Subject(s)
Embryo Disposition/ethics , Embryo Research/ethics , Embryonic Stem Cells , Guidelines as Topic , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Oocyte Donation , Tissue Donors , Cell Line , Disclosure , Embryo Disposition/standards , Female , Fertilization in Vitro , Humans , Informed Consent , United StatesABSTRACT
The use of iPSCs and tetraploid complementation for human reproductive cloning would raise profound ethical objections. Professional standards and laws that ban human reproductive cloning by somatic cell nuclear transfer should be revised to also forbid it by other methods, such as iPSCs via tetraploid complementation.
Subject(s)
Bioethics , Cloning, Organism/ethics , Pluripotent Stem Cells/cytology , Animals , Cell Differentiation , Cloning, Organism/methods , Guidelines as Topic , Humans , MiceABSTRACT
Stem cell researchers commonly use human pluripotent stem cell lines derived by other investigators. Researchers may use lines derived elsewhere, provided that their derivation met consensus core standards. Some types of derivation raise heightened levels of ethical concern and require greater scrutiny. To maintain public trust, research institutions need to justify why they allow researchers to use lines whose derivation would not have been permitted locally.
Subject(s)
Cell Line , Embryo Research , Pluripotent Stem Cells , Animals , Embryo Disposition , Embryo Research/economics , Embryo Research/ethics , Embryo Research/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , International Cooperation , Oocytes/physiologyABSTRACT
In this article, we describe an exploratory study of a small-scale, concept-driven, voluntary laboratory component of Introductory Biology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. We wished to investigate whether students' attitudes toward biology and their understanding of basic biological principles would improve through concept-based learning in a laboratory environment. With these goals in mind, and using our Biology Concept Framework as a guide, we designed laboratory exercises to connect topics from the lecture portion of the course and highlight key concepts. We also strove to make abstract concepts tangible, encourage learning in nonlecture format, expose the students to scientific method in action, and convey the excitement of performing experiments. Our initial small-scale assessments indicate participation in the laboratory component, which featured both hands-on and minds-on components, improved student learning and retention of basic biological concepts. Further investigation will focus on improving the balance between the minds-on concept-based learning and the hands-on experimental component of the laboratory.
Subject(s)
Laboratories , Learning , Reading , Research/education , Science/education , Teaching/methods , Humans , Science/methodsSubject(s)
Government Regulation , Stem Cell Transplantation/legislation & jurisprudence , Stem Cells , Biological Products/therapeutic use , Embryo Research/legislation & jurisprudence , Embryo, Mammalian/cytology , Genetic Therapy/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Legislation, Medical , Tissue Donors/legislation & jurisprudence , United States , United States Food and Drug AdministrationABSTRACT
A typical undergraduate biology curriculum covers a very large number of concepts and details. We describe the development of a Biology Concept Framework (BCF) as a possible way to organize this material to enhance teaching and learning. Our BCF is hierarchical, places details in context, nests related concepts, and articulates concepts that are inherently obvious to experts but often difficult for novices to grasp. Our BCF is also cross-referenced, highlighting interconnections between concepts. We have found our BCF to be a versatile tool for design, evaluation, and revision of course goals and materials. There has been a call for creating Biology Concept Inventories, multiple-choice exams that test important biology concepts, analogous to those in physics, astronomy, and chemistry. We argue that the community of researchers and educators must first reach consensus about not only what concepts are important to test, but also how the concepts should be organized and how that organization might influence teaching and learning. We think that our BCF can serve as a catalyst for community-wide discussion on organizing the vast number of concepts in biology, as a model for others to formulate their own BCFs and as a contribution toward the creation of a comprehensive BCF.