since scientists require funding for almost all the work they do, the fact that ethics and values questions play an important role in determining what research will receive funding is all the evidence needed to demonstrate a strong link between science and ethics.

The teacher may have to intervene to make sure that the discussion of the panels' selections focuses on the ethical principles connected to the reasoning presented. Some students may prefer to debate the technical merits or defects in the various proposals. The proposals presented here (and presumably alternate proposals created by teachers using this lesson) were included because they raise one or more ethics or values issue rather than because of their unique technical merits. Thus, the proposed ambitious mission to mars raises questions about the ethics of supporting a very expensive research project that appears to have little direct relevance to any of our many Earthly problems; the artificial kidney proposal raises issues about supporting research that will produce results that are only beneficial to affluent members of society; etc.

A revised version of a lesson originally authored by the following Long Island NY science teachers:

Students are given a handout to read as a homework assignment, which contains factual information about low birthweight infants. In the following class period students are divided into cooperative learning groups. Each group reads and responds to questions about a case study involving the birth of a 14 ounce boy and the problems this presents to various characters in the story. The entire class then discusses the responses of each group. An additional set of questions is presented for an optional follow-up class discussion about the more general ethical problems presented by children who are born with birth defects or special needs.

Does society have the obligation to provide whatever medical care and other aid is technically feasible to treat a child born with a birth defect or other special needs, regardless of cost?

What are the ethical responsibilities of other social agents, such as medical insurers and employers with regard to the birth of such a child?

Should parents be legally libel for actions they have taken, such as drinking, smoking or marital abuse that increased the probability of the birth of a defective child.

Should a handicapped child have the right to sue parents or institutions that failed to take actions to prevent or treat his/her condition?

Students should be given the following fact sheet to study as a homework assignment in preparation for this ethics lesson. To increase the likelihood that students will take this assignment seriously, they can be told that a brief (five minute) written quiz based on the fact sheet will be given at the beginning of the lesson.

a) A low birthweight infant is any baby born weighing less than 2500 grams (5.5 pounds).

b) Low birthweight is the most common cause of serious illness among newborn infants.

c) Even with extraordinary care, low birthweight infants live's are threatened by such problems as frequent brain bleeds, inadequately developed lungs, poor body temperature control and malfunctions of the liver.

d) If they survive, low birthweight infants have a higher than average likelihood of having such serious health problems as birth defects, heart disease, mental deficiencies, poor nervous system development and susceptibility to infections.

e) Smoking, drugs, poor nutrition and stress are all factors that significantly increase a pregnant woman's chances of having a low birthweight infant.

f) Intensive hospital care required by a low birthweight baby typically exceeds $50,000.

g) Care of the smallest babies, requiring the longest hospitalization, can cost as much as $150,000.

h) Low birthweight infants represent about 7% of the babies born in the U.S. each year.

i) Because they are likely to have disabilities children who were low birthweight infants require greater than normal community and school resources for their education.

j) The yearly federal budget for the education of disabled children is about $2 billion.

Students should be divided into cooperative learning groups of three of four students. These groups should each be given the case study to read and discuss, and questions to answer (see below).

The teacher should lead the entire class in a discussion of the answers recorded by the cooperative learning groups to each of the questions.

If time permits, all, or part of the following class period should be devoted to a teacher-led follow-up discussion of the optional questions. The value of this session can be enhanced by asking the students to prepare answers to some, or all of these questions in advance, as a homework assignment.

Dr. Fischer, 46, is a pediatrician (children's doctor) and an expert in the care of the newborn at Public University Hospital. He has developed a new medical procedure that has an 80% survival rate for extremely low birthweight (under one pound) babies. Previously, using the normal intensive care given to low birthweight infants, there was almost no chance of survival for such tiny babies. Unfortunately this new method is extremely expensive, costing $450,000 per baby.

Joy Smith, 30, is a clerk in the accounts receivable for the Community Waste Management Corp. She is the mother of one child (Susan, see below) and is and on March 9 she will complete the fifth month of her second pregnancy. This pregnancy, like her first one has been difficult. She would like to work until just before her due date, but back pains are making it increasingly difficult to do her job. She has ignored the advice of her obstetrician to give up smoking and social drinking during her preganancy because of the harm that these habits can cause to her fetus.

Michael Smith, 32, is married to Joy. He is one of the most skilled machinists at Delta-Delta Electronics and earns a base salary of $58,000 per year. Three years ago he and his family moved into an attractive new four-bedroom home. With the new mortgage and a second child on the way, which means that his wife will not be working for at least two years after the baby is born, he has been taking all the overtime work that is available. He hopes that he and Joy will be able to afford the college educations for their children that they didn't have.

Susan, 12, is in her first year at Middleville Middle School. She has made a good adjustment to the new school environment and has developed a large group of friends. She is excited about the prospect of having a brother or sister after years of wishing for a sibling. Susan is already in the school band and the drama club. She also serves one period each day as an assistant in the school library. This year she hopes to try out for the Cheer Leader Squad. At home she has a nice large room with her own TV, VCR and Stereo. She is trying to convince her parents that she also needs her own phone. She has begun thinking about college and would like to attend a good private university like Cornell

Dennis Copa, 49, is the owner of Delta-Delta Electronics, a small sized, private company with 34 employees. Increased competition in the electronics field has recently reduced the company's profit. Sales of the company's most successful consumer products have leveled off. The company lost a recent bid for a government defense contract. Mr. Copa knows that if he doesn't reduce the amount of expensive overtime work he may have to lay off two or three of his employees. He is also looking into negotiating a reduction in health benefits with the employees union.

Joseph Sullivan, 58, has been the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Mega Insurance Corporation for four years. Mega has the contract to provide family health insurance coverage to the workers at Delta -Delta Electonics. Partly due to the increased cost of medical care, Mega's profits have been decreasing for two years. Mr. Sullivan knows that if he doesn't reverse this trend, the stockholders are not likely to retain his services as CEO. He has already down-sized the payroll as much as he can. One option he is looking into is declaring a larger number of new medical procedures to be "experimental" and therefore not eligible for coverage under the terms of the company's insurance policies.

On February 27^th Joy goes into premature labor and gives birth to a baby boy at Public University Hospital. Thomas weighs only 15 ounces. Joy had an easy delivery, is in excellent health, but she and Michael are faced with some very serious and troublesome decisions. They have been told about Dr. Fischer's new procedure for extremely low birthweight babies like Thomas. But they have also been informed that the hospital's policy on low birthweight babies is that "unusual" extreme care, such as that required by the Fischer procedure will only be employed if it is covered by medical insurance, or if the baby's parents agree to full financial responsibility. Otherwise, Thomas will be put in the normal intensive care unit for newborns, which means his chances of survival would be very small. Michael contacts Mega Insurance Corp. and is told that they consider Dr. Fischer's procedure to be experimental, and not covered under his policy. The hospital informs the Smiths that if Thomas is to receive the greatly enhanced survival prospect of the Fischer procedure they will have to agree to pay $300,000 -- the difference between the procedure's $450,000 cost and the maximum amount Mega will pay for intensive care for newborns.

Joy and Michael have less than 24 hours to make a most difficult decision. If they can somehow come up with $300,000 they can increase Thomas' chances of surviving for more than a few days, from nearly zero to 80%. They also are told that even if he does survive, the chances of him being a normal, healthy child are less than 50%. He would have an increased risk of having many serious ailments and a 25% chance of dying before the age of 10.

The Smith's total savings amount to $20,000. Fortunately, Joy has a rich uncle who she is sure would agree to help them get a bank loan for the remaining $280,000. But meeting the monthly payments will require a drastic reduction in the family's lifestyle. Joy and Michael decide to involve Susan in the decision. She is told that if they agree to the pay for the Fischer treatment the family will have to sell their new home and move into a much less expensive one in a less attractive neighborhood. Susan will have a smaller room and she will soon have to begin baby-sitting to pay for most of her entertainment expenses. When she is 13 Susan will have to take care of Thomas after school so that her mother can begin to work part time. She will surely have to abandon the idea of having her own phone and also of attending an expensive private college. Michael also knows that before making a decision he will need to confront Mr. Copa and try to persuade him to make an exception and permit Michael to continue to earn at least as much overtime pay as he has in the recent past.

Is it ethical for a hospital to provide a technically feasible treatment only to those who can pay for it?

Under the circumstances described, should Mega Insurance be required to pay for The Fischer procedure?

Does Dr. Fischer have any moral responsibility to try to make his procedure available to those with limited financial resources?

Should everyone have equal medical insurance, or should better policies be available to those who can afford them.

Is it fair for the Smiths to ask Susan's to help make a decision that will have negative impacts on her?

If the Fischer treatment could provide a 100% guarantee of Thomas surviving and living a full life as a normal individual, would your answers to any of the preceding questions be different?

Should the Smith's take into account when making there decision how they would feel if they agreed to pay for the treatment and then Thomas either died, or became severely handicapped?

What moral responsibility should Susan feel for creating this predicament, since her drinking and smoking increased the chances that it would occur?

If Thomas survives, but is severely handicapped, should he have the right to either sue his mother for child abuse, or to sue the hospital or his parents for treating him, rather than letting him die?

1. Using intensive care procedures on children who would otherwise die results in larger numbers of retarded and handicapped children. What is your response to this ethical problem?

Should decisions about whether to use expensive medical techniques be based on some form of comparison of costs and benefits?

According to a U.S. Child Abuse law that went into effect in 1984, all infants with disabilities are to receive nutrition and other medically indicated treatment with three exceptions:

b) the treatment would only prolong dying and would not be effective in treating the infant's life-threatening condition.

c) the treatment would be futile in terms of survival and under such circumstances would be inhumane.

Do you agree with this law? Do you think that it would require a hospital to use an expensive "experimental" method like the Fischer procedure in the case study on all very low birthweight infants?

Some obstetricians will not make a great effort to resuscitate a severely handicapped newborn infant that experiences heart arrest. Do you think this is ethical?

Would it ever be ethical to withdraw treatment from an infant with a poor chance of survival in order to provide intensive care for an infant whose chances of surviving are greater?

Some medical policy makers have proposed that the public funds that are now made available to provide intensive care to infants with poor survival chances should be reduced in order to provide more funds for prenatal care for women who are at risk of giving birth to a low birthweight infant. What do you think about this proposal?

Wrongful life lawsuits brought against hospitals, doctors and even parents involve a claim that a severely handicapped child's life is worse than death or nonexistence. What is your opinion about such lawsuits?

Wrongful birth lawsuits involve claims against hospitals or doctors by parents that a severely handicapped child was born because of negligence on the part of the medical personnel in denying them the opportunity for an abortion. What is your opinion about such lawsuits?

Teachers report that the student complaint "That isn't fair" is becoming increasingly common. Frequently what the student means is that some personal expectation or desire is not being met. This lesson provides an excellent opportunity to get students to confront the difficulty of meeting individual needs within the constraints imposed by a society with limited resources.

As the students should learn from this lesson, the task of developing necessary policies for prioritizing the allocation of human, material or financial resources in an ethically fair manner is extremely difficult. The rub is that there are strongly held, sharp differences of opinion about what constitutes a fair policy. For example, wealthy people will generally favor a system that allows limited resources to be purchased by anyone who can afford them, whereas poor people will demand a system that distributes these resources in a manner that provides equal access to people in all economic strata.

These are issues that will become increasingly important as rapid advances in biomedical technology continues to make it feasible to devise healthcare options that can not possibly be made available to everyone. Government officials in the Oregon have already learned how divisive it can be to attempt to define a scheme for rationing healthcare. Questions like whether a kidney transplant should go first to the patient who needs it most desperately, or to the one whose life is likely to be prolonged the most, can not be answered in ways that will be agreed to by everyone. All of today's students will be choosing governmental officials who will be faced with the task of achieving a political consensus on these vital, value-laden questions.

David J. Flatley, Principal, Selden Middle School, Selden, Long Island, NY. (This lesson was developed when Mr. Flatley was Chair of Mathematics and Science at W.T. Clarke Middle School, Westbury, Long Island, NY.)

As written, the lesson is intended for middle school and junior high school science classes, but the teacher-authors suggest that with minimal changes it could be used in any secondary science classroom through high school.

Students are given a fictitious case study to read in preparation for the class. The scenario involves a young industrial research scientist assigned to a research project, her supervisor and her research director. Brief sketches of the principal characters are included along with a description of the project and actions they take which include clear examples of scientific misconduct. Several questions are presented after the case study to prepare students for a classroom discussion of the case.

The teacher leads a class discussion loosely based on the written questions, but intended to explore any other relevant ethics and values issues raised by the students.

This case study can also be readily adapted for a role-playing classroom exercise.

The principal issue is the effect of dishonesty in interpreting and reporting research results, especially in matters related to health. This includes not only the potential effects with respect to the public, but

also effects on science -- such as undermining trust within the scientific community, misleading other researchers and damaging the public image of science.

Several other ethical issues related to this lesson that may be raised by students, or by the teacher

At the end of the class period preceding the one during which this lesson is to be taught the teacher hands out the case study, "Fraud In Science: Circumstances and Consequences" (see below) and instructs students to read it carefully, and to prepare for the discussion of the case by writing responses to the questions at the end of the handout.

At the beginning of the next class period the teacher should invite questions from the students concerning any problems they may have had in understanding the details of the case study. Other students should be invited to help the teacher respond to these questions as a way of assuring that everyone begins the discussion with a common understanding of the facts of the case.

The teacher should then lead a discussion of the case, using the written questions as an outline, but not as a rigid format that would preclude exploring other relevant ethics or values issues that may be raised by the students.

After the students have had the opportunity to describe their views on the ethics of the actions of Jana A., Enrico F. and Marie C., invite them to respond to the question, "Which of the three characters in the story behaved in a manner that you would consider to be the most unethical -- and why?" This question is likely to generate an interesting discussion and reveal both similarities and differences in the value systems that individual students use in making their ethical judgments.

The teacher should direct the discussion of the potential negative effects of the actions of the case study characters so as to focus on the ways in which science may be affected as well as on the more obvious human health effects that may be caused by the decision to use the new bacterial strain. It is important to discuss the evidence that unethical behavior of the sort described in this case study is not very common among research scientists.

Dr. Jana A. is a young research scientist working in the research and development department of Crick Biotech, Inc. For the past three years she has been a member of a team of scientists examining the properties of genetically altered strains of E. coli bacteria. The aim of the research is to produce a strain that meets the following criteria:

1. The bacteria will not be pathogenic to any organism they may come in contact with.

2. The genetic alteration will allow these bacteria to live symbiotically with tobacco plants and to be capable of converting atmospheric nitrogen to a chemical form that can be used by the plants. (This process is called "fixing nitrogen.") The result would be healthier, more productive tobacco plants, requiring less fertilizer -- thus reducing costs for tobacco farmers.

Other members of Dr. Jana A.'s team include her Senior Associate, who is her immediate supervisor, and the Project Director, who is responsible for reporting the groups findings and making recommendations to corporation's Board of Directors.

