GMO products INNER/OUTER CIRCLE DISCUSSION 1. SIGN UP FOR A COUNTRY to represent, You will research information that is either for GMO products or against them. 2. BEFORE THE DISCUSSION > Research the point of view for your assigned country regarding GMO products. Become an expert on that country and GMOs. 40 points: Write AND provide Answers for 5 Blooms Taxonomy critical thinking questions – (Comprehension level – Evaluation level only) based on your country’s outlook on GMO agriculture and products. You may write out questions/answers IN INK or type your own document. BE SURE to label each question/answer with the correct Blooms Taxonomy/Critical Thinking levels for full credit. NOTE: Analysis, synthesis and evaluation level answers will be longer (1/2 page or more) than the comprehension and application answers if you create the questions/ answers correctly. 20 points: Poster/sign > Create and display a GMO foods poster (computer paper size) during your Inner circle time that shows your country’s position on GMO products: (May be computer generated.) Include a map showing GMO info for your country, Include graphics/pictures related to GMO products or companies in your country, Create a snappy Slogan/Saying, Use color Write your name on the back. 3. DISCUSSION DAY INNER CIRCLE > 20 points: Ask 2 critical thinking questions and answer 2 questions in the Inner circle. Display your poster/sign and be sure to turn it in at the end of class. OUTER CIRCLE > 20 points: Listen during the discussion and complete the Outer circle Socratic Seminar sheet. Points are deducted for side-talking in the Inner & Outer Circles.

Bloom’s Taxonomy of Critical Thinking – Create one question and answer for 2-6 Blooms question starters 1. KnowledgeWhat is __? Which one __? How did ___ happen? Where is __? When did ___ happen? Can you list three__? 2. Comprehension/Understanding the facts or information Vocabulary, notes, readings help you demonstrate comprehension Ex: Geographers use maps. Ex: A cat sleeps all day. What is the main idea of ___? How would you compare ___? How can you contrast___? How can you summarize __? Which is the best answer for ___? How would you rephrase__ ? 3.Application: Using what you know about a fact in a designated way without being prompted Ex: You know and comprehend the facts related to Human Geography and now must apply them correctly without assistance. How would you use? What examples show that __? What would result if __? What facts would you use to show__ ? What questions would you ask in an interview with__? 4.Analysis: Using multiple facts to compare/contrast and/or to identify cause/effect relationships AP classes operate at this level and up most of the time. Students are expected to already have the knowledge, comprehension, and application of the facts needed when beginning an assignment, project, exam. Ex: Analyze the causes and effects of the GAP dam project on farmers and Kurds Ex: Explain the similarities and differences between dam projects in Turkey, US and China How is __ related to __? What inference can you make from __? What is/was the motive for __? What is the relationship between __? What ideas justify __? 5.Synthesis: After analyzing facts, consider how the outcomes would be altered if the facts were altered. How would the world be forever different if something was changed? “WHAT IF….?” Ex: What if an earthquake occurs in the Anatolian Peninsula? **Your answer must extend to be “synthesis” level** (the outcome is unknown) How would you improve __? What would happen if __? What are alternatives to __? Can you predict the outcome of __? What changes would you make to solve __? 6. Evaluation: requires analysis of all the facts and theories related to a concept and then requires development of “big picture” patterns as well as judgment of the validity of those patterns. (The outcome is known) Questions must include “in terms of” to meet this standard. Ex: Evaluate the acronym ESPN as a valid characterization of human geography aspects in relation to development. Would it be better if __? Why is it better that __? How would you prove __? How would you justify __? What is the value of __? How would you prioritize __ ? Why did X choose __?

WEBSITES FOR INNER/OUTER CIRCLE ASSIGNMENT > + food-products.htmhttp://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/curiosity/topics/10-genetically-modified- food-products.htm / eat?page=4 eat?page=4

Class Debate : GMO DISCUSSION CATEGORY4321 Understanding of Topic The student clearly understood the topic in-depth and presented their information forcefully and convincingly. The student clearly undestood the topic in-depth and presented their information with ease. The student seemed to understand the main points of the topic and presented those with ease. The student did not show an adequate understanding of the topic. Use of Facts/Statistics Every major point was well supported with several relevant facts, statistics and/or examples. Every major point was adequately supported with relevant facts, statistics and/or examples. Every major point was supported with facts, statistics and/or examples, but the relevance of some was questionable. Every point was not supported. InformationAll information presented in the debate was clear, accurate and thorough. Most information presented in the debate was clear, accurate and thorough. Most information presented in the debate was clear and accurate, but was not usually thorough. Information had several inaccuracies OR was usually not clear. OrganizationAll arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight, logical fashion. Most arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight, logical fashion. All arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) but the organization was sometimes not clear or logical. Arguments were not clearly tied to an idea (premise). Respect for others during discussion All statements, body language, and responses were respectful and were in appropriate language. Statements and responses were respectful and used appropriate language, but once or twice body language was not. Most statements and responses were respectful and in appropriate language, but there was one sarcastic remark. Statements, responses and/or body language were consistently not respectful.