|
Type A
|
Code |
Competences Specific | | | A14 |
Assess the socio-economic impact and the bioethical implications of the different biotechnological processes and assure the current legal dispositions. |
|
Type B
|
Code |
Competences Transversal | | | CT5 |
Communicate information clearly and precisely to a variety of audiences |
| | CT7 |
Apply ethical principles and social responsibility as a citizen and a professional. |
|
Type C
|
Code |
Competences Nuclear |
|
Type A
|
Code |
Learning outcomes |
| | A14 |
Stimulate the ability to communicate efficiently, orally and in writing, in a variety of ways and in different audiences.
|
|
Type B
|
Code |
Learning outcomes |
| | CT5 |
Use the techniques of non-verbal communication and the expressive resources of the voice to make a good oral presentation. (Non-verbal communication and use of the voice)
Construct a discourse that is structured, clear, cohesive, rich and of the appropriate length. (Discourse construction)
Produce a discourse that is appropriate to the communicative situation, consistent and persuasive, and interact effectively with the audience. (Efficiency)
| | | CT7 |
Be aware of the inequalities and the discrimination caused by gender and other factors, and understand the reasons that account for it. (Equality)
Be able to identify major environmental problems. (Environment)
Recognise and reflect on social needs and problems, and get involved in improving the community. (Social responsibility as a citizen)
Recognise the ethical and deontological concepts in their field of expertise, show an ability for criticism and dialogue, and respect the rules and regulations that members of the university community must abide by. (Ethics)
|
|
Type C
|
Code |
Learning outcomes |
| Topic |
Sub-topic |
1. The biolaw: concept and fundamentals
2. Genetics and law
3. Environment and food law
4. Biotechnological patents
5. The social environment in the era of globalization
6. The cultural environment in the sociatas of risk
7. The opinion published shortly
8. The processes of formation of public opinion
|
1.1. Human rights, biolaw and bioethics
1.2. General principles of law applicable to biotechnology
1.3. Legal norms and biolaw
1.4. The fields of application of the biolaw
2.1. Biomedicine and eugenics: General aspects
2.2. Human genome, genetic manipulations and biological diversity
2.3. Reproduction rights, human embryos and "stem cells"
2.4. Databases, DNA analysis and criminality
3.1. Protection of the environment and sustainable development
3.2. The principles of prevention and precaution: Risks and legal regulation
3.3. Food safety and food labeling processes
3.4. Genetically modified organisms: Legal regulation
4.1. Patents: Concept and criteria of patentability
4.2. Origin of biotechnological patents
4.3. International legal framework and / or Spanish of biopatents
4.4. Arguments for and against of biotechnological patents
5.1. Information society, knowledge society. Globalization, technology and science.
5.2. The political and social ideologies around the society of complexity.
5.3. Social groups and organizations for and against biotechnology.
5.4. The North-South conflicts.
6.1. The social perception of science and technology.
6.2. Study and interpretation of public perception of biotechnology.
6.3. The social, cultural and communicative construction of biotechnology. Board games workshop (Peptide, Cytosis, Virulence, Covalence).
6.4. Who, how, why should we communicate scientific innovations?
7.1. The apocalyptic and integrated biotechnological applications: Agriculture, environment and health. The century of biotechnology.
7.2. Models and debates on scientific communication. The media and journalists: The study of the effects and productive routines.
7.3. The media representation of biotechnology: The construction of social images. The journalistic coverage of science and scientists. The dilemmas of journalistic disclosure. Interaction between scientists and journalists: How do the others look?
7.4. Media coverage does not determine public opinion although it helps to build it
8.1. Genetic engineering, life sciences and communication sciences.
8.2. Social dialogue around genetically modified foods.
8.3. The configuration of opinion climates.
8.4. Public opinion for and against of biotechnological applications. |
| Methodologies :: Tests |
| |
Competences |
(*) Class hours
|
Hours outside the classroom
|
(**) Total hours |
| Introductory activities |
|
2 |
0 |
2 |
| Lecture |
|
20 |
0 |
20 |
| Personal attention |
|
6 |
0 |
6 |
| Presentations / oral communications |
|
6 |
35 |
41 |
| Seminars |
|
18 |
31 |
49 |
| |
| Oral tests |
|
2 |
4 |
6 |
| Oral tests |
|
2 |
4 |
6 |
| Mixed tests |
|
2 |
8 |
10 |
| Mixed tests |
|
2 |
8 |
10 |
| |
(*) On e-learning, hours of virtual attendance of the teacher.
