Team:UCL London/HumanPractices/Background

From 2011.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
(Created page with "{{:Team:UCL_London/Template/Header}}<html> <div id="submenu" class="sm-humanprac-background"> <div id="humanprac-debate"><a href="https://2011.igem.org/Team:UCL_London/HumanPracti...")
 
(47 intermediate revisions not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
-
{{:Team:UCL_London/Template/Header}}<html>
+
{{:Team:UCL_London/Template/Header}}
 +
__NOTOC__
 +
<html>
<div id="submenu" class="sm-humanprac-background">
<div id="submenu" class="sm-humanprac-background">
<div id="humanprac-debate"><a href="https://2011.igem.org/Team:UCL_London/HumanPractices/Debate"></a></div>
<div id="humanprac-debate"><a href="https://2011.igem.org/Team:UCL_London/HumanPractices/Debate"></a></div>
<div id="humanprac-experts"><a href="https://2011.igem.org/Team:UCL_London/HumanPractices/Experts"></a></div>
<div id="humanprac-experts"><a href="https://2011.igem.org/Team:UCL_London/HumanPractices/Experts"></a></div>
<div id="humanprac-artcollaboration"><a href="https://2011.igem.org/Team:UCL_London/HumanPractices/ArtCollaboration"></a></div></div></html><div id="content">
<div id="humanprac-artcollaboration"><a href="https://2011.igem.org/Team:UCL_London/HumanPractices/ArtCollaboration"></a></div></div></html><div id="content">
-
<h1>E.coili Arts Initiative</h1>
+
<h1>Background Research</h1>
-
Team Ecoili presents: '''Machine or life: a paradigm of synthetic biology.'''<br />
+
Synthetic biology, as an emerging field, raises issues of particular sociological importance. Education, regulation, interdisciplinarity and reasons for participation emerged from our initial brainstorming as interesting themes, and we have examined each of them below with a view to shaping our ‘human practices’.  
-
''At the Dana Centre,''<br />
+
-
''The London Science Festival.''
+
-
Our approach seeks to stimulate excitement, debate and interest around synthetic biology through the use of arts as an engaging media. Visual art and moving images can reach new audiences that may not traditionally be interested in the sciences and provide new perspectives for thinking about the social, ethical and cultural implications of contemporary science.
+
<h1>Education - Science Question Time</h1>
-
Showcasing existing collaborative and interdisciplinary practice across the arts and sciences helps to provide new thought in both fields. The art also provides stimulation and thought provocation in new directions that otherwise would not be accessed through only discussion and debate.  
+
[[File:sciqt.jpg|right|link=http://www.biochemistry.org/PublicAffairs/Events/ScienceQuestionTimeAugust2011.aspx]]
-
The exhibition will introduce visitors to synthetic biology and its uses in the iGEM competition, along with the implications of garage biology and the use of language in contemporary science. Through a showcase of art works and film we aim to provoke thoughtful reflection in a broad audience. This reflection will culminate in a discussion session and the opportunity for the visitor to record personal reflections on video. The art will provide a basis for new ways to examine the social cultural and ethical impact of synthetic biology, the event will have two main themes; Garage biology and the language of synthetic biology.  
+
The iGEM website explains that the competition is an [https://igem.org/IGEM/Learn_About effective teaching method], but how does it facilitate education? We attended a discussion with experts in science education policy, organised by the [http://www.biochemistry.org/ Biochemical Society], the [http://sciencecampaign.org.uk/?p=7107 Campaign for Science and Engineering] and [http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/ Imperial College London], to find out current policy issues that affect iGEM’s educational potential.
-
The ‘garage biology’ movement that has arisen alongside synthetic biology demonstrates that science is breaking from the confines of the lab, and in the future this may have a democratising effect on scientific discovery. Equally the ‘garage biology’ movement has caused concern about security and related ethical issues, such concerns have been amplified as synthetic biology has grown up in a post 9/11 culture of securitization. Our exhibition will allow the audience to consider both the positive and negative implications of garage biology as a movement and indeed we will consider if there is a ‘garage biology movement’ at all.
+
During the [http://www.biochemistry.org/PublicAffairs/Events/ScienceQuestionTimeAugust2011.aspx Science Question Time], several concerns were raised that are relevant to the competition. First, what are the barriers to participation? In the UK, with educational budgets squeezed as a result of conservative policies, it is becoming more difficult to afford college and university education. Participation in iGEM is expensive, with travel, accommodation, and summer living costs required. With gaining external sponsorship becoming more difficult due to the economic climate, this expense means that many students are excluded from taking part in the competition. We asked funding advisers from the Wellcome Trust, a UK iGEM team sponsor, what they thought about this cost [[Team:UCL_London/HumanPractices/Experts#Wellcome|here]].
-
The social and cultural effects of language used in science communication are key in forging positive public perceptions. Specific sets of language are used within synthetic biology that often describe life using dehumanising mechanical words, these words are a legacy of synthetic biology’s close association with engineering. Are we experiencing the reductionism of life on a similar scale to that seen in the enlightenment, if so, should we expect reaction on a par with the romanticists? In fact, if we are experiencing such similarity in the historical paradigm of thinking, can we learn from the lessons of the past? What effect does the use of such words have on the public perception of synthetic biology? What are the implications of using old metaphors to describe new forms of life? Words that already exist with a common meaning are being reshaped and redefined, without any consideration for the outward image of science, we will aim to analyse whyFinally after exploring the intricacies of such linguistic subtleties from a historical and societal perspective we will be able to make an informed answer to the question: Are we really considering the lessons of the past to inform our going forward?  
+
The second prominent issue raised was the question of how to encourage young people to choose a career in scientific research. There are several campaigns such as Future Morph aimed at persuading students to choose science education. To find out what makes iGEM appealing to students choosing a science career, we asked UK iGEM teams why they decided to take part [[#Norwich|here]], and talked to Guardian Science correspondents about the educational-monetary value of iGEM [[Team:UCL_London/HumanPractices/Experts#Guardian|here]].  
 +
 
