Saturday 22 August 2015

FRAME: RESEARCH AS INQUIRY


LECTURE 5
 Threshold concepts suggested by ACRL's taskforce as information literacy standard. RESEARCH AS INQUIRY  refer to an understanding that research is iterative and depends upon asking increasingly complex or new questions whose answers, develop additional questions or lines of inquiry in any field.
The student will be doing a learning scenario about WHY GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD ?  

 Investigate this biotechnological crop in terms of health. Find out what forces them to accept the crop. Is it market related ?

LEARNING OUTCOME

The student will be able to:
  • Formulate questions for research based on information gaps.
  •  Use multiple perspective in this field to broaden up their knowledge
  •    Use variety of research method, open mind, open ended questions
ACTIVITY
  • The student must read journal articles on GMF from 2000 – 2015 so that they can have broader knowledge about this biotech food.
  • Investigate conducting a series of investigation with different groups like communities, farmers, scientist.
  • Follow ethical and legal guidelines 
LINKING THE ACTIVITIES

  • By reading the articles the students will have a broader knowledge about the research the scholars have done in the past and present, they will able to formulate question based on the gaps.
  • They must also focus not only on this field, try and focus on different perspective to find the solutions. having interview with scientist
  • Using variety of research methods will give a student more knowledge about their experiences, what does the scientist say about this crop, and the farmers as well as consumers?



 

Curtis, Kynda R., Jill J. McCluskey, and Thomas I. Wahl. "Consumer acceptance of genetically modified food products in the developing world." (2004).

Lusk, Jayson L., et al. "Effect of information about benefits of biotechnology on consumer acceptance of genetically modified food: evidence from experimental auctions in the United States, England, and France." European review of agricultural economics 31.2 (2004): 179-204.
            


















No comments:

Post a Comment