Project Director: Dr. Enrico F. is 68 years old. While he is well respected in the scientific community and in the corporation, he has been under recent pressure from the Board. He has not produced a money-making development in several years. Some of the younger Board members feel he no longer practices "cutting edge" science. He would very much like to prove them wrong before his anticipated retirement in two years.

Senior Associate: Dr. Marie C. is 45 years old. She is widely considered to be next in line for the position of Project Director. She is responsible for the day-to-day operation of the team's research effort. Her principal duty is to oversee the work of several junior research scientists, including Dr. Jana A. In addition to her responsibilities at the lab, she is president of the local chapter of the national organization, Women Scientists in Industry.

Dr. Jana A. has been given the responsibility for a critical part of the investigation. She has isolated a strain of altered bacteria which has been shown to meet the second set of requirements. Dr. Jana A is conducting tests to make sure that it isn't pathogenic. Jana believes that the strain she has isolated is safe. Most of the data support this hypothesis. However, some data suggest potential problems. It is known that other mutant forms of E. coli can cause serious, sometimes fatal human infections. Jana is aware of this. She also knows that future funding for the research, and possibly her job, may be in doubt if her problematic data become known. She makes note of the data in her notebook, but does not include it in the positive research report that she writes on the results of her tests on the new bacterial strain.

Dr. Marie C. reviews the report and notices what appears to be some missing data and incon-sistencies. Like Jana, she is very anxious to see the team's positive results recognized. Therefore, despite her doubts she approves the report and sends it to the Project Director. A week later, still troubled she asks Jana about the inconsistencies. She reviews Jana's lab notes and observes that there are a small number of "weird" data that raise some questions about the safety of the new starin of bacteria. She decides to support Dana's decision to ignore this data and makes no further report to Dr. Enrico F.

Dr. Enrico F. meets with the Board of directors to announce the team's encouraging findings. He makes the following recommendations:

1. Crick Biotech should invest corporate funds in producing large quantities of the new strain of bacteria and make a public announcement of the forthcoming availability of the new product.

2. The new strain should be named E. enrico, in honor of its producer and developer.

3. He plans to publish the research results in a paper that will list only his and Dr. Marie C.'s names as authors.

1. What actions of the three principal characters in this fictional case study would you consider unethical? Why?

2. What do you think motivated each of the unethical acts that you described in answering the first question. How do these likely motivations effect your judgement of the moral character of each of these individuals.?

3. Do you think that questionable behavior like that described in this case study is common among research scientists? What is the basis for your answer?

4. What negative consequences are likely to arise as a result of the unethical behaviors you have identified?

5. In addition to these specific examples of unethical behavior, can you think of any other ethics or values that are brought to mind by this case?

The stereotypic cultural image of a scientist among most members of our society, including secondary school students, incorporates the virtue of honesty. It is important to stress to students that this lesson is not designed to undermine the notion that most scientists do exhibit high levels of honesty in their professional work. However, as demonstrated by several recent cases that have received considerable media attention, scientists like all human beings can occasionally be expected to give in to the sorts of personal pressures that result in dishonest or fraudulent behavior.

A goal of this lesson is to heighten student awareness of the serious consequences that can be the result of scientific dishonesty. Students will generally be quick to recognize that the dishonest behavior depicted in the case study could be serious because it may subject the public to a serious health risk. In general students are likely to focus on danger to the public as an obvious serious consequence of dishonest behavior by scientists whose work relates to products related to human health or safety. It may be necessary for the teacher to direct the discussion toward the threat that dishonesty poses to the scientific enterprise itself. Scientific knowledge is cumulative and a scientist needs to have confidence that the facts and data he or she uses are the result of honest efforts by other scientists.

The particular case study included in this lesson is cleverly designed to raise a variety of possible ethical issues. By providing personal information about the scientists it puts a human face on the discussion. Students will differ in their assessment of the relative moral culpability of the various characters. The fact that the research is designed to aid farmers in the production of tobacco is likely to lead to an interesting discussion of the ethics of participating in research on a product, which though legal, poses a serious health threat to consumers.

Students are presented with a hypothetical scenario for discussion. Students work in cooperative groups of three. Each group strives to reach a consensus decision. Each group devises a skit in which members role-play the hypothetical scenario. Summary questions are provided for further group discussion and completion for homework.

Environmental values; relationships between law and ethics; personal responsibility; responsibility for the behavior of others; effective communication; negotiating consensus.

Students work in cooperative groups of three. They are presented with the hypothetical scenario described below, along with two questions for discussion. They are instructed to strive for a consensus decision in their responses to the questions. Then each group will be asked to devise a short skit in which members role-play the individuals and situations outlined in the scenario. Finally, summary questions are provided for further group discussion and completion for homework. Homework assignments can be for each student to prepare alone, or each group can be asked to prepare a consensus statement that represents decisions and responses arrived at by all members.

A student has just completed a short unit of study on recycling in her science class. As a part of this unit, she receives a copy of the official town policy on recycling, which recommends the placement of newspapers, scrap (non-glossy) paper, and all metallic and plastic objects in an official town container that is placed curbside each week. She has become convinced of the importance of and need for recycling. This student and her family are friendly with their next-door neighbor; she has done some minor chores and run errands for the neighbor. While walking to school, she has observed her neighbor setting out trash containers which, she notices, never contain any recyclables. In her own home she is careful to recycle all acceptable materials, but her parents only recycle a few items, sporadically, and sometimes not at all.

This lesson requires students to engage in shared reflection on their convictions concerning a significant issue in society today--recycling. It also requires them to connect what they learn in science class with their daily affairs. In the hypothetical scenario it is clear that the student believes that recycling is important, and she incorporates this in her own treatment of recyclable materials. However, the scenario raises another kind of question of responsibility. What responsibility, if any, does one have to attempt to persuade others to share, and act on, that same belief?

An interesting feature of the lesson as described here is that students work together in small groups, and they are expected to try to reach consensus. This is a valuable activity in its own right, since such cooperative undertakings are typical of much of what we must do in our everyday and work worlds. Furthermore, striving for consensus requires listening carefully to others and trying to negotiate differences in ways that extend respect for those whose views may be different. This often results in genuine changes in our ideas, since others may bring up important matters that we would not think of on our own. But it also exemplifies some of the features of democratic life, especially those that require cooperative action even when there is not full agreement among those who must act together.

At the same time, insisting on consensus, particularly in controversial areas, is not always desirable. A consensus view is not necessarily more likely to be more adequate than a dissenting view. So, students should not be encouraged to think that consensus necessarily determines what is best.

As described above, this lesson requires groups to role-play attempting to persuade others to recycle. It is quite possible, however, that some groups will reach a consensus that, while the student should try to approach a parent, she should not (or need not) approach the neighbor. Or a group might conclude that the neighbor should be approached, but not a parent. Or a group might conclude that neither should be, or need be, approached. For these groups, role-playing the student approaching neighbor or parent might be difficult (although still worth trying). A possible variation on the lesson would be to allow groups simply to role-play whatever consensus they obtain. For example, the student could be portrayed as discussing with her friends why she is reluctant to approach either a parent or the neighbor. The friends can be portrayed as trying to convince her that she should. Or she could be portrayed as discussing with a parent why she (or the parent) thinks it best not to approach the neighbor. And so on.

The final assignment, writing responses to the summary questions, is important because it requires students to put their thoughts on paper--after there has been much exchanging of ideas with others. This will encourage further reflection, and it will encourage students to refine their thoughts even further. This can be a group assignment, requiring an effort to formulate a group consensus statement (although it would be good to allow individual differences to be expressed as well). Or each student could be required individually to write responses to the questions.

Values in expenditure of public funds; fairness; individual rights; public good.

Dune Road in the Hampton's on Long Island's South Shore has houses worth millions of dollars built along the water. During hurricanes and severe storms, Dune road is often destroyed. The local government provides funds for the rebuilding of the road. Only the wealthy can afford to live there. Many of the houses on Dune Road are used only during the summer or as a weekend retreat by the owners. Unfortunately, some of the houses eventually get swept into the ocean.

The situation is quite controversial. Most Hamptons taxpayers are tired of paying for the road to be rebuilt; and they believe there are other, more important priorities in the community that need tax dollar support. Dune Road homeowners are afraid of what will happen if the road is not rebuilt. Not only will they find it difficult to reach their homes, their property value will go way down; and they fear no one will want to buy their homes if they try to sell them. They would also like to get some government money to repair their storm damaged homes.

Students are then asked to write two letters to the editor of the local newspaper concerning this problem. In doing this, they are to assume a different perspective for each letter. In one letter they are to assume the role of someone favoring repairing the Dune Road (e.g., a Dune Road homeowner who has spent the family's last dime in making this dream house a reality; a movie star who owns a Dune Road home; or a 12 year old child who visits his or her estranged father for two months during the summer at his Dune Road home). In the other letter they are to assume the role of someone opposed to repairing Dune Road (e.g., a taxpayer tired of contributing tax money to repair the road; a year around resident of the Hamptons who lives in a modest home and who would rather see tax dollars used to improve recreational facilities for year around residents; an environmentalist who would rather "let nature take its course" in the Dunes area). Letters should be restricted to no more than one page.

Students should then be invited to share their letters with the rest of the class, with discussion following.

Next, each student should assume the role of editorial writer at the local newspaper. Having heard a variety of arguments both for and against repairing Dune Road, the editorial writer is to write an editorial viewpoint that addresses the issues, pointing out the important values at stake and recommending, with reasons, a resolution of the controversy. The editorial should be restricted to no more than two pages.

This lesson raises basic questions about the appropriate use of tax dollars. Parties on both sides of the issue may appeal to individual rights and fairness. Those opposing the repairs might appeal to the larger good of the community, which raises questions about how minority interests are to be respected. Opponents might appeal to certain environmental values (particularly if they believe that the Dune Road owners are harming the dunes area). This raises basic questions about the appropriate relationship between human habitation and the rest of the natural world. Those who favor the Dune Road development might point out that, in one sense, all human habitation "interferes with" the rest of nature. So, assuming human habitation is to continue, what criteria for appropriate human habitation and development should be used?

An important feature of this lesson is the form of reflection and communication it requires. The students's first task is to consider the issues from different, and conflicting, perspectives. In writing letters to the editor, two important factors are involved. First, students are required to try to understand perspectives different than their own. Second, they are required to try represent and support these perspectives in a public arena (the local newspaper). This raises important questions about citizen participation in public discussion.

The students's next task is to participate in a class discussion that is likely to expose them to a much larger range of considerations than occurred to them in the first part of their assignment. This sets the stage for the final task, that of writing an editorial that is responsive to this wider range of public concern. Again, the communication is in the context of a public forum, but this time from the vantage point of someone with the public responsibilities of a journalist.

Although much of this lesson pivots around issues of public policy in expending tax dollars, the full range of concerns should make apparent the importance of obtaining as sound an understanding of the relevant ecological considerations as possible. (E.g., to what extent should communities attempt to anticipate problems such as the Dune Road before permitting the development of certain areas for residential or commercial purposes?)

A thought experiment in which students imagine themselves facing a practical decision in building a summer home. Students are instructed to make a decision, articulating the most important factors leading to that decision.

Environmental responsibility; long vs. short term consequences; ethics and punishment.

Students are asked to find definitions of the following terms (providing examples for each in order to make definitions more understandable):

Students are asked to read the following and answer the accompanying questions. This can be a written assignment, a class discussion, or both.

You are having a small summer house built on a lake in upstate New York. You have chosen this spot because of its isolation and the beauty of the lake. The lake is active with plant and animal life and covers an area of about 1.5 square miles. On its north side many small streams enter the lake carrying runoff from the area, while on the south side many small streams carry away some of the lake's water. Because of poor drainage in the area, it is necessary to have a septic tank installed. In order to have the septic tank do its job for a longer period of time, it is suggested to you, by the builder, to let all waste water (showers, sinks, garbage disposal, etc.), with the exception of the toilet empty into the lake. Since only you and two or three other people will be using the house and the lake is fairly large, you decide to give it some thought.

This lesson invites students to apply basic concepts they have learned in Earth Science ('pollution,' 'eutrophication,' etc.) to contexts in which individuals make practical decisions. The questions following the scenario invite students to reflect on the values underlying the decision they recommend. Factor 7 (consideration of likely future use of other property around lake) deserves special attention. The scenario describes the present situation. However, it is important to ask whether it can be assumed that things will remain the same. (After all, how is it that you were able to acquire the land? Won't others want to do the same?)

Another question to invite students to consider is why they might consider the environmental effects of allowing their wastewater running into the lake to be negligible, while agreeing to install a septic tank for effluent from the toilet. Further, might there be other ways to' extend the septic tank's useful period of time? This is a good opportunity to discuss various alternative ways in which people might more efficiently take care of their refuse in environmentally friendly ways (e.g., composting).

Students discuss the risks a landfill may pose to a community. The setting is a school board faced with a decision about whether to close a school until the landfill is capped (a 3 year period). Students are asked to determine (and defend) how they would vote.

Prioritizing values--risking health vs. lowering property values; role of environmental experts in affecting public policy.

An old landfill site in Lakeville borders an elementary school. From 1950 until 1965 it was an active landfill. During this time the landfill was used by several sanitation and chemical companies for disposal of their wastes. Assured that the landfill site posed no health hazards, the Lakeville community opened the elementary school in 1985. Children can be seen playing in the landfill's shadow. Although the landfill has existed since 1950, no problems with it were raised until quite recently. The two reasons the landfill is now an issue are:

1) Having determined that it contains large quantities of highly toxic chemicals the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has designated the landfill a "Superfund" site. The landfill will be capped to reduce the likelihood that toxins will leach out. Construction will disturb the materials in the landfill. The project will last approximately 3 years.

2) A new housing development of about 100 homes has been built 3 miles from the school. Although there is an elementary school one mile from the development, it is overcrowded. So, the school board decided to send children in the new development to the school next to the landfill.

The school principal's home is next to the school. The principal's view is that the landfill poses no danger to the health of the children. If she thought it did, she states, "I wouldn't be willing to live where I do." Others who live near the school would like to keep the school open. In addition to favoring sending their children to a nearby school, they are concerned that closing the school will affect the value of their homes.

However, residents in the new housing development are concerned about health risks to their children. They would like the school to be closed and have their children sent to another school over the next 3 years.

A special school board meeting is taking place as a result of the issue. The environmental engineer hired by the school board states, "Although the capping process is probably harmless, there always is some risk that some type of toxic exposure could result. Still, the risk isn't high enough to force the government to close the school or require residents to leave until the work is finished. It's really the board's decision." The EPA engineer states, "There is no danger to anyone near the landfill, and the capping procedure presents very little or no risk to the surrounding school and community."

The following discussion is very emotional. There is standing room only in the school auditorium, with speaker after speaker strongly expressing his or her views.

Now it is time for the board to make its decision. As a member of the board, how do you vote? Explain your decision, presenting the strongest reasons you can in support of your view.

The discussion can be conducted in various ways. For example, a portion of the class could play the role of school board members, with other students playing the roles of engineers and concerned citizens. Alternatively, the class could divide into several boards, each of which carries on its own deliberations and then reports its conclusions to the entire class. Or there could simply be a class discussion of the issues without role-playing. Finally, regardless of how the discussion is structured, students could be asked to write up their views of the situation (either before or after the discussion--or both before and after).