 +
<h1>Regulation - Louis’s POST Internship</h1>
 +
 
 +
[[File:Post.png|right|link=http://www.parliament.uk/post]]
 +
 
 +
In the UK, the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology provides impartial analysis to government of science and technology related public policy issues. This information is used to inform regulatory decisions, and since iGEM constitutes a significant part of the emerging field of synthetic biology, we decided to explore how POST presents the field and relevant social issues. Our team member Louis undertook an internship in the office, and explored the processes by which scientific and social research is condensed for consumption by parliamentarians.
 +
 
 +
Louis discovered that the UK’s government has highlighted a preference for international agreement on synthetic biology policy, to improve competitiveness and maximise economic benefit from the technology. European initiatives such as [http://www.emergence.ethz.ch/ Emergence] and [http://www.synbiosafe.eu/ SynBioSafe] commend the open discussion of relevant social issues, and attempts to standardise aspects of research. iGEM is therefore seen as a positive force for driving standardisation and ethical consideration. It is likely that the UK’s government will continue to support the ethos of the competition as the field develops.
 +
 
 +
<h1>Interdisciplinarity - Arts Catalyst</h1><span id="ArtsCatalyst"></span>
 +
 
 +
  [[File:artscatalyst.gif|right|link=http://www.artscatalyst.org/experiencelearning/detail/synthesis/]]
 +
 
 +
Traditional ideas about the ‘two cultures’ of science and art are being challenged by modern interdisciplinary collaborations that use synthetic biology as inspiration. We attended the Arts Catalyst event [http://www.artscatalyst.org/experiencelearning/detail/synthesis/ We Need To Talk About Synthia] to investigate the potential of art as a tool for increasing accessibility to cutting-edge research. These events commission art to enable audiences to critically engage with science, and several pieces were showcased that illustrated innovative approaches. We were inspired to devise an event that displays existing artworks in a more reflective way. Our event exposes the effective merging of the two cultures, allowing us to discuss the implications of MIT’s ‘hacking’ ethos for the garage biology movement. There’s more on our Art Collaboration [[Team:UCL_London/HumanPractices/ArtCollaboration|here]].
 +
 
 +
<h1>Motivation - Norwich Interviews</h1><span id="Norwich"></span>
 +
 
 +
To further explore the purpose of iGEM, we interviewed several participants from different UK teams. The majority of interviewees explained that the competition was primarily an opportunity to improve their career prospects, and it was compared several times to a summer internship. This suggests that for many students, the competition is less about the pursuit of actual science and more about developing skills in project marketing. We discussed this topic in our debate event [[Team:UCL_London/HumanPractices/Debate#purpose|here]].
 +
 
