Laboratory Schedule - Spring 2023

Skills Stressed

Familiarity & Safety.
Self-analysis and application of concepts.

Use of lab instruments.

Connecting tissue functions to organ functions; recognition of tissue types.

Analysis of symptoms from the actions of organisms; prevention and avoidance;  recognition of organism types.

  Research Resources  (5)
        

 Principles of dominant/recessive crosses;  applications. Other genetic processes.  Group discussion.

Recognition of egg, sperm, and embryo-producing cells.

Recognition of organs and structures;  functions applied to real world situations.

 "

Applying scientific principles to outbreaks of disease.
Group discussion.

Overall Format for the SC 137 Research Paper:

First Page / Title Page.

• You can have a full separate title page, or use the top half of your first text page for the title.

• The title must be specific enough to get an idea of whats in the paper clearly across to the reader.

• The title must be followed by the chosen topic number in parentheses!!! See the topics list for their numbers.

• Minimum four pages of text, double-spaced (leaves room for notes and corrections) - make a note if your word processors idea of "double-spaced" looks unusually wide. Margins should not be too wide.

Footnotes.  

• General information or information available from multiple sources does not require footnotes, so don't overdo it. Specific or controversial information, or direct quotes (which also require attribution - tell who's talking, and why they are quotable!), things that you could only have gotten from particular sources, do require footnotes. Format: at the end of the passage, in parentheses, put the last name of the lead author (or whatever the reference is listed under) from your reference (your reference list at the end is alphabetized by authors last name, so a reader can easily find the full reference title if they want to).  No other information is needed in the parentheses) unless you have more than one reference from that author - then, use year of publication or second author or first words of title to specify which reference you're footnoting. References without authors can be footnoted according to how you listed it at the end.  If you are using a multi-word organization name, you can put down just enough to clearly specify the listing, with "..." at the end.   You need at least one reference dated from the last 3 years.

• NOTE: These papers require a specific science-style reference listing format!!!!!!

• Requires at least one reference from the last 3 years!

• References are listed as follows. The entire list is alphabetized by authors last name. Make notes in your list of information that was not available.

• Paper Sources: In this order: Author(s), last name first, full names, full list; Year (only) of publication; Title of actual reference; reference source if part of bigger whole, like a magazine article or a separately-written book chapter would be; Volume and Issue Numbers for a magazine, Date for a newspaper, or Publisher for a book; Page Numbers if applicable.  If the reference came from a database such as the Library's, put which database you used to find it.

• Internet Sources: Use ONLY sources that can be shown to be reliable! List as: Author(s), last names first, full names, full list (this will often be an organization and may wind up being repeated in the website name);  Year of writing or last update;  Title of specific web page accessed;  Website name if page is part of larger site (they usually are);  Full Internet address;  Date(s) that you accessed the information.  If there is no listed author, use the organization as the author but fully spell out the name.  That will often be the website as well, so it may be in the listing twice.

• Other Sources: Check with Mr. McDarby on formats for unusual references, such as pamphlets or interviews.  Don't make assumptions!

NOTE: When more than one paper is required, you cannot use the same topic twice.

Common mistakes for this topic: People ignore that this is basically a comparison between general media (using specific sources) and specific expert sources; they don't really go into media treatment, or use actual media sources, which should set up the whole paper.

2.) A current human-health-related ethical issue. These are the moral issues that surround decisions about human health. You might find proper subjects in such areas as medicine, research, public policy or the environment. You must find a subject that has at least two sides, and you must present all sides of the issue adequately. You may express your own opinion if you wish, but all sides must be treated fairly despite your personal feelings.  Have sources for all sides!

Common mistakes for this topic: People pick a subject they feel too strongly about, so the "other side" is presented very poorly.  Sources from one side should not be used when presenting the opposing side.  These papers may be difficult to organize properly - people sometimes just go over and over the same territory.

3.) Health technology. Here you'll address some new developments, in equipment or techniques; describe the technology, give a background of what it's replacing or changing, and make projections of the sorts of changes it might bring about.