This lesson may seem to be more about public policy than science. However, science plays an important role. First, the landfill issue facing the community is the direct result of industrial developments connected with biology, chemistry, and the earth sciences. However, aside from questions about the role scientists may have in creating difficult issues related to public health and safety, it is clear that scientists (and, in this case, engineers) have some responsibility to provide public constituencies with reliable information that can be used to resolve those issues.

Although this is not emphasized in the scenario above, one of the most important tasks scientists and engineers have in situations like this is to present needed information in ways that can be understood and put to relevant use by concerned citizens, and especially those whose responsibility is to make decisions that affect public health and welfare. This is a good time for future scientists and engineers to begin thinking about the importance of being able to form bridges between the world of expertise they will enter and the general public.

At the same time, this scenario should help students who will never become scientists or engineers understand why it is important for them to acquire at least minimal scientific literacy so that they will be in a better position to interpret expert reports and testimony they may need in order to make responsible decisions--whether as public officials or private citizens.

Another feature of this lesson is that students are asked to imagine themselves having to make an important decision in the public eye in an emotionally intense setting. This adds high drama to an already complicated situation. In such circumstances it may be difficult to remain clear-headed and composed. Teachers may need to remind students that the psychological forces that lead us to decide in one way or another are not necessarily good reasons from the standpoint of justification. The psychological forces may explain why a particular decision is actually made. But justifications seek to determine how one ought to decide.

Author:

An edited version of an individual lesson plan developed by

Richard Tunick, Massapequa High School, Massapequa, Long Island, NY

Courses for Which Lesson is Intended:

Earth science classes.

Biology classes.

Types of Teaching/Learning Activities Employed in this Lesson:

Role-playing in policy-making setting.

Category the Best Describes this Lesson:

Social issues.

Ethics/Values Issues Raised by this Lesson:

Environmental values vs. economic development; public vs. private interest; democratic decision-making.

Lesson plan:

This lesson is based on an actual case, a dispute about the use of 100,000 acres in Suffolk County on Long Island, known as the Pine Barrens. The details in this case are not intended to be completely accurate (e.g., there is no Suffolk County Planning Commission, as each town controls its own development). The purpose of this lesson is to help students understand the complexities of environmental decisions, rather than to recreate the actual circumstances and outcome of the original case.

The class is divided into five groups. Each group is given time to discuss its particular role in the case. Then the Suffolk County Planning Commission group will conduct a public meeting at which the other groups make presentations, and the Planning Commission will make its decision. The five groups are:

The Suffolk County Planning Commission, whose responsibility is to decide on the uses of land in Suffolk County.
The Paradise Development Corporation/LIPA/LIRR, a combination of a corporate home builder, the Long Island Power Authority, and the Long Island Railroad.
The Long Island Association, an organization of businesses.
The Long Island Pine Barrens Society, an environmental group.
Citizens

The following materials are distributed to each member of the class for initial review. Then each group is asked to prepare for its particular role.

Status of the Pine Barrens

Originally the Pine Barrens consisted of about 250,000 acres of undeveloped, forested land. It is situated above a relatively unpolluted section of the aquifer system that is the source of all potable water to Long Island residents. But more than half of this land has been used for housing developments, farms, roads, landfills, golf courses, and businesses. Most of the remaining 100,000 acres are undeveloped. What to do with this land is highly controversial, which is why the Suffolk County Planning Commission is holding this public meeting.

As members of the Planning Commission, you are expected to study and make decisions regarding the use of community facilities. You oversee street maintenance, sewage treatment, library services, and other public services. You also issue building permits, and you review plans for new residential developments. You have been elected by the citizens to make decisions that serve their best interests.

Today, you are reviewing proposals for the use of the Pine Barrens, 100,000 acres of undeveloped land in Suffolk County. Different proposals will be presented by the Paradise Development Corporation, in collaboration with LIPA and the LIRR; the Long Island Association; and the Long Island Pine Barrens Society. Also, some citizens of the area are present at this public meeting and should be allowed to speak.

You should listen carefully to the proposals and discussions that follow. You may want to take notes. You may question the representatives of these organizations. When the presentations and discussions are finished, you are to decide what to do, providing reasons for your decision. A voice vote will be taken. Majority vote determines the decision. (You realize that, as elected representatives, your votes will be remembered if you stand for re-election.)

You can decide whatever you want. You can completely accept a proposal or only part of it. You can come up with any kind of compromise you think best. What to do with this land is in your hands.

Paradise Development Corporation representative: As a representative of this corporation, your objective is to persuade the Planning commission to allow development of the land for a community of 20,00 without disturbing the natural beauty of the area. Some arguments:

A new community would attract business enterprises, such as food stores, department stores, restaurants, gas stations.

2. The area's natural beauty would be preserved, for only a minimum of trees need to be cut down.

The community would provide a market for nearby farms: potatoes, wine, corn, and other vegetables and fruits.

This planned community would be able to provide decent homes at an affordable price.

Remember: You represent a corporation that makes its profits by building and selling homes. Here you have an ideal setting for a model community. Housing sales should be quick and profitable in such a setting, and your company stands to gain both large profits and prestige. Additional points you can make: Houses will use solar heating and natural ventilation, making them more "environmentally friendly" than typical houses. Housing will also be concentrated that a minimum of land will be under construction.

How have you planned for sidewalks, street maintenance, police protection, fire protection, garbage collection, schools, libraries, businesses to support the community?

LIPA representative: As a representative of this electric utility, your objective is to persuade the Planning Commission to allow development of the Pine Barrens with housing developments and industry. LIPA wants more customers so that it can request that the closed Shoreham nuclear power plant be used for a natural gas-fired power plant. With more customers, LIPA claims it can keep down future rate increases for its customers (rate increases that have already been approved for the next 10 years).

If LIPA gets more customers, won't there be a need for more generators, thus increasing costs to everyone?

Won't the production of more electricity add to the pollution of the environment?

LIRR representative: As a representative of the railroad, your objective is to persuade the Planning Commission to allow development of the Pine Barrens. This will benefit the railroad in a number of ways:

The LIRR will make this line attractive by electrifying the railroad from Ronkonkoma to Riverhead. (When LIRR electrified from Hicksville to Ronkonkoma, Ronkonkoma station usage more than tripled.)

This project will give LIRR reason to upgrade its services to keep up with the times.

1. Won't building a station cost more money, while the LIRR should be trying to save money?

Won't electrifying the tracks be expensive, therefore costing riders more money?

This is an organization representing the businesses of Long Island. Your objective is to persuade the Planning Commission to grant permission for the expansion of businesses on Long Island in general, and in the Pine Barrens area in particular. Two general points can be made:

Successful businesses provide a strong economic base and, therefore, a thriving community.

More businesses mean more jobs; and more jobs mean more support services (e.g., stores, gas stations).

Whenever there are more businesses, there is more pollution (air, land, groundwater). What will be done to prevent increased pollution?

Why do we need more people in this area? Isn't the population of Long Island, and Suffolk County in particular, large enough? Is bigger always better?

Your objective is to persuade the Planning Commission to protect the Pine Barrens as much as possible. The following arguments could be used:

There is a need to protect the huge quantity of clean groundwater under the Pine Barrens.

There is a need to prevent air pollution. Increased population means increased air pollution form home, business, and industrial heating units, and auto pollution.

The currently undeveloped land needs to be protected from increased use of fertilizers, sewage and solid waste materials, and oil and gas runoffs.

Land protection benefits everyone. An unlimited public access park can be created with access to ball fields, bridle paths for horses, hiking trails, camp grounds, and unmotorized boats. A limited public access park can be created for limited hiking, fishing and boating.

Designating the land as park land will ensure preservation because current laws prohibt building transportation and urban facilities on park land.

Development means more jobs and an improved economy. Won't preventing development hurt the economy?

Won't a public access park scare away wildlife and increase pollution caused by both cars and people? What will you do to prevent vandalism, and how much will this cost?

Won't creating such a park attract people who might want to live in the area, thereby increasing pressure for more housing development?

Won't a public park destroy the environment (more cars, motorbikes, picnic areas, baseball fields, basketball courts, campfire sites, etc.)?

Who will be allowed to enter a limited access park? Only local residents? Long Island residents? State residents? Is it fair to allow access to only a select few?

As citizens, you are sitting in on the Planning Commission hearings, and you have a right to speak. Here are some comments some of you might want to make (but you may think of others):

Won't our taxes be raised with more children moving into the area, requiring new schools, playgrounds, sewage treatment, and so on?

Long Island's over development is a bonanza for builders and developers and a disaster for the rest of us.

LILCO's electric rates are much too high. Let's do anything we can to lower them.

Why can't we have both development and the Pine Barrens? Can't we use some of the land for development and preserve the rest?

When will it stop? We've already developed 40% of the original Pine Barrens land. We've gone far enough.

We can use the jobs and new services. Besides, no one's going to cut down all the trees. It'll still be a beautiful area.

What right do we have to stop progress and keep others from developing the land; isn't that what we've always done anyway?

In order to reveal the complexities of issues like this, and to allow the students to engage their imagination more fully, this lesson may take several class periods. Although students will probably want more information than this lesson provides, there should be enough for them to see the sorts of questions a planning commission needs to consider. Even though students are right in thinking that more information is needed, they need to realize that, no matter how much information they have, at some point they will have to address some basic ethical and value questions about rights, the public interest, and the importance of the environment. However, perhaps the most important lesson here is that responsible treatment of those ethics and value questions requires being well informed in a variety of areas. Here the social sciences (such as economics and political science) as well as the natural sciences provide important perspectives.

Students imagine they are a team of scientists advising a town council on pollutants seeping into the groundwater. They discuss issues among themselves and then report to the class their recommendations.

The civic responsibilities of scientists; the value implications of scientific consulting/advising.

Students are divided into small groups. Each group is to imagine itself to be a team of scientists with expertise in industrial water pollution. The teacher distributes the following scenario and instructions to the groups. Each group will report its recommendations to the class.

Clinton Automotive is a factory in the town of Plainsville and the principal employer of the town. Clinton is also a major tax payer for the town and the local school district. The local water company has discovered that the undercoating applied to the chassis of its cars has been seeping into the ground water and is now in the water supply of a small part of the town.

A public meeting has been called to address the concerns. Clinton has threatened to leave town if it incurs heavy expenses and lawsuits related to the plant effluent. Homeowners with affected drinking water are threatening a lawsuit unless Clinton stops using the undercoating and pays for cleaning up the pollutant. At the public meeting it can be expected that there will be:

Your team of scientists has been hired by the town council to help it and members of the audience understand the significance of what has happened thus far to the groundwater and what will correct the problem (including cost estimates).

Although the groups of students will not be able to make actual estimates, they can discuss their obligations and strategies in serving as town council consultants. To whom do they have obligations in this case? The town council? The community? Clinton? How should this affect their scientific analysis and the report they will construct based on that analysis? Can the team remain value "neutral" and simply report the facts? Should they attempt to? Why or why not?

This case focuses on the responsibilities of scientists as consultants and as community participants in policy making. It may be thought that scientists simply try to determine the "facts," leaving all value questions to others. However, the very purpose of the study undertaken here is to assist the town council in meeting its responsibilities. So, in addition to understanding the town council's responsibilities, a scientific team of consultants also has to make judgments about what kinds of information will be most relevant for its deliberations and the public meeting. It also should take into consideration the needs and rights of the community in this matter--both in regard to questions of health, safety, and welfare and in regard to meaningful participation at a public meeting addressing the concerns of the community.

This does not mean that the scientific team itself makes the policy decisions. But it does mean that it has a responsibility to assist others in making those decisions. The question is whether that responsibility extends only to those who hired the team (the town council), or also to those to whom the town council is accountable (the larger public). Either way, it seems that "value neutrality" does not capture the role of the scientific team. But if this is right, it does not follow that the team is justified in being partisan to one faction or another. So, this raises another question: to what extent should a team of scientists, even as consultants, strive not to be partisan to the concerns of those for whom they provide consulting services? Should they be "partisan" to interests of the larger community that will be affected by what is decided? Which interests?

A revised version of a classroom lesson initially authored by the following Long Island, NY science teachers:

Antonia Martin and Theresa Soltiz, Cold Spring Harbor High School, Cold Spring Harbor

The particular science fiction story that this lesson is based on (Letter to Ellen by Chan Davis) is intended for use in standard or advanced high school biology classes, during or following a following the study of genetics. (Other science fiction stories that illustrate interesting ethical issues can of course be chosen for use in other science courses)

Students are given a science fiction story and questions to respond to as a two-day homework assignment. The class is divided into cooperative learning groups of three or four students each, which are given tasks based on the story. The entire class views the results of each group, which have been recorded on overhead transparency masters. The teacher leads a discussion designed to probe the ethical issues and student responses revealed in the work of the groups. The groups are given a follow-up exercise, the results of which are discussed in the following class session.

Note: This lesson works best if two or three class periods are devoted to it. It can readily accommodate a role-playing exercise based on either a dramatic presentation of the short story or some format involving questions by reporters directed at the characters in the story.

Informed consent as a requirement for research involving human subjects; other issues related to research on human subjects; secrecy and deception in research; the sanctity of human life.

(The classroom activities described below will require two or three class periods. If only a single period is available the work of the cooperative learning groups in item {4} can be restricted to activity {c}, and the lesson can be terminated after item {6e}.)

Many students enjoy reading science fiction. There are many well-written science fiction stories that are based on technically sound scientific principles and incorporate vivid examples of ethics and values issues that are associated with the actual practice or use of science. One such story is "Letter to Ellen," by Chan Davis (This story first appeared in the June 1947 issue of Astounding Science Fiction. It has been include in several science fiction anthologies including Golden Years of SF 5th Series, Isaac Asimov, Ed., {Bonanza Books, 1985}). This tale is particularly relevant because what was futuristic speculation in 1947 is now not so far-fetched in view of the capabilities of modern biotechnology. Indeed, several of the ethical issues raised by the characters in Davis' story are those that society is currently grappling with. (Two other science fiction stories that the authors of this lesson suggest as being suitable for teaching ethics in biological science are "The Winnowing," by Isaac Asimov and "Samson and the Temple of Science," by Harry Harrison. Teachers of other science courses should have little trouble finding suitable stories.)

Two class meetings before the this lesson is to begin in class, give the students the first student assignment. (See below.)

The next session give students the second assignment. (It is strongly recommended that students be given at least two days to read and reread the story to allow time for them to absorb and understanding the issues presented.)

Divide the class into cooperative learning groups of three or four students each.

b) share and discuss briefly the written answers of each group member to questions 2 and 3 of the assignment,

c) compile a list of questions they would like to ask the main characters in the story and record these on an overhead transparency master.