 +
<html>
 +
<iframe width="315" height="170" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/F1mhixqJJ-U?rel=0&controls=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 +
<iframe width="315" height="170" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5pr9e0q3og0?rel=0&controls=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 +
<iframe width="315" height="170" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/KKP0p3P05aY?rel=0&controls=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 +
</html>
</div>
</div>
{{:Team:UCL_London/Template/Footer}}
{{:Team:UCL_London/Template/Footer}}

Latest revision as of 02:06, 22 September 2011

Background Research

Synthetic biology, as an emerging field, raises issues of particular sociological importance. Education, regulation, interdisciplinarity and reasons for participation emerged from our initial brainstorming as interesting themes, and we have examined each of them below with a view to shaping our ‘human practices’.

Education - Science Question Time

Sciqt.jpg

The iGEM website explains that the competition is an effective teaching method, but how does it facilitate education? We attended a discussion with experts in science education policy, organised by the [http://www.biochemistry.org/ Biochemical Society], the [http://sciencecampaign.org.uk/?p=7107 Campaign for Science and Engineering] and [http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/ Imperial College London], to find out current policy issues that affect iGEM’s educational potential.

During the [http://www.biochemistry.org/PublicAffairs/Events/ScienceQuestionTimeAugust2011.aspx Science Question Time], several concerns were raised that are relevant to the competition. First, what are the barriers to participation? In the UK, with educational budgets squeezed as a result of conservative policies, it is becoming more difficult to afford college and university education. Participation in iGEM is expensive, with travel, accommodation, and summer living costs required. With gaining external sponsorship becoming more difficult due to the economic climate, this expense means that many students are excluded from taking part in the competition. We asked funding advisers from the Wellcome Trust, a UK iGEM team sponsor, what they thought about this cost here.

The second prominent issue raised was the question of how to encourage young people to choose a career in scientific research. There are several campaigns such as Future Morph aimed at persuading students to choose science education. To find out what makes iGEM appealing to students choosing a science career, we asked UK iGEM teams why they decided to take part here, and talked to Guardian Science correspondents about the educational-monetary value of iGEM here.

Regulation - Louis’s POST Internship

Post.png

In the UK, the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology provides impartial analysis to government of science and technology related public policy issues. This information is used to inform regulatory decisions, and since iGEM constitutes a significant part of the emerging field of synthetic biology, we decided to explore how POST presents the field and relevant social issues. Our team member Louis undertook an internship in the office, and explored the processes by which scientific and social research is condensed for consumption by parliamentarians.

Louis discovered that the UK’s government has highlighted a preference for international agreement on synthetic biology policy, to improve competitiveness and maximise economic benefit from the technology. European initiatives such as [http://www.emergence.ethz.ch/ Emergence] and [http://www.synbiosafe.eu/ SynBioSafe] commend the open discussion of relevant social issues, and attempts to standardise aspects of research. iGEM is therefore seen as a positive force for driving standardisation and ethical consideration. It is likely that the UK’s government will continue to support the ethos of the competition as the field develops.

Interdisciplinarity - Arts Catalyst

Traditional ideas about the ‘two cultures’ of science and art are being challenged by modern interdisciplinary collaborations that use synthetic biology as inspiration. We attended the Arts Catalyst event [http://www.artscatalyst.org/experiencelearning/detail/synthesis/ We Need To Talk About Synthia] to investigate the potential of art as a tool for increasing accessibility to cutting-edge research. These events commission art to enable audiences to critically engage with science, and several pieces were showcased that illustrated innovative approaches. We were inspired to devise an event that displays existing artworks in a more reflective way. Our event exposes the effective merging of the two cultures, allowing us to discuss the implications of MIT’s ‘hacking’ ethos for the garage biology movement. There’s more on our Art Collaboration here.

Motivation - Norwich Interviews

To further explore the purpose of iGEM, we interviewed several participants from different UK teams. The majority of interviewees explained that the competition was primarily an opportunity to improve their career prospects, and it was compared several times to a summer internship. This suggests that for many students, the competition is less about the pursuit of actual science and more about developing skills in project marketing. We discussed this topic in our debate event here.