(**) The information in the planning table is for guidance only and does not take into account the heterogeneity of the students. |
Methodologies
| |
Description |
| Introductory activities |
Expose the objectives of the subject, highlighting the interest of knowing the legal, ethical, social and communicative implications of biotechnological applications |
| Lecture |
The main trends and dilemmas in contemporary societies will be presented: globalization, identity, culture, communication
|
| Personal attention |
It will be promoted the oral defense of the projects, as well as the elaborated and nuanced discourse around the themes worked on. |
| Presentations / oral communications |
Es treballaran continguts del temari en grups que exposaran les seves presentacions a la resta dels alumnes assistents a classe. |
| Seminars |
It will be worked texts that must be writting in groups and then make a public presentation to the rest of the students. |
|
Description |
|
The teachers of the subject will arrange appointments for students through email:
veronica.galiana@urv.cat
anna.sendra@urv.cat |
|
Methodologies |
Competences
|
Description |
Weight |
|
|
|
|
| Oral tests |
|
The active participation in the development of the discussions in class as well as the public defense of elaborated arguments on the proposed topics will be valued particularly (part of legal and legal aspects). |
20% |
| Mixed tests |
|
Written work, individual or in small groups, which must be presented publicly in class (legal and legal aspects). |
30% |
| Mixed tests |
|
Written work, individual or in small groups, which must be presented publicly in class (Social and communicative aspects) |
30% |
| Oral tests |
|
Active participation in the development of class discussions as well as the public defense of arguments elaborated on the thematic proposals will be valued particularly (part of social and communicative aspects). |
20% |
| Others |
|
|
|
| |
|
Other comments and second exam session |
|
Students who do not follow the continuous assessment must submit to an exam of the whole subject in the second call, and must also submit the two mixed tests that have been worked and documented in ''moodle'' on the space of the subject. During evaluation tests, mobile phones, tablets and other devices not expressly authorized by the test must be switched off and out of sight. The demonstration of fraudulent conduct of some evaluative activity of some subject in both material and virtual and electronic support leads to the student the suspension note of this evaluation activity. Regardless of this, in view of the seriousness of the facts, the center may propose the initiation of a disciplinary file, which will be initiated by resolution of the rector. |
| Basic |
|
BIBLIOGRAFIA PART ONE. Legal aspects of biotechnology Abellán, Fernando, Reproducción humana asistida y responsabilidad médica, Comares, Granada, 2001. Autores varios, Bases de datos de perfiles de ADN y criminalidad, Comares, Granada, 2002. Autores varios, Biotecnología y derecho. Perspectivas en el derecho comparado, Comares, Granada, 1998. Autores varios, El Convenio de Derechos Humanos y Biomedicina. Su entrada en vigor en el ordenamiento jurídico español, Comares, Granada, 2002. Autores varios, Genética y Derecho penal. Previsiones en el Código Penal español de 1995, Comares, Granada, 2001. Autores varios, Genética, Ariel, Barcelona, 2003. Autores varios, La eugenesia hoy, Comares, Granada, 1999. Autores varios, Los genes y sus leyes. El Derecho ante el genoma humano, Comares, Granada, 2002. Autores varios, Los retos de la genética en el siglo XXI: genética y bioética, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, 1999. Blázquez Ruiz, Javier, Derechos Humanos y proyecto genoma, Comares, Granada, 1999.. Casado, M. (coord.), Manual de Bioética y Derecho, Titant lo blanch, Valencia, 2004. Emaldi Cirion, Aitziber, El Consejo Genético y sus implicaciones jurídicas, Comares, Granada, 2001. Etxeberría Guridi, José, Los análisis de ADN y su aplicación al proceso penal, Comares, Granada, 2000. Galán Cortés, Julio César, Responsabilidad médica y consentimiento informado, Cívitas, Madrid, 2001. McGee, Glenn, El bebé perfecto. Tener hijos en el nuevo mundo de la clonación y la genética, Gedisa, Barcelona, 2003. Osset Hernández, Miguel, Ingeniería genética y derechos humanos. Legislación y ética ante el reto de los avances biotecnológicos, Icaria, Barcelona, 2000. Pérez Salom, José, Recursos genéticos. Biotecnología y Derecho Internacional. La distribución justa y equitativa de beneficios en el Convenio sobre Biodiversidad, Aranzadi, Navarra, 2002. Recuerda Girela, M.A., Seguridad alimentaria y nuevos alimentos: régimen jurídico administrativo, Thomson Aranzadi, Madrid, 2006. Romeo Casabona, C.M., (ed.), Biotecnología, Derecho y dignidad humana, Comares, Granada, 2004. Sádaba, J., Principios de bioética laica, Editorial Gedisa, Barcelona, 2002. Valls, R., Ética para la bioética, Editorial Gedisa, Barcelona, 2002. Zarraluqui, Luis, Procreación asistida y derechos fundamentales, Tecnos, Madrid, 1988. PART TWO. Social and communicative aspects of biotechnology Alcíbar, Miguel (2004) “La divulgaciónmediática de la ciencia y la tecnología como recontextualización discursiva”. Anàlisi,31, 43-70. http://www.raco.cat/index.php/analisi/article/viewFile/15153/14994
Bates, Benjamin R. (2005) “Public culture and publicunderstanding of genetics: a focus group study”. Public Understanding ofScience, 14, 47-65. http://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/bitstream/handle/document/22373/ssoar-2005-1-bates-public_culture_and_public_understanding.pdf?sequence=1
Bergoglio,J.M. (2015). Laudatio si: http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/es/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html
Carbonell, Eudald;Sala, Robert (2002) Encara no som humans. Propostes d'humanització per al tercermil·leni. Barcelona: Empúries.