The teacher should then lead a class discuss focused on the following questions:

b) What ethical problems and other ethics and values issues do the questions raise?

e) What regulations or other actions might be taken to safeguard against future unethical practices at Pierne Labs?

f) Scientific research benefits from a free exchange of information among research scientists. (Why?) Yet, in many cases government or corporate laboratories impose restrictions on such information exchange, often demanding the type of secrecy of scientists that Dr. Hartwell tried to maintain. Under what circumstances is secret research an ethically acceptable practice?

g.) Even after a scientist leaves a particular research group, he/she is often required to honor secrecy restrictions. This can mean that the scientist can no longer continue the type of research he/she had been doing. Are such restrictions on a scientist's professional freedom ethically justified?

Students should then reconvene in their cooperative learning groups to formulate a code of conduct for research involving human subjects, recording the result on an overhead transparency master.

After reviewing and discussing each group's proposed code of conduct, the class should come up with a code incorporating the best suggestions of the individual groups.

The teacher should then hand out the Belmont Report⁽⁵⁴⁾ and discuss how the recommendations of that committee differed from those that the class produced.

Carefully read the science fiction story "Letter to Ellen," by Chan Davis. While reading this story (which was written in 1947), make written notes of the principal actions that occur and controversial issues that are confronted by the characters.

Reread "Letter to Ellen," adding to your notes. Write a description of the emotions expressed by the main characters in response to their experiences. Write down your own reactions to the behavior of the scientists, the nature of the research they are doing and the possible consequences.

One potential problem with the use of science fiction as a vehicle for ethics education is that most readers of fantasy don't generally expect the characters to be guided by the same ethical principles that they would expect of characters in a work of non-fiction or in real life. It is easier to get students to apply real-world ethical considerations if the events and technology in the story are not so far out as to be inconceivable in the foreseeable future. For this reason a story like "Letter to Ellen," written many years ago when it was clearly futuristic, but which describes events that are no longer so far beyond the reach of present-day technology, is particularly suitable.

In this, as in other ethics lessons, it is important to get students to recognize that ethics issues raise questions about which reasonable people can have legitimate differences of opinion. Although there are a few ethical statements like "genocide is always immoral" with which there is almost universal agreement, this is the exception rather than the rule.

The task of trying to write a general code of conduct for research on human subjects should prove to be a good illustration of the difficulty in constructing ethical guidelines that will win wide approval. Most students will probably include some type of requirement that the subject should consent to the research he or she is a subject in. Framing this requirement in a way that assures that the subject truly understands the research and all of its potential ramifications is no easy task!

David Flatley, Principal, Selden Middle School, Selden, Long Island, NY. (This lesson was developed when Mr. Flatley was Chair of Mathematics and Science at W.T. Clarke Middle School, Westbury, Long Island, NY)

Simulation: students imagining that they have learned specific genetic information about themselves.

Responsible use of genetic information, both by researchers and those who learn the information. Basic questions about just how much we want to know about our future health and behavioral prospects.

The specific objectives of this lesson include students being able to communicate clearly the notion that ethics and values issues are central to scientific research and being able to identify at least one ethical concern related to the human genome project.

For a class of 30, 30 envelopes, 30 index cards, and a chalkboard are needed. Before class begins, each index card must carry a "genetic code." "Genotypes" are assigned based on the following distribution:

[These percentages are not intended to represent the actual proportion of people who might eventually be determined to have such genotypes. They are used only for classroom purposes to make sure that each genotype has at least a few students wrestling with the problems they pose.]

The teacher should fold each card and seal it in a separate envelope so that the genotype is hidden. The following information should then be presented to the class:

Assume for the moment that, thanks to the human genome project, certain human genotypes can be identified for members of this class. For our simplified example, we will consider only four different possible genotypes, 1, 2, 3, and 4 (described below). Each of these genotypes is related to a different set of human traits. The genotypes, their associated traits and the frequency of the genotype in our class population is listed in the following chart:

4 No special tendencies have been identified. They all fall within 70% the "normal" range in appearance, ability, and predicted behavior.

The teacher should randomly distribute one sealed envelope to each student and review the prepared information with the class. Then, without opening the envelopes, the following questions can be used to start discussion:

After discussing these questions, students should open their envelopes. Now the teacher can ask: "Considering what your genotype is, would you like to re-think your responses to any of the previous questions?"

All of this could be done orally. Or students could be asked to write answers to one or more of the questions considered before opening envelopes. This might most effectively be done over two class periods, with written answers prepared before the second period.

This "futuristic" lesson can be used to raise students's curiosity about the genome project and some of the ethical, social, political, and legal questions it poses. Some time should be spent discussing the importance of knowing what percentage of those with certain genotypes will develop the traits in question, as well as what factors might contribute to or interfere with their development. This is important because, in most instances the human genome project information we are likely to discover will be in the form of the likelihood, rather than the certainty, that various traits will develop; and there may be much we can do to affect their development.

At the same time, it is important to discuss who should have access to whatever information is discovered. Should insurance companies have access to this information? Should our health care providers? The police? The schools? The children who have these genotypes, or only their parents? Are there limits to what science should be allowed to discover about us? Who should be allowed to conduct this research? Who should pay for it?

For further discussion of these issues refer to Case Study #5: The XYY Controversy, in Chapter 4 of Section I.

Biology classes. (It should be preceded by at least one lesson in which the students are introduced to the topic of ethics and values in science.)

This lesson employs the "structured controversy" in which pairs of students get to debate and discuss both sides of a controversial issue. It is best suited for a two-period laboratory session following the study of DNA, genes and the basic science of inheritence.

Is it ethical for the government to invest such a large fraction of its research budget in the Human Genome Project when the result is denial of funding for other worthy projects? Do such possibilities as finding the cause of many genetic diseases and identifying criminals outweigh such concerns as the possibility of using the genetic information to renew the types of eugenics programs practiced before and during World War II or to deny health insurance coverage? Given the huge investment of public funds in the Human Genome project, is the government responsible to assure that the benefits will be equally available to people of all socioeconomic levels and ethnic or racial backgrounds? Should genetic testing be made available to people who have not received the genetics counseling they need in order to fully understand and respond to the results?

This lesson was designed to help students identify and understand some of the complexities associated with the Human Genome Project. It is vital for students to understand that the enormous range of scientific and technological possibilities that will result from the complete deciphering of the human genome will require all of us to confront numerous new thorny ethical questions.

The pedagogic technique employed in the lesson is the "structured controversy." Students are assigned to four-person discussion groups, each of which is composed of two pairs of student partners. The lesson begins with each of the pairs choosing to argue in favor one of the two opposing viewpoints. After reading a brief essay supporting its viewpoint the pairs engage in a twenty minute debate/discussion. The pairs then switch sides, reading the essay supporting the opposing view and engaging in a second twenty minute debate/discussion.

By requiring students to learn both sides of the issue and allowing them to construct their own arguments in support of both positions they will come to appreciate the difficulties in establishing a reasoned position about a controversy that does justice to all of the important facets of the questions being discussed. The goal is to have each student reach his or her own ethical position on the question after a careful examination of the facts and the options.

At the beginning of the lab period the teacher should familiarize the class with the Human Genome Project, it's goals, and how far the research has progressed to date. A brief, non-judgmental description of some of the likely scientific and technical applications of the research should also be presented. (Note: At the time this lesson is being written, the task of sequencing the DNA in the entire Human Genome is less than half completed. This lesson will still be appropriate after the project has been completed. At that time the question to be debated will be whether the project should have been supported.)

Divide the class into groups of four students each of which should be further divided into two pairs of partners.

Give each group one copy of the "Order of Events" and two copies of each of the opposing essays; "The Human Genome Project: Science At Its Best" and "The Human Genome Project: Super Science Or Super Problem?"

During the debate/discussions the teacher should circulate among the groups. Only if the conversations seem to be stalled or moving in an unproductive direction, should the teacher interject questions or comments designed to get things back on track. Teachers should avoid making any remarks that reveal their own positions on the ethical issues. This is important because students often look to teachers for answers, but here it is desirable for them to think for themselves.

The laboratory should conclude with the groups sharing and discussing their opinions on the ethical issues associate with the genome project. If time runs out, this discussion can be held at the beginning of the next class.

Each pair of partners in the group should choose and read one of the opposing essays.

The partners should then discuss the readings, helping each other understand the issues raised and arguments made and developing a strategy for presenting these argument to the opposing partners.

NOTE: These first two activities should be completed in approximately ten minutes. Your teacher will announce when it is time to begin the first debate/discussion.

Engage in a twenty minute debate/discussion with the other partners in your group. Note that in this debate you must argue in favor of the positions taken in the essay you have read, even if they do not represent your own ethical perspectives on the issues.

Each pair now repeats activities 1-3, but this time reading the other essay and arguing in favor of the opposite point of view.

After the second debate the four members of your group should take ten minutes to write a statement expressing your points of view on the issues discussed. If you can not reach a group consensus opinion on an issue, then include the differing ideas in the statement.

The Human Genome Project involves thousands of scientists in a huge cooperative effort. The goal is to determine the sequence of the four chemical groups called bases in all of the strands of DNA contained in the chromosomes of every human cell. This sequence of bases contains the codes for all of the estimated 100,000 human genes. The genes, in turn, determine all of the information that is passed on by inheritance during reproduction.

Although expensive and time-consuming, sequencing all of the human genes is definitely a worthwhile scientific project for the government to support. Once all of DNA has been sequenced it should be possible to find the genes responsible for all inherited human traits including numerous serious genetic diseases. Already we have found the genes responsible for causing several diseases including Huntington's disease and cystic fibrosis. People will be able to undergo genetic screening tests to determine all of their genetic diseases, and in cases of recessive genes a married couple will know which diseases they may pass on to their children. Knowing the genetic cause of a disease may make it easier to find a treatment or a cure. In cases, like heart disease, diabetes and certain types of cancer genes may not cause a disease but may make a person prone to get the disease under certain environmental conditions. In such cases those who know they have such genes may be able to take actions to reduce the chance of getting the disease. Eventually we may even learn how to cure genetic disease by gene therapy to correct or replace the defective gene. By treating or preventing genetic diseases, billions of dollars of medical costs could be saved each year.

There are many other valuable uses that can be made of the information from the Human Genome Project. A government data bank could be set up containing every person's cpmplete genetic code. This would make it easier to identify criminals and trace missing persons. Insurance companies could use the information to refuse insurance or charge high rates to a person with a high risk genetic make-up. Prospective parents might be able to use genetic information to select specific traits that they want in their children. Ultimately genetic informatiom might even be used to help perfect the human race.

This expensive and time-consuming project was begun after much heated controversy. Opponents pointed out that the huge government research investment (many billions of dollars over at least ten years) would mean that hundreds of other worthwhile scientific projects could not be supported. Furthermore it can be argued that much of that money will be used to determine the sequence in parts of human DNA that does not contain any genes and is often referred to as "junk" DNA.

Although scientists hope that the genetic information can be used to cure diseases and save lives, it is not clear how likely this is. For example, although we have known the precise gene that causes Huntington's disease for several years we are no closer to finding a cure or even a treatment for this deadly condition. While it is true that a genetic test is available that enables a person to know early in life whether he or she will get this disease at about age forty, it is not clear that an individual is better off living with the knowledge that he or she is doomed.

The government and insurance companies may be anxious to gain access to each of our specific genetic codes, but is this a good thing? Shouldn't we worry that such information could be used to restrict our civil liberties? Do we want insurance companies to be able to deny medical insurance to exactly those people who may need it the most? Do we have any way of assuring that the potential beneficial uses of the genome information, paid for by everyone's tax dollars, will be as available to the poor as to the rich?

Earlier in this century the eugenics movement gained popularity. Many people who were thought to have "bad genes" were sterilized so they couldn't have children. The use of such measures by Nazi Germany gave eugenics movement a bad name. But now we once again are hearing talk about how the Human Genome Project will provide the needed information for a much more scientific effort to improve the human race. Is this any more ethically acceptable than a less scientific eugenics program?

The "structured controversy" technique, which requires students to defend both of the opposing positions in a debate is based on pedagogical evidence that a thorough understanding of any controversial issue requires a detailed examination of the arguments on both sides of the question. Students may initially claim that it isn't possible to make arguments that you don't personally believe in. The teacher can counter this by pointing out that lawyers are required to do this regularly as part of their jobs. Once students make the effort, most of them will stop complaining and find that this exercise is an enjoyable challenge.

Students should not be confined to using only the arguments presented in the pro and con essays. Although teachers should abide by the admonition against making remarks that reveal their own positions on the issue being debated, they should make an effort to correct any major incorrect or misleading statements made by the debaters. So as not to interfere with the debates in progress it is best to present these corrections to the entire class in a brief "clarification of the issue" session at the completion of the debate phase.

Biology classes. (It should be preceded, earlier in the school year, by a lesson that introduces the class to the general consideration of the roles of ethics and values in science.)

Students are given a homework assignment requiring them to read a fictional story involving the future cloning of human beings and to answer questions about some of the key technical aspects of the story. The class begins with a teacher led discussion of the answers to the homework questions, designed to assure that the ethics lesson is based on a common understanding of the scientific aspects of the story. The class is then divided into cooperative learning groups. Each group is charged with responding to a common set of questions about some of the ethical issues raised by the story. The teacher then leads a classroom discussion focused on the variety of alternative values-based responses of the different groups to the questions, as well as other possibilities suggested by the teacher or by students during the discussion. Students are then given a follow-up homework assignment based on the lesson.

The ethics of cloning human beings as compared to plants or animals; the ethics of a parental agreement that imposes unusual involuntary obligations on a child; the ethics of imposing restrictions on scientific research; the rights of a child to know the details of her/his genetic heritage.

Students are given a homework assignment (see below) requiring them to read the futuristic, fictional story "Whose Life Is It?" and to answer questions about the important scientific/technical aspects of the story.

At the beginning of the next class the teacher invites students to present their answers to the homework questions and leads a brief discussion designed to provide all of the students with the correct information about the scientific/technical details of the story before beginning the ethics lesson.

The class is then divided into cooperative learning groups, each of which is given twenty minutes to formulate answers to a set of questions about the ethics and values issues related to the story.

The teacher then conducts a discussion about differences among the answers to the questions arrived at by the groups. An effort should be made to get the students to recognize some of the differences in values that underlie the responses to the questions and to consider other reasons for their specific responses.

The students are then given a homework assignment requiring each of them to write a letter to their representative in Congress concerning the student's views about federal support for research on human cloning and describing any restrictions or guidelines that Congress should impose on the scientists who do cloning research.

On June 23, 2018 Jean Trueblood celebrated her seventeenth birthday. Her summer activities include preparing for her freshman year at Central State University. Due to the influence of several inspiring high school science teachers, she is seriously considering biology as her major in college. She is fascinated by what she has learned so far about the amazing scientific and medical advances made possible by powerful new biotechnologies. For her final paper in her advanced "Current Issues in Biology" course she chose to write about the ethical implications of cloning, not knowing that this topic was about to have a direct impact on her own life.

Just one week after her birthday Jean's plans for a carefree summer were shattered by a letter received by her parents. The letter was from Dr. Cynthia Hayes who had won the Nobel Prize for groundbreaking research on the cloning of mammals. Dr. Hayes' successful research on the cloning of chimpanzees had been funded by a grant from the U.S. National Institutes of Health.

