---

Each team member will author a memo addressed to me (some overlap in information will naturally occur). The memo will consist of three parts that:

1) Describes the scientific or technological controversy your group has selected for the Scientific Controversies Project;

2) Outlines the article you will contribute to the Science Controversies wiki;

3) Provides a brief annotated bibliography of possible sources for your article.

The following are suggestions for subjects and questions to be addressed in the parts of the memo:

Part 1: The Controversy

• The scientific or technological controversy you have chosen that will be posted to Science Controversies, a wiki
• The central question that the issue of the journal will pose and which the debate will address;

Look, for example, at Easton's Taking Sides. Note that the issues are posed as central questions. For example, Issue 2 in the text is "Should Society Restrict the Publication of Unclassified but 'Sensitive' Reearch?" Once you have selected a controversy, formulate a central question.

Part 2: Your Article and Argument

• The position you will take on the central question (yes, no) and the argumentative claim you will develop;

Assuming a group of 4 (the assignment will be modified for groups of 3 or 5), 2 group members will argue "yes' in response to the central question, 2 group members will argue "no" in response to the central question.

• The disciplinary context or perspective you will argue from to make your argument;

Let me offer an example: Let's say that the group decides that the issue of the journal will examine the controversy of a national site, Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for burying America's nuclear waste. The central question being: "Should the United States Bury Its Nuclear Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada?" Again, assuming your group is comprised of four members, two group members will answer "yes" to the question, two group members will answer "no" to the question. The basis for the "yes" or "no" answer you give will be the research you have conducted from a given context or perspective. For example, you may argue that nuclear waste should be buried at Yucca Mountain from an environmental perspective. That is, based on the evidence, Yucca Mountain is, environmentally, the safest place to centrally store nuclear waste. Or you may answer "no" to the question based on civil engineering principles.That is, nuclear waste should not be buried at Yucca Mountain because the project has violated best civil engineering practices and disaster may result.

Any context or perspective that interests you — social, political, technologcial, biological, chemical, economical, psychological, rhetorical, historical, environmental, legal — can be the basis for your position, pro or con, on the central question.

• A brief outline and summary of the article you will submit to the journal (speculate within reason — changes will undoubtedly occur).

Part 3: Annotated Bibliography

Please choose five to seven of the sources you've found so far (including at least two print sources and at least one web source — the others are your choice).

Your summary will help me evaluate the progress of your research, and help you organize the information you've found and decide what else you need. As a result, the memo needs to both present and evaluate information. Be sure to:

• Provide bibliographic information for each source;
• Summarize the scope and major points for each source — i.e., what information does each article/web page cover?;
• Explain how these sources fit into your overall project: Do they provide background information? Empirical research? Professional or personal opinions? Details on one particular subtopic?;
• Evaluate the sources — i.e., how useful are they in your work?

You can organize this section of the memo in whatever way makes sense - you do not need to include a separate paragraph on each source (though that's certainly an option). Consider:

• How do these sources relate to each other?;
• Are the sources all on different topics, or do they overlap?;
• Do the sources provide different approaches to the same topic (a research project, a personal opinion, and an overview for lay people, for instance)? Do they provide similar approaches to different topics (e.g. three separate government publications on different subtopics).

Based on those relationships, you might, for instance, have a general introduction that evaluates the sources and explains how they fit in, then several paragraphs on the sources themselves. If two sources deal with similar topics, you might cover them together. You might include the bibliographic information in a simple list, or put it with your discussion of each source.

The approach to organizing the content of the memo is yours (the three part structure above offers a guide). Look at the information you have, and decide what structure makes the information clearest and most accessible.

Requirements:

• Due: At the time scheduled to meet with groups (in March).
• A 2-4 page (500-1000 words, informal) memo.