Why iGEMers Engage in Education

In iGEM, a synthetic biology competition, the most important tasks for iGEMers should be the experimental validation and societal implementation of their products. So, why do iGEMers engage in education activities, which at first glance seem unrelated to the validation and implementation of their products?
"Because engaging in education tends to be highly evaluated by the judges."
"It somehow feels like promoting synthetic biology is beneficial for iGEMers."
"We want to encourage the junior high and high school students to join our team eventually through our education activities."
Many teams seemingly focus excessively on the frequency, scale, and uniqueness of their education activities for reasons like the ones above without knowing if they truly lead to fruitful education practice. We pose a question: Is this approach really appropriate in the context of a synthetic biology project?

To answer why iGEMers engage in educational practice and why iGEM HQ places importance on it, UTokyo 2024 has delved into the theoretical reasons behind carrying out educational activities. While education practice may seem unrelated to the core goals of an iGEM competition project, by thoroughly exploring the reasons for its implementation, the educational activities we iGEMers should be conducting beyond mere educational outreach become clear.

Specifically, by re-examining the fundamental nature of Education and constructing practical methodologies grounded on this understanding, we are confident that we can establish effective practices both for communication with the general public, the main target of iGEM education activities and for the implementation and understanding of our products.

Education for Social Implementation

With the emergence of advanced scientific technologies and their application in society, the general public should trust scientists in knowledge and ethics. However, even in Japan, where we live, trust in scientists and technology has often been eroded by issues such as the release of ALPS-treated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant and controversies over the harmful side effects of HPV and COVID-19 vaccines. As a result, there is often a divide between society and science.

Under such circumstances, it is crucial to bridge this gap and build a foundation of trust with the public to maximize the potential of scientific technologies and contribute to societal progress.

Our final goal is to develop a glaucoma detection device usable in households. In order for the general public to adopt our product, their understanding and trust in not only the product itself but also in the synthetic biology behind it is crucial. To achieve this, we aim to help the public understand our product, the synthetic biology, and the biotechnology underlying it through our education activities, thereby bridging the gap between science and society.

Education for Public Involvement

To bridge the gap between products and society, it is insufficient to bring the public closer to the product without thinking. We should get civil people's point of view and improve the product design to meet their needs.

Our product cannot exist without the general public. The voices of the general public, as end users, can become a powerful driving force in improving the product. However, to properly elicit these voices, we must perform educational activities, empowering the general public by helping them understand the product and the underlying fields such as synthetic biology and biotechnology. These allow them to stand on the same foundational understanding as we do. By conducting educational activities as a means of advanced public participation in project governance, we can draw out more effective product improvement ideas from the general public, who are the future users of POIROT.

Connecting Society and Projects through Education

Our educational activities focused on two main objectives: increasing public understanding of the product and facilitating advanced public participation in project governance.

Considerations on Bidirectional Communication

The Importance of Bidirectionality in Science Communication

Models on the Recipients of Information - Deficit Model and Contextual Model

A common explanation for the emergence of skeptical the general public towards science and technology is the assumption that "the general public lack sufficient knowledge or understanding of science." This assumption forms the basis of the so-called "deficit model." However, this model has been the subject of criticism for a long time.

For example, a study conducted by Bucchi and Neresini in 2000 and 2001, which surveyed 2,039 Italians, found not only no correlation between "exposure to a large amount of information" and "having accurate knowledge," but also no correlation between "having accurate knowledge" and "holding a positive attitude towards genetically modified foods and biotechnology"¹. This suggests that just providing knowledge does not necessarily change the general public' attitudes toward science and technology, calling into question the very premise of the deficit model.

This is where the "contextual model" comes into focus. The contextual model takes into account the "external factors" such as the moral, political, and religious beliefs, culture, history, and personal experiences of individuals, and models the way they receive information without ignoring these factors.

The advantage of the contextual model is that, by assuming that the general public understand science and technology based on their external factors, it enables more fertile Human Practices and educational activities. Rather than imposing scientific knowledge unilaterally, it becomes possible to engage with the general public' understanding and attitudes through dialogue that respects their position and values. Moreover, the general public can provide feedback to the project from their own context.

By adopting the contextual model, we aimed to foster a bidirectional practice that goes beyond merely compensating for a lack of knowledge, ultimately cultivating a healthier relationship with science and technology.

The Importance of Bidirectional Communication for Social Implementation

To gain a widespread understanding of synthetic biology and biotechnology, we must accurately grasp the context of concerns and anxieties among the general public regarding these fields. Based on this understanding, we must engage in meaningful exchanges of perspectives and reposition synthetic biology within that context, enableing its re-interpretation.

At this point, one-way communication based on the deficit model will fail to investigate the causes of distrust in synthetic biology or to re-establish its place adapted to public perception. Dialogue and communication with the public are essential in understanding the contextual concerns of the general public and aligning our mutual understanding. Conducting educational activities grounded on bidirectional communication leads to a broader dissemination of understanding about synthetic biology and our product.

The Importance of Bidirectional Communication for Public Involvement

In science and technology, there are often instances where the intuitive understanding or experiential knowledge proves more accurate.
For example, while nuclear scientists may understand and explain that radioactive cesium can be removed from sheep faster on valley grasslands than on highlands, sheep farmers know how grazing only in valleys can negatively impact sheep breeding. The latter is an experiential fact that nuclear scientists might not be aware of ².