Common mistakes for this topic: People miss one of three main aspects of the topic: describing the technology, giving a general idea of how it's to be applied (including current techniques), or projecting its future.

4.) New developments for a particular type of health-oriented research. You'll describe how that type of research gets done, with multiple examples to show variations and issues.

Common mistakes for this topic: This is about process - how do researchers do their research?  You'll probably need to read and understand some fairly technical sources.

5.) An interview with a health professional. Discuss their background, including education and motivations, their current duties, and their opinions about the system they're a part of. Most importantly, put their particulars into context with general research of their profession.

Common mistakes for this topic: The interview is fairly easy, although some people forget to ask all of the questions the topic requires - it's finding the information to put the subject into context that's difficult. An example: your interview subject went to a trade school; you need to find out how common that is in that particular profession.

6.) Review of a health-oriented business. You'll need to find out how the business was set up and how it runs, but you also need to track down information on how such businesses operate in general or on average. Charities or public institutions can be used if they have a health function.

Common mistakes for this topic: Getting all of the information can be difficult, especially the general information about the type of business you're researching.

7.) A detailed individual case-history with full background. A case history would be one person's experience with a disease or condition. You'll need to trace the development, diagnosis, treatment, and outcome of the case, but you need to do the research to explain things - why does that symptom appear, or why is that test run, or what is that medication supposed to be doing?

Common mistakes for this topic: Giving the history is fairly simple - it's doing the research and giving the explanations that people have problems with. Virtually every aspect of the case should be explained - its not enough to just say what happened, you have to say why, so far as anyone knows.  If something isnt really understood, say that as well.

8) The overall history of a disease or health-related topic. You need a subject that not only has a history, but one whose history you can actually track. Give early background and descriptions, discoveries, political / social aspects and impacts, all in a historical framework, including development of responses.

Common mistakes for this topic: Finding such information is almost impossible for some subjects. Although you would think otherwise for something that's essentially a timeline, many people can't seem to organize these papers properly.

9.) Comparison of two books on the same health-related topic. These books should look, to a glance, like they're on the same subject. Your job is to compare them - how are they similar? How are they different? This topic does not require four references - just the two books.

Common mistakes for this topic: People sometimes forget to tell at the beginning of their papers what their books are; they get bogged down just reviewing the books, and give almost no real comparisons. Sometimes it's clear that they didn't really understand the books, which makes it hard to compare them!

Topic Number is missing or wrong.

Paper doesn't really address chosen topic, or misses much of the topics requirements.

Organization of the paper is poor - things are discussed in widely separate sections. NOTE: outline, and don't be afraid to use a word processor to move things around.

Points you've already discussed are repeated.

Overall proofreading was not done and needed to be. (Computer checkers are better than nothing, but will still miss a lot of mistakes.)

Apostrophes are not used on possessives. (Exception: possessive "its" gets no apostrophe; "it's" is a contraction meaning "it is.")

Colons and semicolons are misused. (A colon sets something up, often a list; a semicolon breaks things apart a bit more strongly than a comma.)

Verbs dont refer to their nouns (singular, plural) properly, or change tense for no reason.

Confusion among "there/ their/ they're," or "your/ you're," or "two/ to/ too."  Word processors tend to miss these mistakes.

Effect and affect are confused. (Effect is almost always a thing, affect is a verb.)

Proper usage is "try to do whatever," not "try and do it," as most people say.

Paragraph breaks don't make sense. (They come when you make a major subject change - there is no magic sentence count.)

Footnotes are overused, or not used when needed, or done improperly. (See earlier section on footnotes.)

Quotations are overused (you're paraphrasing, mostly, not copying) or are not attributed.  At most, maybe 20% of your paper can be quotes.

In quotations, periods and commas are put outside the quotation marks. (Punctuation at the end of quotations go inside the quotation marks unless putting them there would change the meaning of the quotes.)

Style results in confusion or changes for no apparent reason.

Paper isn't long enough. (Text alone has to be at least 4 pages!)

Reference format is wrong, and/or information that's supposed to be there is missing, or there aren't enough acceptable references.