As Jean's parents knew, Dr. Hayes had secretly used some of the funds to apply her new technique to the cloning of a human being. That human being was Dr. Hayes, herself. She was motivated by the fact that she had developed a chronic infection in both of her kidneys that might eventually require a kidney transplant. She knew that she had some rare blood and cell characteristics that would make it hard for her to find a matching kidney donor. With the aid of a close friend who was medical technician in Central State Medical Center's Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Dr. Hayes was able to obtain 10 human eggs removed from the ovary of a research volunteer. Then, using her new method, she was able to get four of these eggs to begin to grow into clones of herself by removing the original eggs' nuclei and inserting nuclei from her own cells. All of the successful clones were then frozen in liquid nitrogen in the early blastula stage.

With the aid of another friend who worked for a clinic for women seeking assistance in becoming pregnant, Dr. Hayes was able to locate a woman who was seeking an embryo implant after she had failed to become pregnant by any other means. That woman was Jean's mother, Valerie Trueblood. Dr. Hayes offered Jean's parents a very financially attractive deal. They could save the usual $60,000 cost of an embryo implant if they agreed to accept one of Dr. Hayes' cloned embryos and signed an agreement. The terms of the agreement caused the Truebloods to hesitate. It required the clone of Dr. Hayes that would be born to Valerie Trueblood to agree to donate one of her kidneys to Dr. Hayes should she require a transplant any time during her life. To persuade the Truebloods to accept this unusual and troubling requirement, Dr. Hayes agreed to create a $100,000 trust fund that the Truebloods could use toward the expenses of raising and educating her clone. After Dr. Hayes assured them that there was less than a 50% chance that she would ever need a kidney transplant, the Trueboods signed the agreement. A little less than nine months later Jean was born.

As the reader will certainly have guessed by now, the letter the Truebloods received from Dr. Hayes informed them that she was now in desperate need of a kidney transplant and that they should have Jean immediately "volunteer" for the tests that would determine that her kidney exactly matched Dr. Hayes' unusual tissue-typing requirements. All of this came as quite a shock to Jean who had never been informed by her parents about her biological origins or the existence of the contract they had signed.

Explain why a germanium plant grown from a leaf placed in water is an example of cloning.

Explain why Jean and Dr. Hayes are the same sex and why Jean's kidneys are ideally suited for Dr Hayes transplant operation.

Since every human cell contains all of the information required to make an entire human being in its DNA, why isn't it possible to simply use any cell to clone an individual?

Dr. Hayes did not reveal her decision to clone herself in addition to the chimpanzees because she knew that the National Institutes of Health would not approve. Give two reasons why the government agency might object to cloning humans, although it approved of cloning monkeys.

Do you approve of the cloning of (a) plants, (b) mice (c) monkeys (d) humans? Explain your answers.

Do you think that Dr Hayes' was justified in secretly cloning herself because of her kidney condition? Explain your answer.

Do you think that the Truebloods decision to accept Dr.Hayes' terms for the embryo implant was ethically justified? Explain your answer.

Should the Truebloods have told Jean about her biological heritage and about the terms of the agreement they signed? If so, at what age should she have learned these facts?

Does the fact that Jean's upbringing and education have been partly payed for by Dr. Hayes have any influence on your answer to question 5. Explain your answer.

If one identical twin needs a kidney transplant due to a condition not related to heredity, should the other twin feel obligated to donate one of his/her kidneys for a transplant operation? Explain your answer? Why would the situation be different if one of the twins needed a liver transplant?

Write a letter that could be sent to your representative in Congress that (1) explains your views on the cloning of human beings and (2) proposes any restrictions or guidelines that you think Congress should impose on scientists who use federal funds to do cloning research.

Cloning of human beings and other mammals has long been a component of science fiction because of the numerous fascinating (or horrifying) possibilities it opens up. This fascination has been heightened by the recent success in cloning mammals and the likelihood that the cloning of humans could soon be technically feasible. Philosophers, politicians, religious leaders and many others have begun an intense debate about the ethics and possible consequences of these advances in the science of cloning.

Teachers may wish to modify the questions assigned for homework in accord with the content of the information about cloning that has been previously taught to the students.

The fictional story included in this lesson is designed to raise many ethical issues in addition to the controversies typically associated with the potential cloning of human beings. The fact that the central character is a seventeen-year-old should make it easy for students to identify with her. Although this lesson could be completed in one class period, doing justice to the many important contemporary ethical concerns that are likely to emerge during the discussion will probably require continuing into a second period. This additional time can also be profitably used to read and discuss some of the letters that students are assigned to write to their Congresspersons.

This lesson is intended for use in any biology course - introductory or advanced - that includes a unit on genetics or reproduction.

Students read a story about a girl who grows up in a family affected by the heritable, disabling and fatal medical condition called Huntington's Disease. They then meet in cooperative learning groups to define the meaning of several relevant terms and to answer questions about ethical issues related to the available genetic test for Huntington's Disease. A classroom discussion is then held to explore the differences among the group's responses to the questions

General ethical issues related to modern biotechnology; specific ethical issues related to testing for genetic diseases; the ethical consequences of the disclosure of genetic information.

In preparation for the lesson the students are given a homework assignment requiring the written definition and explanation of a series of terms related to the lesson.

At the beginning of the class, students are given ten minutes to read the brief introductory story, "My Friend Linda."

The class is divided into cooperative learning groups of three or four students each.

a) discusses and attempts to formulate a set of definitions and descriptions for the terms in the homework assignment.

b) discusses and attempts to reach a consensus in response to the discussion questions

The teacher asks for volunteers among the reporters for the learning groups to present definitions of the assigned terms. With the help of other students the definitions are discussed and, if necessary modified, with the goal of producing a set of definitions that the teacher and class find acceptable.

The teacher then leads a class discussion based on the questions, which is designed to expose the students to the many unavoidable ethical issues that our society faces as a result of the development of biotechnology and its application to genetic testing.

When I was ten years old, my best friend Linda's father died. We knew he had been very sick, but Linda told us nothing else about his illness. When you are ten, the death of someone close to you is usually too frightening to talk about. Linda's friends would never have dreamed of asking, "What did your daddy die of?"

Although she moved to another city when we were both 13, I kept in touch with Linda. When she was twenty she told me that her brother Peter was ill. Peter was 31, married, and had a two-year-old daughter. Over the next three years I learned from Linda that his condition had gotten much worse and he had been confined to a hospital. A year later Linda wrote to tell me that he had died and that her unmarried sister Hope, then 33, was showing early signs of the same disease that had taken the lives of her father and brother.

Linda disclosed in that letter that her father, Peter, and now Hope were victims of Huntington's Disease. She explained that it is a genetic disease caused by an autosomal dominant gene. Anyone who inherits the gene will suffer physical and mental deterioration, usually beginning about age forty. Symptoms from the most lethal form of the gene can sometimes begin several years earlier. The disease begins by causing a variety of physical symptoms. The victim loses muscular control, soon becoming unable to walk normally or do tasks requiring any coordinated motion. Speech becomes difficult and then impossible. Within a few years serious mental disturbance occurs followed inevitably by death. There is no cure, nor effective treatment for the disease.

One purpose of Linda's letter was to seek my advice. She faces a very difficult decision. Genetic research has identified the form of the gene that causes Huntington's disease. A test has been developed in which the gene is cloned and DNA analysis can be done to determine if a person is carrying the lethal allele. Linda is now 24 and she has fallen in love. She knows there is a 50% chance that she inherited the lethal gene from her father. The question she has asked me to help her with is should she have the test done to find out whether or not she is doomed to suffer the same fate as her father, brother and sister?

3. If Linda is tested and plans to be married, should she tell her boyfriend about the results?

4. If she decides not to be tested, should she explain to her boyfriend that she has a 50% chance of having the lethal gene, and that if she has it, any children she has will also have a 50% chance of inheriting it from her?

5. Should Linda's test results be available to health insurance companies; to a potential employer; to the government? Should anyone else be informed of the test results without Linda's permission?

6. Suppose Linda had an identical twin sister. Should that sister have the right to know Linda's test results? Suppose that sister does not want to be tested, and since it would be difficult for Linda to hide either negative or positive test results from her, should the sister have the right to prevent Linda from being tested?

7. Should being tested for the gene be a requirement for anyone with a family history of Huntington's Disease?

8. Suppose a cure, or effective treatment for Huntington's Disease was discovered. Would this affect your answers to any of the other questions?

9. As you have seen in responding to these questions, genetic testing involves decisions of an ethical nature that have complicated possible effects on the person being tested, family members and society. Since most people will not be aware of all these issues, should genetic counseling be required before an individual undergoes genetic testing? If so, who should pay for it?

There is no doubt that biotechnology and the Human Genome Project will continue to result in new technologies that will become available to medical practitioners and to the public. It is important that in addition to learning about the tremendous potential benefits of this biotechnological revolution, students become aware of the complex social and ethical issues that will accompany this development.

In this lesson students learn that it is now possible for an individual with a family history of Huntington's Disease, a lethal inherited disease resulting from a genetic defect, to have a test to find out if he or she has inherited the defect. Since the disease is incurable and always fatal, the obvious question is whether or not an individual is better off knowing if the defect has indeed been inherited. Knowledge would be helpful in many ways. If the results are negative it means the individual can live a normal life without fearing an early, horrible death. If the results are positive it can help an individual prepare for the inevitable. An individual with the inherited gene may decide not to have children, each of whom would have a 50-50 chance of inheriting the lethal defect. On the other hand an individual may prefer to live with the uncertainty of not knowing rather than risk having to live with the certainty that she or he is doomed. Question 6 points out that the decision to have the test results in information that can affect relatives as well as the individual in question. Parents and children of an individual being tested, as well as the more unusual case of an identical twin, could learn that they are either definite or possible carriers of the defect from the results obtained by a person who chooses to be tested. This can clearly present thorny ethical problems for someone who is considering being tested.

It is important to emphasize that serious ethical issues are by no means confined to the case of genetic testing for a fatal incurable disease. Genetic testing of any sort is associated with serious potential consequences that most people are not aware of. In many cases an individual is advised to see a genetic counselor before making a decision about whether to be tested. It has been suggested by some of the people who have studied this issue that such counseling should be made mandatory. Before any action could be taken on such a suggestion it would be necessary to define what constitutes adequate counseling. At present, genetic testing and counseling are expensive and are not financially feasible for the majority of people. This raises a general ethical concern about how a democratic society can assure fair access to present and future expensive biomedical technological procedures.

An edited version of a classroom lesson initially authored by the following Long Island, NY science teachers:

Intended for use in a college-preparatory or advanced high school biology course.

The teacher leads a student discussion of the ethics/values issues associated with the student activity and the events depicted in the video.

Cooperation versus competition in science; attitudes toward the sharing of unpublished data and results; assignment of credit for scientific discoveries; sexual bias in the scientific community.

This lesson is designed to explore several common ethics/values issues related to the behavior of research scientists, while reinforcing students' understanding of the relationship between the structure of the DNA molecule and the biology of protein synthesis. It was inspired by the video The Race for the Double Helix⁽⁵⁵⁾, which is a dramatization of the efforts of James Watson, Francis Crick, Rosalind Franklin, Maurice Wilkins and other scientists that led to the discovery of the structure of DNA. The video is, in turn, based on the book The Double Helix, by James Watson⁽⁵⁶⁾.

The complete activity requires a minimum of four forty-minute class periods. It should be used after students have learned about the structure of DNA, the relationship between DNA and messenger RNA (mRNA), and the mechanism of synthesis of proteins using mRNA.

At the beginning of the lesson, the class is divided into groups of four students each representing a "research team." The objective of these teams is to win a "bonus" by deciphering a coded message. This is achieved by first transcribing a DNA segment, given to the team, into mRNA, determining the amino acid sequence that is coded on the mRNA, and then using a code that assigns each amino acid to a letter or other element of sentence structure.

No single research team is given enough information to decipher the entire message. Each team is given instructions on how to interact with the other teams in an effort to win the bonus. Some of the teams are instructed to behave in a collaborative manner, sharing their information. A second set of teams is told to act in a highly competitive manner, keeping their own results to themselves while aggressively attempting to obtain data from the others. One team is instructed to work independently and methodically in an effort to solve the problem on its own.

The following instructions are based on an assumed class size of 24. The six four-person research teams will be labeled Groups A, B, C, D, E and F. Groups A, B, and C will be instructed to behave as "collaborator" teams. Groups D and E will be told to behave as aggressive "competitors."

Group F will be the "independent," methodical research team. (In classes of larger or smaller size, some, or all of the groups can be increased to five or decreased to three students. Alternatively, the number of collaborator or competitor groups can be increased or decreased.)

The first group that brings the correct message to the teacher wins the bonus. That message is "CONGRATULATIONS! YOU ARE THE WINNER. THE BONUS IS YOURS!"

The segments of DNA given to each of the groups, when correctly decoded, will produce the following partial messages:

Note that by exchanging data, the collaborator groups can get the entire message, except for the first word, which they would have to guess. The independent group has a longer message, which includes the first word, which none of the other groups have. By working methodically on their own that group can get an entire message, but the last word is incorrect and they can get the bonus only by guessing the correct word. The competitor groups are given the shortest part of the message, but by following their instructions to be aggressive, they may be able to find a way to get the rest of the information. In fact, teachers who have used this exercise report that it is usually one of the competitor groups that wins the bonus.

After one of the groups correctly deciphers the message, the teacher should lead a discussion about the students' reaction to the activity and their thoughts about how the instructions given to the groups compare with what they imagine to be the behavior of real-life scientific researchers. The teacher should help the students identify ethics/values issues that are related to the points the students raise in the discussion. Some questions that the teacher might ask to stimulate and direct this discussion are:

What do you think about the instructions your research group was given and did you have any reaction to the behavior of the other groups?

Which of the groups was instructed to behave in a manner that you think resembles the way real-world scientists behave?

What is your opinion about the roles of competition, collaboration and independent work in scientific research?

Are the standards of behavior that you expect of scientists any different than those you set for other professional workers?

When the continuation of this discussion no longer appears to be fruitful, the students should be shown the video The Race for the Double Helix. After viewing the video, the teacher should lead another discussion.⁽⁵⁷⁾ Some suggested questions for this second discussion are:

If you were going to be a scientist, which of the researchers in the film would you choose to be like? Why? (Note: If, as is likely, more girls than boys in the class identify with the Rosalind Franklin character, some questions might be asked to get the class to think about reasons why this is true.)
What differences did you observe among the research goals of the various principal researchers - James Watson, Francis Crick, Rosalind Franklin and Maurice Wilkins?
Which do you think should be the goal of a scientist: receiving credit for being the first one to make an important discovery, or sharing your results with others so that the discovery can be made as soon as possible, even if you don't get the credit for it?
In what circumstances do you think scientists are justified in not sharing their results with others before their research is completed.
This video is based on a book written by James Watson, in which he very openly described his memory of the effort leading to the discovery of the structure of DNA. The book proved to be very controversial, and Watson received much criticism from other scientists for revealing the personal side of this historic research effort. Why do you imagine that other scientists reacted in this way?
Do you think that women scientists are still discriminated against the way Rosalind Franklin was in the 1950s?
Aside from the direct effects of discrimination against women, can you think of any other possible consequences of the fact that science has historically been a profession that has been dominated by men, most of whom had above average incomes?

