Below entails a cluster map, which is essentially a mind map, that organizes the two major parties of the Gene Sequencing Debate as well as gives a more cohesive image of the two belligerent's policies and outlets to express said policies; as well as, their basic beliefs on the issue at hand.
 |
| Lewis, Brandon. Screenshot 9/10/2015 |
I organized my map based on four main topics, and various subtopics:
- Who are the Main Belligerents in the Debate- Two of the Most Powerful/Influential.
- Who are There more Famous Speakers- Giving a Quote for the More Recent Speaker.
- Of the two Main Parties, what are the mutually agreed upon beliefs on Gene Mapping.
- Within Each Group: How does their Media portray Genome Sequencing.
My main argument for this debate, is to favor the use and implementation of gene sequencing technology and its associated genetic engineering technologies within the healthcare environment for the betterment of diagnostic healthcare and for a more logical approach towards the treatment of mental or physical disabilities contributed by genetic mutations/errors. In my research, I have found substantial evidence from medical professionals and geneticists who view the technology as vital for future healthcare; as well as, found counter arguments in order to discuss or clarify the ethics being such tech. The cluster will also allude to the broad spectrum of argumentation on this issue, as some view the technology as a means for other more controversial medical treatments- abortions, anesthetization- or another example of the lack of morality within science.
Reflection:
After reviewing the posts made by Morgan and Alyssa, I found that cluster maps can really make an issue readable and comprehensible. I was very impressed in the way both organized their debate using colors and brief points. I too tried to keep each point, each position, each major event separate so that there would be little confusion when attempting to understand my discipline's current debate. Alyssa used more color and imagery in order to keep the reader's attention; while Morgan used clearly described outlines to prevent a mixing of information. I will use both of these qualities in any future cluster maps.
Reflection:
After reviewing the posts made by Morgan and Alyssa, I found that cluster maps can really make an issue readable and comprehensible. I was very impressed in the way both organized their debate using colors and brief points. I too tried to keep each point, each position, each major event separate so that there would be little confusion when attempting to understand my discipline's current debate. Alyssa used more color and imagery in order to keep the reader's attention; while Morgan used clearly described outlines to prevent a mixing of information. I will use both of these qualities in any future cluster maps.
I really enjoyed looking at your cluster. It is very thorough, and you sound very prepared for your QRG. I personally struggled in making so many different branches in my cluster, as my topic is not as specific as some of our classmates. You seem very well-versed in your topic.
ReplyDeleteHey Brandon,
ReplyDeleteI really, really liked the layout and structure of your cluster map. Honestly I thought its four-sectioned structure lent itself perfectly to the way your controversy is built, with the four major views on the topic each being clearly represented in your map. Well done sir. I also really admired how you had clear labels for where different statements came from in the media. Excellent job on that too.
I also used coggle and thought it was incredibly useful, but you took a different approach to it and it was interesting to look at. My map had more paragraph-like branches that flowed with arguments, but your structure made more sense to me, with viewpoints, persons, and sources all neatly organized.
Really great job, thanks for letting me look at the map!
-Mika