How to come to a unique conclusion?
Watch this threadPage 1 of 1
Skip to page:
mslcrux
Badges:
4
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
I am doing some preliminary research for my EPQ before I start Y13 in September. My working title is 'Should CRISPR/Cas9 be used to genetically engineer transgenic pigs for xenotransplantation?'. My research is going alright but I'm increasingly worried that my argument/essay will be too 'linear' or simple.
I don't really have a structure for the essay yet, but I thought I could outline why xenotransplantation is a necessary option/why pigs are good models, introduce CRISPR, introduce challenges e.g. accuracy/immunological barriers, evaluate different methods for the lack of organ donors, before and conclude whether it's worth trying to proceed with xenotransplantation.
I'm worried it'll be too descriptive of the technologies and not evaluative enough. From my research so far, I think my conclusion would be that research in xenotransplantation should continue (because other methods aren't long-term/underdeveloped/inaccurate) but more research needs to be done before clinical trials (which will happen in 2-3yrs), but that seems very basic.
I don't know if I'm overthinking, but I don't know if I should change my title. I still want to do CRISPR, but maybe focus on a human disease? Thing is, I've already started and completed the first two sections of the production log, so I don't know if it's worth it...
Sorry if this doesn't make sense.
I don't really have a structure for the essay yet, but I thought I could outline why xenotransplantation is a necessary option/why pigs are good models, introduce CRISPR, introduce challenges e.g. accuracy/immunological barriers, evaluate different methods for the lack of organ donors, before and conclude whether it's worth trying to proceed with xenotransplantation.
I'm worried it'll be too descriptive of the technologies and not evaluative enough. From my research so far, I think my conclusion would be that research in xenotransplantation should continue (because other methods aren't long-term/underdeveloped/inaccurate) but more research needs to be done before clinical trials (which will happen in 2-3yrs), but that seems very basic.
I don't know if I'm overthinking, but I don't know if I should change my title. I still want to do CRISPR, but maybe focus on a human disease? Thing is, I've already started and completed the first two sections of the production log, so I don't know if it's worth it...
Sorry if this doesn't make sense.
Last edited by mslcrux; 1 year ago
0
reply
999tigger
Badges:
19
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report
#2
(Original post by mslcrux)
I am doing some preliminary research for my EPQ before I start Y13 in September. My working title is 'Should CRISPR/Cas9 be used to genetically engineer transgenic pigs for xenotransplantation?'. My research is going alright but I'm increasingly worried that my argument/essay will be too 'linear' or simple.
I don't really have a structure for the essay yet, but I thought I could outline why xenotransplantation is a necessary option/why pigs are good models, introduce CRISPR, introduce challenges e.g. accuracy/immunological barriers, evaluate different methods for the lack of organ donors, before and conclude whether it's worth trying to proceed with xenotransplantation.
I'm worried it'll be too descriptive of the technologies and not evaluative enough. From my research so far, I think my conclusion would be that research in xenotransplantation should continue (because other methods aren't long-term/underdeveloped/inaccurate) but more research needs to be done before clinical trials (which will happen in 2-3yrs), but that seems very basic.
I don't know if I'm overthinking, but I don't know if I should change my title. I still want to do CRISPR, but maybe focus on a human disease? Thing is, I've already started and completed the first two sections of the production log, so I don't know if it's worth it...
Sorry if this doesn't make sense.
I am doing some preliminary research for my EPQ before I start Y13 in September. My working title is 'Should CRISPR/Cas9 be used to genetically engineer transgenic pigs for xenotransplantation?'. My research is going alright but I'm increasingly worried that my argument/essay will be too 'linear' or simple.
I don't really have a structure for the essay yet, but I thought I could outline why xenotransplantation is a necessary option/why pigs are good models, introduce CRISPR, introduce challenges e.g. accuracy/immunological barriers, evaluate different methods for the lack of organ donors, before and conclude whether it's worth trying to proceed with xenotransplantation.
I'm worried it'll be too descriptive of the technologies and not evaluative enough. From my research so far, I think my conclusion would be that research in xenotransplantation should continue (because other methods aren't long-term/underdeveloped/inaccurate) but more research needs to be done before clinical trials (which will happen in 2-3yrs), but that seems very basic.
I don't know if I'm overthinking, but I don't know if I should change my title. I still want to do CRISPR, but maybe focus on a human disease? Thing is, I've already started and completed the first two sections of the production log, so I don't know if it's worth it...
Sorry if this doesn't make sense.
The fact you are already deciding on the conclusion now shows poor analytical skills and a closed mind.
Everything flows from your mind map to essay plan and investigation.
0
reply
aqeel27
Badges:
11
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report
#3
I did an EPQ on CRISPR as well and got an A*! Yes it is extremely important that your EPQ is evaluative and I feel like your question is great (and maybe if you want to narrow it even further) and your conclusion seems fine. Remember that most of EPQ is about the process and not the actual conclusion, don''t overthink it. So, as long as you show your thought process throughout your production log then it should be fine. You could include your worries in your log and it will show how reflective you are.
0
reply
TTSSRR101
Badges:
11
Rep:
?
You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report
#4
(Original post by mslcrux)
I am doing some preliminary research for my EPQ before I start Y13 in September. My working title is 'Should CRISPR/Cas9 be used to genetically engineer transgenic pigs for xenotransplantation?'. My research is going alright but I'm increasingly worried that my argument/essay will be too 'linear' or simple.
I don't really have a structure for the essay yet, but I thought I could outline why xenotransplantation is a necessary option/why pigs are good models, introduce CRISPR, introduce challenges e.g. accuracy/immunological barriers, evaluate different methods for the lack of organ donors, before and conclude whether it's worth trying to proceed with xenotransplantation.
I'm worried it'll be too descriptive of the technologies and not evaluative enough. From my research so far, I think my conclusion would be that research in xenotransplantation should continue (because other methods aren't long-term/underdeveloped/inaccurate) but more research needs to be done before clinical trials (which will happen in 2-3yrs), but that seems very basic.
I don't know if I'm overthinking, but I don't know if I should change my title. I still want to do CRISPR, but maybe focus on a human disease? Thing is, I've already started and completed the first two sections of the production log, so I don't know if it's worth it...
Sorry if this doesn't make sense.
I am doing some preliminary research for my EPQ before I start Y13 in September. My working title is 'Should CRISPR/Cas9 be used to genetically engineer transgenic pigs for xenotransplantation?'. My research is going alright but I'm increasingly worried that my argument/essay will be too 'linear' or simple.
I don't really have a structure for the essay yet, but I thought I could outline why xenotransplantation is a necessary option/why pigs are good models, introduce CRISPR, introduce challenges e.g. accuracy/immunological barriers, evaluate different methods for the lack of organ donors, before and conclude whether it's worth trying to proceed with xenotransplantation.
I'm worried it'll be too descriptive of the technologies and not evaluative enough. From my research so far, I think my conclusion would be that research in xenotransplantation should continue (because other methods aren't long-term/underdeveloped/inaccurate) but more research needs to be done before clinical trials (which will happen in 2-3yrs), but that seems very basic.
I don't know if I'm overthinking, but I don't know if I should change my title. I still want to do CRISPR, but maybe focus on a human disease? Thing is, I've already started and completed the first two sections of the production log, so I don't know if it's worth it...
Sorry if this doesn't make sense.
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
Back
to top
to top