2. Your group will be given a sequence of nucleotide pairs carried by a piece of DNA. Using the left hand set of nucleotides as a template, and your knowledge of the base-pairing that occurs in RNA, transcribe the corresponding strand of mRNA.

3. As you have learned, each successive set of three mRNA nucleotides is a codon that codes for a particular amino acid. Using Table 1, determine the amino acid sequence that would be produced by the mRNA you transcribed.

4. Use table 2 to determine the sequence of characters (letters, spaces or punctuation marks) that correspond to your DNA sequence, and write them in the appropriate place on your data sheet.

5. Your group is collaborating with groups B and C (or A and C, or B and C). After deciphering the part of the message coded by your piece of DNA, you should share your results with these other two groups to complete missing sections of the message indicated by the numbers of spaces in parenthesis. You should then "publish" your results on the black board for the other groups to share. You may then try to complete any missing part of the message by guessing. When you think you have the entire correct message, report it to your teacher who will give a bonus to the first group that gets it right.

5. Your group is intent on being the first to decode the entire message. You find that After deciphering the part of the message coded by your piece of DNA, you are missing sections of the message indicated by the numbers of spaces in parenthesis. You should try to obtain the missing information from the other groups by any means you can devise, without sharing your results with them. When you think you have the entire correct message, report it to your teacher who will give a bonus to the first group that gets it right.

5. Your group believes in methodical, independent work. You do not wish to publish your work until you are sure it is correct. Unfortunately, you find that after you decipher the message corresponding to your piece of DNA, it contains an error. You may try to independently deduce (guess) the correct complete message. Only if you are sure that you know what it is should you report it to your teacher who will give a bonus to the first group that gets it right.

Groups A

(51 SPACES)	(24 SPACES)			(18 SPACES)
TA	AT	TA	TA	TA	CG	GC
AT	CG	AT	TA	GC	TA	TA
CG	AT	AT	GC	GC	TA	GC
CG	TA	TA	AT	GC	GC
TA	GC	TA	GC	CG	TA
TA	GC	TA	AT	GC	TA
GC	CG	AT	TA	AT	TA
TA	TA	TA	AT	TA	TA
CG	GC	TA	GC	GC	CG
AT	CG	AT	AT	TA	GC
TA	TA	TA	TA	AT	CG
GC	AT	GC	GC	CG	AT

Group B

(51 SPACES)			(36 SPACES)
T A	CG	TA	CG	GC
AT	CG	TA	GC	CG
CG	TA	CG	AT	AT
CG	TA	AT	CG	AT
TA	TA	GC	TA	TA
TA	CG	AT	TA	GC
GC	TA	TA	CG	(27 SPACES)
TA	AT	AT	TA
CG	AT	GC	GC
AT	AT	AT	GC
TA	TA	TA	TA
GC	AT	GC	TA

Group C

(51 SPACES)	(24 SPACES)			(18 SPACES)
TA	AT	TA	TA	TA
AT	CG	AT	TA	GC
CG	AT	AT	GC	GC
CG	TA	TA	AT	GC
TA	GC	TA	GC	CG
TA	GC	TA	AT	GC
GC	CG	AT	TA	AT
TA	TA	TA	AT	TA
CG	GC	TA	GC	GC
AT	CG	AT	AT	(18 SPACES)
TA	TA	TA	TA
GC	AT	GC	GC

Groups D and E

(51 SPACES)
TA	CG	TA	AT	TA
AT	CG	TA	CG	AT
CG	TA	CG	AT	AT
CG	TA	AT	TA	TA
TA	TA	GC	GC	TA
TA	CG	AT	GC	TA
GC	TA	TA	CG	AT
TA	AT	AT	TA	TA
CG	AT	GC	GC	TA
AT	AT	AT	CG	AT
TA	TA	TA	TA	TA
GC	AT	GC	AT	GC
				(57 SPACES)

Group F /TD> /TD> /TD> /TD> /TD> /TD> /TD> /TD> /TD> /TD> /TD> /TD>

CG	GC	AT	TA	AT	CG	GC
AT	AT	TA	TA	TA	TA	CG
AT	CG	AT	CG	TA	TA	AT
CG	CG	CG	AT	TA	CG	AT
TA	GC	CG	GC	AT	TA	CG
TA	TA	TA	AT	TA	GC	CG
CG	TA	TA	TA	TA	GC	AT
TA	GC	GC	AT	AT	TA	CG
AT	TA	TA	GC	TA	TA	TA
GC	GC	CG	AT	GC	CG	AT
AT	AT	AT	TA	TA	CG	GC
AT	CG	TA	GC	TA	AT	TA
TA	TA	GC	AT	GC	AT	AT
TA	CG	CG	CG	AT	TA
TA	CG	CG	AT	GC	GC
CG	TA	TA	TA	AT	TA
CG	GC	TA	GC	TA	GC
AT	GC	TA	GC	AT	GC
TA	CG	CG	CG	GC	GC
TA	GC	TA	TA	AT	CG
AT	GC	AT	GC	TA	GC
GC	TA	AT	CG	GC	AT
TA	AT	AT	TA	CG	TA
CG	AT	TA	AT	GC	GC
GC	TA	AT	TA	AT	CG

The Amino Acids

Abbreviation	Name	Abbreviation	Name
gly	glycine	ala	alanine
val	valine	ile	isoleucine
leu	leucine	ser	serine
thr	threonine	pro	proline
asp	aspartate	glu	glutamate
lys	lysine	arg	arginine
asn	asparagine	gln	glutamine
cys	cysteine	met	methionine
trp	tryptophan	phe	phenylalanine
tyr	tyrosine	his	histidine
term	termination

Table 1: The Genetic Code: Codons and the Amino Acids They Code

First Two Nucleotides of the Codon	Last Nucleotide of the Codon
First Two Nucleotides of the Codon	U	C	A	G
UU	phe	phe	leu	leu
UC	ser	ser	ser	ser
UA	tyr	tyr	term	term
UG	cys	cys	term	ttrp
CU	leu	leu	leu	leu
CC	pro	pro	pro	pro
CA	his	his	gln	gln
CG	arg	arg	arg	arg
AU	ile	ile	ile	ile
AC	thr	thr	thr	thr
AA	asn	asn	asn	asn
AG	ser	ser	arg	arg
GU	val	val	val	val
GC	ala	ala	ala	ala
GA	asp	asp	glu	glu
GG	gly	gly	gly	gly

Table 2 Amino Acid to Character Conversion

Amino Acid	Character	Amino Acid	Character	Amino Acid	Character
Glycine	A	Alanine	B	Valine	C
Isoleucine	E	Leucine	G	Serine	H
Threonine	I	Proline	L	Aspartate	N
Glutamate	O	Lysine	R	Arginine	S
Asparagine	T	Glutamine	U	Cysteine	W
Methionine	Y	Tryptophan	D	Phenylalanine	J
Tyrosine	Space	Histidine	!	Termination	.

Name ______________________ Group _____ Period _____ Teacher ____________________

DNA	mRNA	Amino Acid	Character	DNA	mRNA	Amino Acid	Character	DNA	mRNA	Amino Acid	Character
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____			____	____			____	____
____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______	____	____	_______	______
____	____			____	____			____	____

Although this lesson requires a substantial investment of classroom time, teachers who have used it with properly prepared students commented that it serves to concretize the mechanism by which DNA codes for protein synthesis, while stimulating very rich and rewarding student discussions of important ethical issues related to the behavior of scientists.

In the discussions, it is important to direct attention to the significance and generality of the issues, rather than the particular circumstances of the student exercise, or the specific personality traits of the characters in the video. These general issues include the common conflict between a scientist's personal values, such as the desire to achieve success or fame, and the ethical demands of the scientific profession. Students should be challenged to consider why collaboration, sharing of information and the fair assignment of credit for discoveries are important to the advancement of scientific knowledge, but may often be compromised due to the fact that scientists are human beings with competing personal needs and desires. An effort should be made to take the discussion arising from the constraints imposed on women in science beyond the obvious negative aspects of overt sexism or racism. A possible way to do this is to ask students to consider whether the ranking of the importance of research problems by women or minority members might be significantly different from the choices made by relatively affluent white males.

For those teachers who can not devote four classroom periods to this lesson, the required time can be cut in half by eliminating either the viewing of the video and related discussion, or the DNA coding exercise. While this significantly reduces the student experience that can be used to probe the issues, teachers report that worthwhile ethic/values education is still achieved.

Group discussion of a fictional case study involving environmental concerns. Each group submits a short paper and reports its recommendations to the class.

Responsibilities of scientists in determining and communicating risks to public health and safety; honesty in reporting data; role of scientists in the framing of public policy.

Importance of honesty, especially in research that has a direct impact on human health and welfare.

The teacher divides the class into small groups and distributes the following hypothetical scenario to students. Each group is instructed to submit a short paper on their recommendations, with supporting rationale, and to be prepared to report their views to the rest of the class.

Mark Sidwell is working his way through college. A chemistry major, he has a summer job monitoring pollution for a chemical company located on Bedell Creek. (Bedell Creek is adjacent to the high school and eventually flows out to the ocean.) He is instructed to collect three 100 ml water samples at certain locations at set times each day. To each sample he is to add 5 ml of a chemical solution that reacts and changes its color in response to the amount of toxic heavy metals in the water. He then checks each sample with an instrument that detects color intensity and gives a quantitative measure of the amount of pollutant in each sample. If heavy metals are present, further analysis will be conducted to determine the specific type of and quantity.

Mark's supervisor, Jerry Elrod, has made it very clear that he will be very upset if any unfavorable results show up, pointing out to Mark how costly it may be for the company and the community if the test results show significant amounts of pollution. "Mark," he says, "if we get unfavorable data, we're due for heavy fines; and we might even have to shut down the company. That would be bad news for a couple hundred folks from the area who work here-- and their families."

Mark finds that, after a week on the job, 98% of the tests he has run are favorable, with no significant heavy metal pollution detected. However, in 2% of the tests the change in color intensity seems to warrant further analysis. On further analysis he finds that those two samples contain significant quantities of cadmium and methylmercury ions, both of which are highly toxic. When he shows this data to Jerry, he is instructed to omit the unfavorable data in his report. "We don't have to worry about anything," Jerry explains, "as long as 95% of the tests are negative. As far as I'm concerned, anything under 5% is an unreliable indicator of a problem. 2% certainly isn't enough to bother anyone about--just leave it out of the report."

Mark has one of the best paying summer jobs around, and he has no desire to cause the company any problems. But he wonders if leaving out the unfavorable data is appropriate. He mentions, in confidence, his concerns with you and other members of your group, asking for your advice. What advice do you give him?

This is a complicated case. In addition to the specific issues about Mark Sidwell's circumstance, it raises basic questions about how standards of acceptable risk are established. Even though students should not be expected to know what those standards are (e.g., how much vinyl chloride or benzene poses a danger and precisely how this can be determined from data), it is important for them to begin to think about standards of acceptable risk and how scientists might responsibly conduct and report studies of risk in circumstances like the one described.

However, this case is also complicated by questions of authority. Mark is a summer employee, accountable to his supervisor. To whom else is Mark accountable? To what extent is he justified in simply doing what he is told? If he has doubts about the appropriateness of what he has been instructed to do, how might he best go about answering those doubts?

Finally, Mark has reasons for not wanting to "rock the boat." To what extent, if any, is it justifiable to allow himself to be influenced by the desire to keep his job? Students might be asked to compare Mark's reasons for agreeing to leave out data with their reasons for not reporting all the data they collect in their laboratory work. This can lead to a good discussion of the differences between those reasons that are justifications (reasons that can stand up to public scrutiny) and those that are, at best, excuses or rationalizations.

This lesson is designed for use in a high school physics class. It may also be suitable for a chemistry class, if calorimetry is included in the course syllabus. Similar lessons that describe the alteration of data by students in laboratory situations could easily be written for any other laboratory science class.

Students are given a homework assignment requiring them to read a brief laboratory case study and to write their reactions to the described conduct of the students in the scenario. A classroom discussion is then conducted by the teacher using a structured set of questions.

Alteration of laboratory data - an example of scientific misconduct. Real world consequences of data falsification.

In school science laboratories, students frequently will know what the expected "correct" result is before doing an experiment. In such cases, students who err in carrying out the experiment may realize that the data collected is not consistent with the expected result. This often leads students to alter their data, rather than report a result they know is wrong. This case study lesson is designed to teach students why altering data is not acceptable behavior on the part of scientists or science students.

Give students the homework assignment of reading the case study "Making the Data Fit the Result," and writing about their reactions to the behavior of Mike and Sarah.

In class the teacher should lead a discussion using the following questions as a guide:

Ms. Joule knew that the masses of the unknowns she had given out were all less than 15 grams. She noted that the mass that Mike and Sarah had recorded for their unknown was 18.2 grams. She also noted that Mike and Sarah, who had recorded their lab results in pencil, had erased and changed what they had recorded for the final temperature, but she realized she never taught the class not to do that. Since the object of the experiment was to identify the unknown metal on the basis of its specific heat and Mike and Sarah calculated exactly the right answer, she gave them a grade of 100%. Thus they were rewarded for unethical behavior. How could she have designed and graded the laboratory exercise to avoid this result?

Although real world scientists usually don't know the "correct" answer when they do an experiment, they frequently know what they hope the result will be in order to confirm an hypothesis they may have. Thus, they may also be tempted to alter laboratory results to get the answers they predicted. What would be the consequences if scientists frequently altered data to conform to their expectations?

If a student in a high school laboratory alters his or her data it will not have the same affect as if a scientist were to act unethically. Why then, is it important for students to learn always to report the actual data they observe in laboratory experiments?

With the teacher's help the class should write a set of guidelines for proper behavior in conducting laboratory experiments and reporting the results.

Jon and Sarah are laboratory partners in Ms. Joule's physics course at Central High. The laboratory for the day is the determination of the identity of an unknown metal by measuring its specific heat. Ms. Joule has told the class that each pair of partners' unknown metal is either aluminum, lead or zinc. As instructed, Jon and Sarah use the top loading balance to weigh a styrofoam cup, which will serve as a simple calorimeter. They then fill the cup half-way with water and weigh it again, subtracting the weight of the cup to calculate the weight of the water added. In the meantime they have placed their unknown sample in a beaker of boiling water. They use a thermometer to verify that the temperature of their sample is now 100⁰C. At this point, thinking that they have plenty of time they get into a conversation with another pair of students in the class about a school basketball game that they all attended last weekend. They then measure the temperature of the water in the styrofoam cup and find that it is 27⁰C. Next they remove their metal sample from the boiling water and transfer it to the styrofoam cup and begin measuring the temperature of the water in the cup. After a few minutes the water temperature has stopped rising and they record this as the final temperature. Realizing that they forgot to measure the mass of their unknown sample and that they must now hurry to complete the lab before the end of the period they transfer the sample to the balance, but forget to dry it. Therefore the mass they record is significantly higher than the true mass of the sample. Not realizing their error, they proceed to calculate the specific heat. They note that Ms Joule has told them that they can ignore the very small amount of heat that will be absorbed by the styrofoam cup. They make use of the following formulas from their lab manual:

The value of the specific heat they calculate for their unknown is 0.14 kcal/kg⁰C Using the Handbook of Physics and Chemistry they find the following values for the specific heats of aluminum, lead and zinc: c_aluminum=0.22, c_lead=0.035, c_zinc= 0.087. From the appearance of their unknown they are certain it must be aluminum. It seems to be a light weight (low density) metal like aluminum, but unlike lead or zinc. However their result is closer to the specific heat of zinc than that of aluminum.

