the future impact of genetic modified food on crops sustainability in Australia
1. Work in a team to research a specific topic related to your chosen grand challenge, with a view to defining the issues at play and gathering a wide range of academic and non-academic resources e.g. feature articles, media releases, documentary programs, opinion pieces/blog posts, academic, research or governmental papers, etc. representing a range of differing social, economic and political perspectives.
2. Create a mind map in order to help you integrate and synthesise the main issues and perspectives around your grand challenge/problem.
3. Working alone, select the most pertinent articles which you think best represent the different viewpoints
4. Critically assess each of the main issues or perspectives using the framework you have been taught in workshops (Reliability, Validity, Accuracy, Timeliness, Authority, Point of View). There may be more than one type of source for a particular perspective, you can discuss which ones are more influential and why in your critique.
5. Plan and write your own individual critique so that it will explain to someone with absolutely no knowledge of your chosen grand challenge/problem the following things:
(a) What is your topic about?
(b) Who are the key stakeholders e.g. consumers, businesses, primary producers etc.
(c) What are the major issues or perspectives in current public debate about your grand challenge/problem?
(d) What is your critical assessment of the ways in which the differing perspectives are communicated about your grand challenge/problem and why do you believe these ideas are or are not influential on the public debate around your grand challenge/problem?
What you will submit
A 1,500 word essay-style document. The document should include a title, your name and student number and the name of the unit. Your assignment should be submitted through the Blackboard site.
Resources and Useful References
To be supplied in the relevant workshops and via the Blackboard and Library web sites.
Criteria and Standards for Grading
Criteria 7 6 5 4 3
Explanation of issues Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and described comprehensively, delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding. Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, described, and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions. Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, boundaries undetermined, and/or backgrounds unknown. Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated without clarification or description. Issue/problem is not stated clearly, and/or has limited info or relevance, Little or no information or explanation
Evidence
Selecting and using information to investigate a point of view or conclusion Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are questioned thoroughly. Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are subject to questioning. Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are taken as mostly fact, with little questioning. Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation.
Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact, without question. Insufficient information, sources or expert viewpoints. Little or no interpretation/ evaluation. Little or no evidence
Influence of context and assumptions Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyses own and others’ assumptions and carefully evaluates the relevance of contexts when presenting a position. Identifies own and others’ assumptions and several relevant contexts when presenting a position. Questions some assumptions. Identifies several relevant contexts when presenting a position. May be more aware of others’ assumptions than one’s own (or vice versa). Shows an emerging awareness of present assumptions (sometimes labels assertions as assumptions).
Begins to identify some contexts when presenting a position Little awareness of assumptions (bias), no clear context in analysis or conclusion. Little or no clear context or analysis
Student’s position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is imaginative, taking into account the complexities of an issue.
Limits of position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) are acknowledged.
Others’ points of view are synthesized within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis). Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) takes into account the complexities of an issue.
Others’ points of view are acknowledged within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis). Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) acknowledges different sides of an issue. Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is stated, but is simplistic and obvious. Position (perspective) is missing or unclear. No clear position
Conclusions and related outcomes (implications and consequences) Conclusions and related outcomes (consequences and implications) are logical and reflect student’s informed evaluation and ability to place evidence and perspectives discussed in priority order. Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly. Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion); some related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly. Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are oversimplified. Conclusion is not tied to some of the information and/or is not stated clearly; Little or no conclusion
