Questioning Reality, Questioning Science: Teaching Students in the Food and Agricultural Sciences about Epistemological, Ethical, and Empirical Controversies

R. Chiles, J. Coupland
{"title":"Questioning Reality, Questioning Science: Teaching Students in the Food and Agricultural Sciences about Epistemological, Ethical, and Empirical Controversies","authors":"R. Chiles, J. Coupland","doi":"10.1111/1541-4329.12106","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The effective application of food science depends on social constraints, yet the training for food scientists does not adequately consider the contested social context under which food is processed, packaged, and prepared. We recently co-taught a new course (“Arguing about food”) intended to introduce students to critical perspectives on the epistemological, ethical, and empirical assumptions that characterize contemporary food controversies. Through a series of guest lectures, readings, and discussions, students engaged with contrasting views on data quality, food ethics, nutrition, safety, governance, and the scientific enterprise as a whole. A key feature of the course was that we did not seek to defend any particular position. Rather, we examined how different values could lead reasonable people to take different views on scientific issues. Course requirements included a pass/fail quiz, a series of written reading responses, a group project devoted to a case study, and active attendance and participation. The students were engaged and challenged by the material, and at the end of the semester, reported that the course had also been useful and informative to them as young professionals embarking upon careers in the food and agricultural sciences.","PeriodicalId":22784,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Food Science Education","volume":"102 1","pages":"49-53"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Food Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4329.12106","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The effective application of food science depends on social constraints, yet the training for food scientists does not adequately consider the contested social context under which food is processed, packaged, and prepared. We recently co-taught a new course (“Arguing about food”) intended to introduce students to critical perspectives on the epistemological, ethical, and empirical assumptions that characterize contemporary food controversies. Through a series of guest lectures, readings, and discussions, students engaged with contrasting views on data quality, food ethics, nutrition, safety, governance, and the scientific enterprise as a whole. A key feature of the course was that we did not seek to defend any particular position. Rather, we examined how different values could lead reasonable people to take different views on scientific issues. Course requirements included a pass/fail quiz, a series of written reading responses, a group project devoted to a case study, and active attendance and participation. The students were engaged and challenged by the material, and at the end of the semester, reported that the course had also been useful and informative to them as young professionals embarking upon careers in the food and agricultural sciences.
质疑现实,质疑科学:在食品和农业科学中教授学生关于认识论、伦理和经验争议
食品科学的有效应用依赖于社会约束,然而对食品科学家的培训并没有充分考虑到食品加工、包装和制备过程中存在争议的社会环境。我们最近共同教授了一门新课程(“关于食物的争论”),旨在向学生介绍当代食物争议特征的认识论、伦理和经验假设的批判性观点。通过一系列的客座讲座、阅读和讨论,学生们对数据质量、食品伦理、营养、安全、治理和整个科学事业有了不同的看法。这门课的一个主要特点是,我们不寻求捍卫任何特定的立场。相反,我们研究了不同的价值观如何导致理性的人对科学问题采取不同的看法。课程要求包括一个及格/不及格测验,一系列书面阅读回答,一个致力于案例研究的小组项目,以及积极出席和参与。学生们被这些材料所吸引和挑战,在学期结束时,他们报告说,这门课程对他们这些从事食品和农业科学职业的年轻专业人士来说也很有用,也很有见地。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信