Mike and Jon discuss what to do. They could acknowledge that they realize they must have made some error in measurement and explain why they think their unknown is actually aluminum. Instead they decide to alter their data. Substituting the true value of the specific heat of aluminum in the equation, they solve for the value of T_final that would give the correct result, and change the value of the final temperature in their lab data to that value. They then hand in their lab report to Ms. Joule.

In the context of an informal classroom discussion students will usually admit that the changing of lab data to fit an expected outcome is a type of student behavior they have observed. If they know that there will be no negative personal consequences, many of them will also admit to having changed data themselves in the past. Although most of them will agree that what Mike and Sarah did was "theoretically" unethical, many will acknowledge that they would probably do the same thing if the odds of getting caught are low. Students will frequently try to justify this behavior by distinguishing between what goes on in a school laboratory and "real science."

Convincing students that they should abide by the same ethical standards with regard to collecting and reporting data as is expected of professional scientists is not an easy task. Explaining that a key purpose of the classroom laboratory is for students to learn to model all aspects of proper experimental procedure becomes much more difficult if the laboratory exercise is structured in a way that focuses primarily on getting the correct result. For this reason considerable attention to question (d) is likely to be very profitable, particularly if the result is a restructuring of the laboratory lesson in a way that emphasizes good procedure, and removes the motivation to alter data by greatly decreasing the credit accorded to obtaining the correct result.

The final task of developing a set of class-generated guidelines for proper laboratory behavior will usually prove very valuable. Once having constructed their own guidelines, the students will tend to think of them as something they have ownership of rather than as a set rules externally imposed on them.

Students are asked to explain the law of inertia and apply it to the use of seat belts and airbags in automobiles.

This lesson begins with a discussion of the law of inertia ("a body at rest remains at rest and a body in uniform motion continues moving uniformly unless acted on by a net force"). Next, the law of inertia is applied to a specific context, the use of seat belts and airbags in automobiles. It is well known that automobile accidents often cause serious injuries or deaths as a result of the momentum of cars crashing into other objects. Devices such as seat belts and airbags can help by restraining or cushioning forward motion and lessening impact forces during collisions or other sudden vehicle decelerations. In addition, head restraints can prevent injuries such as "whiplash" due to rear end collisions.

After discussing these ideas, students are invited to comment on the following scenario:

A physics teacher is a passenger in a car driven by a colleague. As they are about to set out on a lengthy trip, the physics teacher notices that the driver is not wearing his seat belt. Should the teacher say something to the driver about this? If so, what should he say?

Suppose the physics teacher reminds the driver about the seat belt, but the driver replies, "I just don't feel safe wearing a seat belt. I've heard about some accidents in which people were killed because they couldn't get out of their belts. Besides, I don't really see the point. If the car goes forward, I go with it; if it stops, I stop. What can a seat belt do about that? Nothing. Isn't this a free country? We should be able to choose--and I've made my choice." What, if anything, should the physics teacher say now?

Students are asked to write out responses to these questions and then to discuss their answers with the rest of the class.

Students are likely to have a number of different views on these matters. Although the law of inertia is a settled matter, the question of whether or not to wear seat belts is not. Here we have to make choices. The question is, on what basis should such choices be made? Physics can help us understand possible consequences of the choices we make. It cannot by itself settle the questions of responsibility the use of automobiles raises--questions about the responsibilities designers and manufacturers have in producing reasonably safe automobiles for consumer use, the responsibilities governments have to establish and enforce safety standards to protect consumers, responsibilities consumers have to protect themselves, and responsibilities we have to urge those with whom we travel to "buckle up".

An understanding of basic principles of physics can help all of the above parties wrestle with their responsibilities. Does this give physics teacher's special responsibilities to help others understand the likely consequences of choosing not to use seat belts and air bags?

Working in groups of 2 or 3, students perform a simple laboratory experiment with resistors.

Equipment has been altered in a manner that is likely to induce students to report what they expect

After performing the experiment, the teacher leads a class discussion of the ethical issues it raises.

The teacher hands out Laboratory 26--Series Circuit (attached) and explains the procedure to the students.

Students are divided into groups of 2 or 3, depending on available equipment and the total number of students.

The teacher passes out the materials. However, a 20 ohm resistor is altered to look like a 10 ohm resistor.

Students are allowed the remainder of the period to complete the lab, with lab reports turned in at the end of the period.

When the reports are collected, students are asked to place their cover sheets last so that their names are hidden.

Between the first period and the second the teacher makes two columns on the chalkboard, one entitled altered, the other unaltered.

Without looking at student names, the teacher reviews the lab reports and records on the chalkboard the number of students who altered their data to conform with what would be expected with a 10 ohm resistor and the number who did not.

As the next period begins, the teacher explains to the class that one resistor was incorrectly marked as 10 ohms when it really was a 20 ohm resistor. Then the altered and unaltered columns on the chalkboard are explained (including the fact that no names are recorded).

The teacher invites students to discuss what has happened and its possible ethical implications. Questions such as the following could be asked:

This lesson clearly raises issues about honesty in interpreting and reporting data acquired in experimental procedures. Although there may be cases in which there is some uncertainty about how one's data can be reasonably and fairly presented, this is not such a case; and there should be little doubt in student's minds that altering the data to conform with what they would expect from a 10 ohm resistor is dishonest reporting. What may be less certain to them is whether it is ethically wrong for them to alter the data. Most students realize that cheating commonly occurs, and they may wonder why they shouldn't cheat if cheating is so common. Discussing what happens when scientists cheat can help stimulate a discussion of the seriousness of cheating in a science lab.

Some students may reply that scientists cheating is different than students cheating. The consequences of scientists cheating can be very serious for others (e.g., resulting in doctors and their patients assuming that prescription drugs are safe when the data supporting this has actually been altered). But, students might say, at most, students hurt only themselves when they cheat; besides there are special pressures to do well as students in order to get into good colleges: once the pressure is off, and when the stakes for others are higher, they won't cheat.

Time permitting, the class could be shown the NOVA program "Do Scientists Cheat?" or the PBS program "Why do People Cheat?" in order to cast some doubt on the idea that there will be a time when there will be little pressure to cheat--and to cast some doubt on the idea that there is no connection between how one behaves as a student and how one will behave as a scientist, professional, or ordinary citizen. For an excellent resource on the extent to which lying can directly and indirectly cause harms to liars, those to whom lies are told, third parties who are affected by lies, and social practices and institutions we value, teachers might consult Sissela Bok's Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life (New York: Random House, 1978). A very useful resource for both teachers and students is Honor in Science, published by Sigma Xi, the Scientific Research Society (North Carolina: Research Triangle Park, 1991). This clearly written 41 page publication concentrates on the importance of honesty in scientific research.

There is another ethical issue this lesson raises. This has to do with a deceptive feature of the lesson itself. It is the teacher who introduces the discrepancy between data and expectation by deliberately mislabeling the resistor. The irony of a teacher using deceptive tactics in order to make a point about honesty in scientific practice is not likely to be lost on thoughtful students. They may not bring this to the attention of the teacher, as they may feel uneasy about challenging the ethics of their teacher. However, this does not mean they won't be thinking about this (and discussing it outside of class). But if the ethics of the teacher's tactic is raised, how should the teacher respond? Not only has the teacher deceived the students, he or she used this deception in order to tempt students to engage in unethical behavior themselves (viz., to falsify data). This, too, is bound to be noticed by the students. In fact, since some of them have been "caught with their hands in he cookie jar," they might be highly motivated to point their fingers back at what they take to be equally culpable behavior on the part of their teacher.

So, there is a substantial risk that this lesson, as presently designed, will backfire. It could generate some distrust of the teacher--who, after all, has lied to the students in a way that they might perceive as manipulative. If students can say to their teacher, "See, you behave unethically, too," much of the force of the lesson may well be lost. In any case, the teacher risks losing ethical credibility with the students--a very heavy price to pay for an ethics lesson!

Is there any alternative way of getting students to deal effectively with the ethical issues this lesson is designed to raise? One way would be for the teacher to describe this lesson to the students without asking the students to conduct the experiment themselves. This puts matters in the third person (since they will be talking about what others have done rather than themselves). Shifting the focus in this way will take some of the dramatic excitement from the lesson, but it does not change the basic ethical issues, which are inherently interesting in any case. Furthermore, students can still draw on their own experience of witnessing or engaging in cheating themselves in order to enliven their discussion of the issues this lesson raises. Not having their backs against the wall (as they would if caught in the act), students might well be in a better position to deal with the ethical issues more fairly and dispassionately.

Objective - To create a series circuit and to determine if the rules for a series circuit are valid:

1. Assemble the circuit below using a 10 ohm and 50 ohm resistor for R₁and R₂, respectively. Double check that the potential control is set to zero before you start assembling the circuit.

4. Turn the power off, remove the 10 ohm resistor, and replace it with the 5 ohm resistor. Repeat the above procedure.

5. Turn the power off. Remove the 50 ohm resistor, and replace it with the 10 ohm resistor. Repeat the above procedure.

DATA TABLE

	V_T	V₁	V₂	I_T	I₁	I₂	R₁=V₁/I₁	R₂=V₂/I₂	R_T=V_T/I_T	R_T=R₁+R₂
5, 10
5, 50
10, 50

1.You have two values for the resistors you used, a calculated value and the value printed on the resistor. Explain where any discrepancies between the two values may have come from.

2. Explain in detail whether the results of this experiment validate the three equations listed in the objective. Show equations to prove your point.

Previous Page Next Page Table of Contents

PART 3

In this section we list books, articles, videos, and websites that are useful resources for preparation for, or use, in classes that integrate ethics and values into the teaching of science. No doubt there are many other valuable resources that are readily available in this growing area of interest.

Annas, G. and M. Grodin, The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg Code (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992).

Bebeau, M., K. Pimple, K. Muskavitch, D. Smith, and S. Borden, Moral Reasoning in Scientific Research: Cases for teaching and Assessment (Bloomington, IN: Poynter Center for the Study of Ethics, 1995).

Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, Publication no. OS 8-0012 (Washington, D.C.: DHEW, 1978).

Benditt, J., G. Taubes, J. Cohen, and E. Marshal, "Conduct in Science," Science, 268, 23 June 1995, pp. 1705-1718.

Broad, W. and N. Wade, Betrayers of Truth (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1983).

Callahan, D. and S. Bok, Ethics Teaching in Higher Education (New York: Plenum, 1980).

Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, On Being a Scientist, 2^nd ed. (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1995).

Fourtner, A., C.R. Fourtner, and C.F. Herreid, "Bad Blood--A Case Study of the Tuskegee Syphilis Project," Journal of College Science Teaching, March/April 1994, pp. 277-285.

Gibbs, Lois, Love Canal: My Story, as told to Murray Levine (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1981).

Gilligan, C., In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1982).

Glass, Bentley, Science and Ethical Values (Chapel Hill, NC: The Univ. of N. Carolina Press, 1965).

Goldfarb, T., Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Environmental Issues, 8^th ed. (Guilford, CT: Dushkin Publishing Group, 1999).

Gray, F.D., The Tuskegee Syphilis Study (Montgomery, AL: Black Belt Press, 1998).

Jennings, B., K. Nolan, CS. Campbell, S. Donnelley, New Choices, New Responsibilities: Ethical Issues in the Life Sciences (Briarcliff Manor, NY: The Hastings Center, 1990). [A teaching resource on bioethics for high school biology. A second edition in preparation.]

Kevles, D.J. and L. Hood, The Code of Codes (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992).

Kohlberg, L., Essays on Moral Development, Vols. I-II (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1981, 1984).

Kohn, A., False Prophets: Fraud and Error in Science and Medicine (New York: Basil Blackwell, 1986).

Korenman, S., and A. Schipp, Teaching the Responsible Conduct of Research Through a Case Study Approach (Washington, D.C.: American Association of Medical Colleges, 1994).

Macrina, F.L., Scientific Integrity: An Introductory Text With Cases (Herndon, VA: ASM Press, 1995).

Martin, M., "The Goals of Science Education," Thinking, 4(2), 1985, pp. 19-22.

Martin, M., "Science Education and Moral Education," Journal of Moral Education, 15(2), 1986, pp. 99-108.

Matthews, M.R., Science Teaching: The Role of History and Philosophy of Science (New York: Routledge, 1994).

Miller, D.J. and M. Hersen, Research Fraud in the Behavioral and Biomedical Sciences (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1992).

National Academy of Science, Responsible Science: Executive Summary (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1992)

Nelkin, D. and M.S. Lindee, The DNA Mystique: The Gene as a Culture Icon (New York: Freeman, 1995).

Penslar. R.L., ed., Research Ethics: Cases and Materials (Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1995).

Pritchard, M.S., Reasonable Children (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1996).

Rest, J. R., "Moral Development in Young Adults," in R. Mines and K. Kitchener, eds., Adult Cognitive Development: Methods and Models (New York: Praeger, 1986), pp. 92-111.

Sieber, J.E., Planning Ethically Responsible Research (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1992).

Stern, J.E. and D. Elliott, The Ethics of Scientific Research: A Guidebook for Course Development (Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 1997.

Ziman, J., An Introduction to Science Studies: The Philosophical and Social Aspects of Science and Technology (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984).

"Academic Integrity," produced at the Center for Applied Ethics, Duke University, 1995. Contact P. Aarne Vesilind: 919-660-5204. (4 vignettes in which college students are portrayed making decisions about fabricating data, cheating on tests, plagiarism, and whistleblowing.)

"Biomedical Research: Is It Really Necessary?," produced by Lockwood Films, London, Canada, 1993. Available from Partners in Research: 519-433-7866.

"The Deadly Deception," NOVA, written, produced and directed by D. Di Anni, WGBH Boston, 1993. Distributed by Films for the Humanities, P.O. Box 205, Princeton, NJ 08543-3053.

"Do Scientists Cheat?", produced by NOVA. No longer distributed, but written transcripts available from Journal Graphics: 1-800-825-5746. [The video is in the collection of many libraries, academic institution and other archives from which it may be borrowed. One such source is the Wisconsin Regional Primate Research Center, phone (608) 263-3512, fax to (608) 263-4031, e-mail to hamel@primate.wisc.edu, write to the Primate Center Library, 1220 Capitol Court, Madison, WI 53715, or request it (video #VT0113) through interlibrary loan at your local library.]

