Team:Kyoto/Humanpractice
From 2013.igem.org
(→HumanPractice) |
(→International Student Seminar) |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
しかし、そういった活動を行ったが知識の差だけではなくほかにも要因があるのではないかという疑念が出てきた. We carried out these activities, however, we thought whether | しかし、そういった活動を行ったが知識の差だけではなくほかにも要因があるのではないかという疑念が出てきた. We carried out these activities, however, we thought whether | ||
そこで、私たちはほかの要因を探るべくアンケート調査を行った。<br><br><br> | そこで、私たちはほかの要因を探るべくアンケート調査を行った。<br><br><br> | ||
- | [https://2013.igem.org/Team:Kyoto/Humanpractice/Data | + | |
+ | |||
+ | =アンケート調査方法= | ||
+ | |||
+ | アンケートは選択肢形式にし、質問の初めに性別、出身国、年齢、宗教、職業を応えてもらい、それぞれの要素が回答にどのように影響してくるのかを調べた。また、外国人へのアンケートは、現地で実際に取ったほか、京都に来ている観光客からも集めた。(どこでやったか書く) | ||
+ | アンケートは以下のものを使用した。<br><br> | ||
+ | '''Questionnaire!!!!'''<br> | ||
+ | Q1 Have you ever thought about experiments using living things?<br> | ||
+ | 1 Yes | ||
+ | 2 No<br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Q2 Do you think these experiments using living-creatures are permissible? Please give X as many as you think it is permissible. <br> | ||
+ | 1 check | ||
+ | 2 no check<br> | ||
+ | Q2.1 Subjects are killed in the experiment, but it can save people in disease. <br> | ||
+ | Q2.2 Subjects can be killed in the experiment, but it can save people in disease.<br> | ||
+ | Q2.3 Subjects are not killed in the experiment but they never go back in nature. However, it can save people in disease.<br> | ||
+ | Q2.4 Subjects are only observed in nature and it can save people in disease. <br> | ||
+ | Q2.5 Subjects are killed in the experiment, but it can improve our life.<br> | ||
+ | Q2.6 Subjects can be killed in the experiment, but it can improve our life.<br> | ||
+ | Q2.7 Subjects are not killed in the experiment but they never go back in nature. However, it can improve our life.<br> | ||
+ | Q2.8 Subjects are only observed in nature and it can improve our life.<br> | ||
+ | Q2.9 Subjects are killed in the experiment, but it can advance science.<br> | ||
+ | Q2.10 Subjects can be killed in the experiment, but it can advance science.<br> | ||
+ | Q2.11 Subjects are not killed in the experiment but they never go back in nature. However, it can advance science.<br> | ||
+ | Q2.12 Subjects are only observed in nature and it can advance science.<br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | Q3 How much do you know about genetically modifying (GM) technology?<br> | ||
+ | 1 I know well. | ||
+ | 2 I know only its name. | ||
+ | 3 I do not know at all.<br> | ||
+ | Q4 Do you think modifying creature’s gene is ethically permissible or not?<br> | ||
+ | 1 Yes, we can modify every creatures’ gene. | ||
+ | 2 Partly yes, some can be but others are not. | ||
+ | 3 No, any living things’ gene cannot be modified.<br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | Q5 Who answered ‘partly yes’ to the fifth question, please answer this question. Which of these creatures’ gene can be modified? Please give X as many as you think it is permissible. <br> | ||
+ | 1 check | ||
+ | 2 no check<br> | ||
+ | Q5.1 Bacteria Q5.2 wheat Q5.3 honeybee Q5.4 killifish Q5.5 frog | ||
+ | Q5.6 chickens Q5.7 mouse Q5.8 dog Q5.9 monkey Q5.10 human beings<br><br><br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | [https://2013.igem.org/Team:Kyoto/Humanpractice/Data (アンケートの結果)]<br><br><br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
Revision as of 05:16, 27 September 2013
count down
Contents |
Human Practices -To spread LIFESCIENCE throughout the world
In 2010, iGEM Kyoto and other iGEM teams in Japan carried out an attitude survey towards genetically modifying and genetically engineering. We concluded that It seems that people only have abstract and unclear image to this 'professional' technique. Genetic engineering is not still so common in Japan. And many people worry about safety. So engineers are desired to develop safety of biotechnology and spread knowledge about biotechnology.” Considering this conclusion, it is important to enrich the people's knowledge on biotechnology when we want public people to accept biotechnology more. Therefore, we carried out these activities as below.
