Browsing by Subject "Public Opinion"

Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Health Related Philanthropy: The Donation of the Body (And Parts Thereof)
    (2006-09-05T14:59:22Z) Indiana University Center for Bioethics, Health Related Philanthropy Study Group
    The academic study of philanthropy has focused on private action for the public good, and on the area of various determinants of giving. Yet one very obvious act of giving in the health field has been largely neglected in philanthropic studies; the literal donation of self: blood, tissue, DNA, organs and bodies. There is a long tradition in bioethics research involving the ethical, legal and policy issues associated with donation, including factors involving the donation of bodies and their parts whether for transplantation, treatment, research, or education. This report describes the main outcomes of the Study Group, specifically the results of a national telephone survey conducted on our behalf by the IUPUI Public Opinion Lab; and the publications, scholarly presentations, and related outreach efforts in the media and elsewhere.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Public Attitudes Regarding Genetic Research: Summary of Methods and Findings
    (2009-10-09T21:31:24Z) Survey Research Center at IUPUI; Wolf, James G.
    The Indiana University School of Medicine Center for Bioethics Program in Predictive Health Ethics Research commissioned the Survey Research Center at IUPUI to conduct a random-digit-dial telephone survey of Indiana residents in an effort to determine the following: the public’s perception of its own understanding of medical and genetic research, public confidence in medical and genetic research, the likelihood of participation if asked, and the sense of public control of genetic research. The following report details the main findings from this research.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Report and recommendations: research on the fetus -- Part V
    (1975) United States. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research
    Part I of this report contains the official mandate. The nature and purpose of research involving the fetus are summarized in Part II. The alternative means for achieving the purposes of fetal research are summarized in Part III. Parts IV and V discuss the legal and ethical issues. Part VI contains views expressed at public hearings. Part VII explores fetal viability and death. Part VIII covers the report deliberations and conclusions. Part IX details the recommendations.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Report and recommendations: research on the fetus -- Part VI
    (1975) United States. National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research
    Part I of this report contains the official mandate. The nature and purpose of research involving the fetus are summarized in Part II. The alternative means for achieving the purposes of fetal research are summarized in Part III. Parts IV and V discuss the legal and ethical issues. Part VI contains views expressed at public hearings. Part VII explores fetal viability and death. Part VIII covers the report deliberations and conclusions. Part IX details the recommendations.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Teaching Awards: What Do They Award?
    (The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and it is reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article in violation of the copyright is prohibited. To contact the publisher: [LINK] http://www.ohiostatepress.org[/LINK]. [BREAK]Copyright © 2006 by the Ohio State University, 2006) Chism, Nancy Van Note
    The article examines selection criteria for teaching awards at various colleges and universities. The study finds that most teaching awards committees use qualitative measures and personal testimonies to evaluate teaching. The criteria for a good teacher is seldom explicitly stated. Materials used in the classroom and examples of student work are seldom used. The article argues that teaching awards can be best used as merely a part of the teaching evaluation system. Working with a concrete list of teaching criteria would make awards valuable tools rather than popularity contests. Revising teaching awards to adhere to a universal set of criteria, relating evidence to criteria, and defining standards would make the awards more valuable and spark conversation within the institution.