Ceballos,G. et al. (2015) Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Enteringthe sixth mass extinction: http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/5/e1400253
Espluga, Josep (2005) “Els debats socials de la biotecnologia”. Papers de la Fundació/144, Fundació Rafael Campalans,1-29. http://www.fcampalans.cat/uploads/publicacions/pdf/paper_biotecnologia.pdf
Gunter, Barrie et al. (1999) “The Media and Public Understanding of Biotechnology: A Survey of Scientists and Journalists”. Science Communication,vol. 20 Nº 4, 373-394. http://scx.sagepub.com/content/20/4/373.abstract
Hornig Priest, Susanna (2006) “Public Discourse and Scientific Controversy. A Spiral-of-Silence Analysis of Biotechnology Opinion in the United States”. Science Communication, Vol. 28 Nº 2, 195-215. http://scx.sagepub.com/content/28/2/195.refs
Muñoz,Emilio (2002). La cultura científica, la percepción pública y el caso de la biotecnología http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/1503/1/dt-0207.pdf
Piguem, Jordi(2010). Revalorar el món. Els valors de la sostenibilitat. http://cads.gencat.cat/web/.content/Documents/Publicacions/pds_15_web.pdf
Punset, E. (entrevista a Edward O. Wilson): "No somos un superorganismo": http://www.eduardpunset.es/431/charlas-con/no-somos-un-superoganismo
Mètode Science Studies Journal (https://metode.es/revistas)
- El origen de la vida. Una narración científica inacabada. Mètode 87. Otoño 2015- La ciencia de la prensa. Retos y tendencias de la divulgación de la ciencia. Mètode 80. Invierno 2013/14. - Los miedos a la ciencia. La percepción social de la investigación científica. Mètode 63. Otoño 2009 - Fotogramas de ciencia. Ciencia y cine. Mètode 48. Invierno 2005/2006 . - Comunicar la salud. La divulgación médica en los medios de comunicación. Mètode 88. Invierno 2015/2016. - Gen, ética y estética. El futuro impacto de la genética en nuestras vidas. Mètode 55. Otoño 2007. - ¿Qué hay detrás del genoma? Las nuevas aplicaciones de la genómica. Mètode 32. Invierno 2001/2002.
|
|
| Complementary |
|
Bauman, Z. (1998). Globalització. Les conseqüències humanes. Barcelona: EdiUOC, Proa. 2001.
Beck, U. (2002): La sociedad del riesgo
global. Madrid: Siglo XXI.
Beck, U. (2004): Poder y contrapoder en
la era global. Barcelona: Editorial Paidos.
Besley, John C., J. Shanahan (2005) “Media Attention and Exposure in
Relation to Support for Agricultural Biotechnology”. Science Communication,
Vol. 26 Nº 4, 347-367.
Bonfadelli, Heinz (2005) “Mass media and biotechnology: knowledge gaps
within and between European countries”. International Journal of Public Opinion
Research, vol. 17 Nº 1, 42-62.
Burchell, Kevin (2007) “Boundary Work, Associative Argumentation and
Switching in the Advocacy of Agricultural Biotechnology”. Science as Culture, Vol. 16, Nº 1, 49-70.
Castells, M. (1997): La era de la
información. Economía, sociedad y cultura. Volúmenes 1, 2, y 3. Madrid: Alianza
Editorial.
DD.AA. (2004) Opinión pública y
biotecnología. Sistema, nº 179-180 (exemplar monogràfic).
Dreyer, Marion & O. Renn, (2009) Food safety governance:
integrating science, precaution and public involvement. Berlun, Springer.
López Cerezo, J. L. (2001). Ciencia,
tecnología, sociedad y cultura. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva.
Muñoz, Emilio (2001). Biotecnología y
sociedad. Madrid: Cambridge University Press.
Nisbet, Mattthew C. And B. V. Lewenstein (2002) “Biotechnology and the
American Media: The Policy Process and the Elite Press, 1970 to 1999”. Science
Communication, Vol. 23 Nº 4, 359-391.
Pavone, Vicente (2006) “Science, Eugenics and Utopia. Comparing
scientific humanism and liberal eugenics on human genetic enhancement”. Documento de trabajo 06-14. Madrid: CSIC, Unidad de Políticas
Comparadas (UPC).
Plaza, Marta i E. Muñoz (2003) “La
biotecnología en la prensa española en el año 2002”. Documento de Trabajo
03-16. Madrid: Grupo de ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad (CSIC).
Rubia Vila, F. J. (Dir.) Percepción
social de la ciencia. Academia Europea de Ciencias y Artes. Ediciones UNED.
Sjöberg, Lennart (2005) “Gene Technology in the eyes of the public and
experts. Moral opinions, attitudes and risk perception”. Working Paper: 7.
Stockholm: Center for Risk Research.
Wilson, E.O. (2006).
La creació. Una crida per salvar la vida a la terra. Barcelona: Empúries. |
(*)The teaching guide is the document in which the URV publishes the information about all its courses. It is a public document and cannot be modified. Only in exceptional cases can it be revised by the competent agent or duly revised so that it is in line with current legislation. |
|