Life Science Seminar in High School
豊中高校に行って分子細胞生物学に関する講義と実験指導をおこなった よりライフサイエンスに親しんでもらえ、根底からの知識を実験という体験を交えて教育することができた このことはバイオテクノロジーに対する正しい理解をうむことになるだろう ながーく書いてね 頼む
Poster session at the school festival
Our University has a school festival called NF every year. This is one of the biggest events in our university and many people from all around Japan visit it. This year, iGEM Kyoto presented our project to these visitors by poster session, and this was actually broadcasted by a popular Japanese TV news program. Through this TV program, we were able to spread our activity to the general public, and succeeded in increasing general knowledge towards biotechnology and life science.
The 4th international symposium on liberal arts and general education
The 4th international symposium on liberal arts and general education is a large scale symposium where many students and public people visit. Therefore, is a good opportunity to enrich people's knowledge on biotechnology and life science to many people. Through presenting our iGEMs’ project here, we enriched people's understanding on life science. Additionally, we received the "Einstein" prize.
International Student Seminar
iGEM Kyoto participated in ISS, short for International Student Seminar. In this seminar いっぱいいろんな人来たよ 外国人もいっぱい来たよ 英語でプロジェクトのプレゼンしたよ それを通していろんなひとのライフサイエンスに対する知識を増やしたよ
このような活動を行ってきた。
しかし、そういった活動を行ったが知識の差だけではなくほかにも要因があるのではないかという疑念が出てきた. We carried out these activities, however, we thought whether
そこで、私たちはほかの要因を探るべくアンケート調査を行った。
アンケート調査方法
アンケートは選択肢形式にし、質問の初めに性別、出身国、年齢、宗教、職業を応えてもらい、それぞれの要素が回答にどのように影響してくるのかを調べた。また、外国人へのアンケートは、現地で実際に取ったほか、京都に来ている観光客からも集めた。(どこでやったか書く)
アンケートは以下のものを使用した。
Questionnaire!!!!
Q1 Have you ever thought about experiments using living things?
1 Yes
2 No
Q2 Do you think these experiments using living-creatures are permissible? Please give X as many as you think it is permissible.
1 check
2 no check
Q2.1 Subjects are killed in the experiment, but it can save people in disease.
Q2.2 Subjects can be killed in the experiment, but it can save people in disease.
Q2.3 Subjects are not killed in the experiment but they never go back in nature. However, it can save people in disease.
Q2.4 Subjects are only observed in nature and it can save people in disease.
Q2.5 Subjects are killed in the experiment, but it can improve our life.
Q2.6 Subjects can be killed in the experiment, but it can improve our life.
Q2.7 Subjects are not killed in the experiment but they never go back in nature. However, it can improve our life.
Q2.8 Subjects are only observed in nature and it can improve our life.
Q2.9 Subjects are killed in the experiment, but it can advance science.
Q2.10 Subjects can be killed in the experiment, but it can advance science.
Q2.11 Subjects are not killed in the experiment but they never go back in nature. However, it can advance science.
Q2.12 Subjects are only observed in nature and it can advance science.
Q3 How much do you know about genetically modifying (GM) technology?
1 I know well.
2 I know only its name.
3 I do not know at all.
Q4 Do you think modifying creature’s gene is ethically permissible or not?
1 Yes, we can modify every creatures’ gene.
2 Partly yes, some can be but others are not.
3 No, any living things’ gene cannot be modified.
Q5 Who answered ‘partly yes’ to the fifth question, please answer this question. Which of these creatures’ gene can be modified? Please give X as many as you think it is permissible.
1 check
2 no check
Q5.1 Bacteria Q5.2 wheat Q5.3 honeybee Q5.4 killifish Q5.5 frog
Q5.6 chickens Q5.7 mouse Q5.8 dog Q5.9 monkey Q5.10 human beings