"Ethics and Scientific Research," in Ethical Issues in Professional Life series. Available from: GPN, P.O. Box 80669, Lincoln, Nebraska 68501-0669. Phone: 1-800-228-4630. Website for entire series: http://gpn.unl.edu. (Features Robert Sprague, whistleblower in the Bruening case.)

"Evolving Concerns: Protection of Human Subjects," produced for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) by the National Library of Medicine.

"Gilbane Gold," produced by and available from the National Society of Professional Engineers's Institute for Engineering Ethics: 703-684-2800. (Fictional dramatization of situation raising questions of whistleblowing, environmental protection, business ethics, and journalistic ethics.)

"Group Dynamics: Groupthink," CRM Films, 1995. Available from CRM Films, 249 South Highway 101, Suite 514, Solana Beach, California 92075. Or call CRM Films: 1-800-421-0833. (Application of Irving Janis's "symptoms of groupthink" to the Challenger disaster.)

"Moral Development," produced by McGraw-Hill, CRM films. Available from McGraw-Hill Films, 1221 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10020. (A simulation of Stanley Milgram's obedience experiments, with an analysis in terms of Lawrence Kohlberg's theory of moral development.)

"Obedience," produced by Stanley Milgram. Available from Penn State Audio Visual Services, University Park, PA: 814-6314. (Original footage from Milgram's famous obedience experiments, which raised fundamental questions about deceiving research subjects.)

"The Race for the Double Helix," a BBC/Horizon Films/A&E 1987 production. Distributed by Films for the Humanities and Sciences, P.O. Box 205, Princeton, NJ 08543-2053.

"Scientific Research Integrity Video Series," directed by Mark S. Frankel and Albert H. Teich, sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), 1996. Contact AAAS: 202-326-6600. (Five short vignettes portraying ethical issues in laboratory research.)

"Susceptibility to Kindness," produced by Larry I. Palmer. Available from Cornell University: 607-255-2090. (Excerpts from David Feldshuh's play, Miss Evers' Boys, dramatization of the 1932-1972 Tuskegee Syphilis Study, with commentary by governments officials, nurses, physicians, and James Jones, author of Bad Blood.)

Here we list just a few websites that seem especially useful. Our exploration of the internet is by no means exhaustive, and the internet changes daily. Still, one thing leads to another. Websites typically contain links to other websites. So, try these and see where they take you.

This is the bioethical case studies site of Dr. J. R. Hendrix and University Computing Services

of Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana. Six case study scenarios are presented along with Dr.Hendrix' model for bioethical educational analysis.

This is the WWWeb Ethics Center for Science and Engineering. It contains a wide variety of useful resources and links on research ethics, moral leaders in science and engineering, women and minorities in science and engineering, and codes of ethics. Try the Education bullet for some good links.

The University of Massachusetts K-12 ethics education site. Contains a course syllabus and links to other ethics education sites.

The Awesome Library site. Search under ethics and ethics center for useful sites and references on a variety of ethics topics and issues.

This is the search page on the Eisenhower National Clearinghouse site. Search under ethics for a variety of useful resources.

This is the Home Page of the University of British Columbia's Centre for Applied Ethics. It contains numerous links to applied ethics sites including Health Care Ethics, Business Ethics, Professional Ethics, Science and Technology Ethics, Environmental Ethics, Animal Rights, Media Ethics, and Computer Ethics. From the Home Page click on the Applied Ethics Resources on World Wide Web button.

Frank C. Jahn and Carol L. Mitch's grade 9-12 Biology and/or Student Research: essays and lesson plans. Woodrow Wilson biology Institute.

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory's ELSI Project. Materials for middle and high school.

This is Western Michigan University's Center for the Study of Ethics in Society.

1. The writing of this text was supported by National Science Foundation Grant No. SBR-9601284: "Infusion of Ethics and Values in Pre-College Science Training."

2. National Science Foundation Grant No. SBR-9320255: "Workshops For High School Science Teachers: Ethics in the Classroom."

3. For example, since July 1990 the National Institutes of Health have required that all recipients of their research training grants receive a program of instruction in the responsible conduct of research.

4. A notable exception is the work of physics professor Marshall Thomsen, who has developed and taught an undergraduate course on ethics in physics, and organized workshops on ethical issues in physics in 1993 and 1996, the proceedings of which may be obtained by writing to him at: Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, MI 48197

5. National Research Council, Science Education Standards (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1996).

6. Florida Department of Education, Florida Curriculum Framework: Science (Tallahassee, FL: Florida Department of Education, 1996).

7. Michigan State Board of Education, New Directions for Science Education in Michigan (Lansing Michigan: Michigan Department of education, 1991).

8. John Ziman, An Introduction to Science Studies: The Philosophical and Social Aspects of Science and Technology (Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1984), p. 1.

10. Committee on the Conduct of Science of the National Academy of Sciences, On Being a Scientist (Washington: National Academy Press, 1989), p. 1.

13. Nicholas Rescher, in Philosophy and Science: the wide range of interaction, Frederick E. Mosedale, editor (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1979)

16. For this observation, we are indebted to Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue, 2nd Ed. (Notre Dame, IN: Notre Dame University Press, 1985), p. 38.

17. Plato, The Trial and Death of Socrates, G.M.A. Grube, trans. (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, 1975).

18. English translations vary, including piety, righteousness, and holiness as possible renderings. The precise word does not matter here, as it is the nature of Socrates's demand that is under consideration.

19. Thomas Reid, On the Active Powers of the Mind, in Philosophical Works, Vol. II, with notes by Sir William Hamilton (Hildesheim: Gekorg Olms Verlagsbuchanlung, 1995), p. 642.

21. See, e.g., Richard A Shweder, Elliot Turiel, and Nancy C. Much, "The Moral Intuitions of the Child," Social Cognitive Development: Frontiers and Possible Futures, John H. Flavell and Lee Ross, eds. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), p. 288.

22. Gareth Matthews, "Concept Formation and Moral Development," in James Russell, ed., Philosophical Perspectives on Developmental Psychology (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987), p. 185.

23. For balanced, accessible discussions of recent findings in moral development see, e.g., William Damon, The Moral Child (New York: Free Press, 1988) and Daniel K. Lapsley, Moral Psychology, (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1996).

24. See, for example, Lawrence Kohlberg, The Philosophy of Moral Development: Essays on Moral Development, Vol.1 (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1981).

25. Michael Pritchard has written extensively on many of them elsewhere. See his On Becoming Responsible (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1991) and Reasonable Children (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1996).

27. Sissela Bok, Common Values (Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press, 1995).

28. Albert R. Jonsen and Stephen Toulmin, The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), p. 17. Jonsen was a member of the commission, Toulmin a consultant.

29. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, Publication no. OS 78-0012 (Washington, D.C. DHEW, 1978), pp. 1-2.

30. W.H. Sibley, "The Rational and the Reasonable," Philosophical Review, 62 (1953), p. 557. Where Sibley refers to "conduct" and "behavior," we can substitute "judgment" without changing the essence of what he has in mind.

31. For discussions of some of these difficulties see, for example, see Richard Whately, "Critique of the Golden Rule," and Marcus G. Singer, "Defense of the Golden Rule," in Marcus G. Singer, ed., Morals and Values (New York: Scribners, 1977); Jeffrey Wattles, The Golden Rule (New York: Oxford, 1996); and James A. Jaksa and Michael S. Pritchard, Communication Ethics: Methods of Analysis (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1994).

32. Here one is reminded of David Hume's sensible knave, who reasons: "That honesty is the best policy, may be a good general rule, but is liable to many exceptions; and he, it may perhaps be thought, conducts himself with mot wisdom, who observes the general rule, and takes advantage of all the exceptions." [David Hume, Enquiries Concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the Principles of Morals, 3^rd ed., edited by P.H. Nidditch (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), pp. 282-3.

33. Universalizability is widely discussed in philosophical ethics. See, for example, Kurt Baier, The Moral Point of View (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1958), ch. 8; Marcus G. Singer, Generalization in Ethics (New York: Knopf, 1961), ch. 2; and any of the writings of R.M. Hare.

34. Sissela Bok, Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life (New York: Random House, 1978), p. 28.

35. Thomas Reid, Practical Ethics, edited with commentary by Knud Haakonssen (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990), p. 110.

36. See Daniel Callahan and Sissela Bok, eds., Ethics Teaching in Higher Education (New York: Plenum, 1980). The Hastings Center, located in White Plains, New York, has been at the forefront of developments in biomedical ethics since its founding in 1969. It regularly publishes The Hastings Center Report, which contains timely articles not only on biomedical ethics, but many other areas of practical ethics as well.

38. If it is going too far to say that the moral character of students is likely to be modified in the classroom, it is not going too far to say that their moral judgment may be modified.

39. This is based on two case studies presented and discussed by Roy V. Hughson and Philip M. Kohn in Chemical Engineering, May 5, 1980, pp. 100-107.

40. Barbara Toffler, Tough Choices: Managers Talk Ethics (New York: John Wiley, 1986), p. 288.

41. This study received federal government support for more than 40 years, until it was exposed in the press in the early 1970's. We will discuss this case in some detail in Chapter 4.

42. For an excellent discussion of how routinely social science students used to accept deception of human subjects in experimental research, see Thomas Murray, "Learning to Deceive," Hastings Center Report, Vol. 10, April 1980, pp. 11-14.

43. These others include not only other scientists who depend for their own work on the reliable work of their scientist colleagues, but also the public who take medications, undergo medical procedures recommended by physicians, drive over bridges, go up and down elevators, drive automobiles at high speeds, and so on -- all the while depending on the reliable work of scientists and engineers.

44. William F. May, "Professional Virtue and Self-Regulation," in Joan Callahan, ed., Ethical Issues in Professional Life (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988), p. 408.

46. Bill Watterson, Calvin and Hobbes in The Kalamazoo Gazette, December 23, 1990.

47. William Grigg, "The Thalidomide Tragedy -- 25 Years Ago, FDA Consumer, February 1987, pp.14-17.

48. This is true even though there are many instances in which researchers have failed to observe this basic form of respect for persons in their research.

49. Even here not everything is indeterminate. When we recognize something as a dilemma, this means that we see that some options really are undesirable. It is precisely because we believe that several things really do matter that the choice is so difficult.

50. Demets, David, "Statistics and Ethics in Medical Research," forthcoming in Science and Engineering Ethics. (P. 29 of draft.) At the 1994 Teaching Research Ethics for Faculty Workshop at Indiana University's Poynter Center, DeMets recounted in great detail the severe challenges he and his team of statisticians faced in carrying out their investigation.

51. Eugene Braunwald, "Cardiology: The John Darsee Experience," in David J. Miller and Michel Hersen, Research Fraud in the Behavioral and Biomedical Sciences (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1992, pp. 55-79.

52. May, William F., "Professional Virtue and Self-regulation," in Joan Callahan, ed., Ethical Issues in Professional Life (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), p. 408.

53. Sprague, Robert L., "The Voice of Experience," Science and Engineering Ethics, Vol. 4, Issue 1, 1998, p. 33.

54. "The Belmont Report," by The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, OPPR Reports, NIH, PHS, HHS , April , 1979.

55. A British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) / Horizon Films / Arts & Entertainment Network (A&E) 1987 production, owned by many libraries and currently distributed by Films for the Humanities and Sciences, P.O. Box 205, Princeton, NJ 08543 - 2053

57. Case Study 4, "The Search For the Structure of DNA" in Chapter 4 of Part I is strongly recommended as preparation for teachers who plan to lead this discussion.

CG	GC	AT	TA	AT	CG	GC
AT	AT	TA	TA	TA	TA	CG
AT	CG	AT	CG	TA	TA	AT
CG	CG	CG	AT	TA	CG	AT
TA	GC	CG	GC	AT	TA	CG
TA	TA	TA	AT	TA	GC	CG
CG	TA	TA	TA	TA	GC	AT
TA	GC	GC	AT	AT	TA	CG
AT	TA	TA	GC	TA	TA	TA
GC	GC	CG	AT	GC	CG	AT
AT	AT	AT	TA	TA	CG	GC
AT	CG	TA	GC	TA	AT	TA
TA	TA	GC	AT	GC	AT	AT
TA	CG	CG	CG	AT	TA
TA	CG	CG	AT	GC	GC
CG	TA	TA	TA	AT	TA
CG	GC	TA	GC	TA	GC
AT	GC	TA	GC	AT	GC
TA	CG	CG	CG	GC	GC
TA	GC	TA	TA	AT	CG
AT	GC	AT	GC	TA	GC
GC	TA	AT	CG	GC	AT
TA	AT	AT	TA	CG	TA
CG	AT	TA	AT	GC	GC
GC	TA	AT	TA	AT	CG

CG	GC	AT	TA	AT	CG	GC
AT	AT	TA	TA	TA	TA	CG
AT	CG	AT	CG	TA	TA	AT
CG	CG	CG	AT	TA	CG	AT
TA	GC	CG	GC	AT	TA	CG
TA	TA	TA	AT	TA	GC	CG
CG	TA	TA	TA	TA	GC	AT
TA	GC	GC	AT	AT	TA	CG
AT	TA	TA	GC	TA	TA	TA
GC	GC	CG	AT	GC	CG	AT
AT	AT	AT	TA	TA	CG	GC
AT	CG	TA	GC	TA	AT	TA
TA	TA	GC	AT	GC	AT	AT
TA	CG	CG	CG	AT	TA
TA	CG	CG	AT	GC	GC
CG	TA	TA	TA	AT	TA
CG	GC	TA	GC	TA	GC
AT	GC	TA	GC	AT	GC
TA	CG	CG	CG	GC	GC
TA	GC	TA	TA	AT	CG
AT	GC	AT	GC	TA	GC
GC	TA	AT	CG	GC	AT
TA	AT	AT	TA	CG	TA
CG	AT	TA	AT	GC	GC
GC	TA	AT	TA	AT	CG

PART 2

PART 3

CG	GC	AT	TA	AT	CG	GC
AT	AT	TA	TA	TA	TA	CG
AT	CG	AT	CG	TA	TA	AT
CG	CG	CG	AT	TA	CG	AT
TA	GC	CG	GC	AT	TA	CG
TA	TA	TA	AT	TA	GC	CG
CG	TA	TA	TA	TA	GC	AT
TA	GC	GC	AT	AT	TA	CG
AT	TA	TA	GC	TA	TA	TA
GC	GC	CG	AT	GC	CG	AT
AT	AT	AT	TA	TA	CG	GC
AT	CG	TA	GC	TA	AT	TA
TA	TA	GC	AT	GC	AT	AT
TA	CG	CG	CG	AT	TA
TA	CG	CG	AT	GC	GC
CG	TA	TA	TA	AT	TA
CG	GC	TA	GC	TA	GC
AT	GC	TA	GC	AT	GC
TA	CG	CG	CG	GC	GC
TA	GC	TA	TA	AT	CG
AT	GC	AT	GC	TA	GC
GC	TA	AT	CG	GC	AT
TA	AT	AT	TA	CG	TA
CG	AT	TA	AT	GC	GC
GC	TA	AT	TA	AT	CG