As the above example, engaging in bidirectional communication with the general public who are the end users of our product can provide opportunities to identify potential risks associated with the product.

The Comparison of Education and Integrated Human Practices in iGEM

In the iGEM Competition, two types of activities promote the societal implementation of a project through engagement with society: Education and Integrated Human Practices. UTokyo 2024 reconsidered the boundaries between Education and Integrated Human Practices to attain successful bidirectional communication in iGEM.

Integrated Human Practices

In iGEM, Integrated Human Practices refers to integrating feedback from society, stakeholders, and experts to improve the project. In this process, iGEMers modify their project to better suit societal implementation. We define Integrated Human Practices as the movement to change the project through engagement with society.

Education

On the other hand, Education aims to provide a foundational understanding of biology and biotechnology, so that the public can offer informed feedback on our project. Additionally, it seeks to make the project more socially acceptable through "public information campaigns." Although educational activities may involve a bit of bidirectional communication when viewed as part of Integrated Human Practices, Education in isolation is just another one-way activity. We define Education as the movement to change the public's understanding through engagement with society.

The Practice of Education Combined with Integrated Human Practices

UTokyo 2024 believes that true bi-directionality cannot be achieved until Integrated Human Practices and Education are combined.

Education activities should not exist in isolation. Without a specific project, the subject they give feedback is obscure and thus public involvement is difficult to achieve, so education activities amount to mere enlightenment, not bi-directional communication. However, combined with Integrated Human Practices, which provides a foundation for public involvement in the project, the one-way education can be transformed into a bidirectional approach, becoming a powerful tool for building trust. Furthermore, that combination enables more people to contribute to and participate in synthetic biology projects through our Education efforts.

For this reason, practices such as publishing articles about iGEM or synthetic biology, or conducting outreach activities without feedback from the general public, are not considered effective according to our concept of Education. Our practice is complete when we receive feedback from the audience on our project.

Pursuing Effective Practices

Framework for This Year's Activities

Section 1: Classification of Target Audiences

It is impossible to conduct the same educational activities with the same materials for every group of audiences indiscriminately. Therefore, we first classified our audiences based on

their level of biological knowledge
their age group.

Naturally, education activities take place at a group level rather than an individual level. Thus, while identifying the dominant group within a diverse audience, it is crucial to implement classifications including the entire group.

Section 2: Development of Methods and Educational Materials

Based on the classification conducted in Section 1 and the feedback from our previous activities, we have developed appropriate methods and materials as outlined below.

Level of Biological Knowledge

Presenting advanced synthetic biology concepts to an audience with no background in biology will not lead to understanding. Therefore, it is necessary to create materials that match the audience's level of biological knowledge to dispel distrust, foster interest and curiosity, and improve their understanding qualitatively.
For groups with advanced biological knowledge, the focus will be on enhancing their understanding and effectively communicating the benefits and risks of synthetic biology. For those with less knowledge, the emphasis will be on identifying the sources of intuitive fear, distrust, and a feeling of rejection, and dispelling these through bidirectional dialogue. Additionally, materials will be designed to foster interest in synthetic biology by contextualizing it within everyday life.

Age Group

Is it meaningful to create long lecture materials for kindergarteners or lower elementary school students? Or to make a picture book for university students? Most likely, the former will lose focus, and the latter will find the content patronizing and lose interest. As such, the approach to educational materials must take not only biological knowledge but also age groups into account.

Development of Methodologies

To properly dispel public distrust towards synthetic biology and biotechnology, which underpin our product, and to effectively elicit concerns and suggestions from the public useful to product improvement, it is essential to implement educational activities using appropriate methodologies. Various methodologies, ranging from simple to complex, have been developed to suit the specific objectives of each Education activity.

Section 3: Implementation

Flow of Implementation

The flow of implementation is constructed based on the target audience and methodology for each session, but generally, it consists of the following three stages:

First, we delve into the audience's perceptions and understanding of synthetic biology. This is evaluated through pre-event surveys, and in some cases, we also did post-it brainstorming with them to facilitate dialogue and ask about their impressions and understanding.
Next, we conduct the Education program using the materials and methodologies developed in the previous sections. This typically includes lectures, games, hands-on learning experiences, and discussions.
Finally, we conduct a post-event survey. This survey plays an important role in providing feedback for improving future education events and materials. It also serves as part of Human Practices by gathering data on the public's acceptance of synthetic biology, ethical perspectives, and suggestions for project improvements.

Through this process, we aim to improve the quality of education and deepen our understanding of the impact synthetic biology has on society.

Key Considerations During Implementation

For younger audiences, such as elementary school children, or groups that do not inherently distrust science and technology, it is important to pursue an approach that promotes interest and curiosity by focusing on "fun." Additionally, attention should be paid to the following points:

High-context nature of Japanese language and culture: It is essential to be mindful of articulating any underlying information or values that might be assumed.
Avoiding claims of the absolute nature of science and technology: If science is perceived as absolute or coercive, it could lead to backlash or create the impression of a hierarchical relationship between scientists and the general public. It is crucial to sincerely explain the limitations of science and technology as well.
Prioritizing inclusivity and listening to diverse voices: Since Education events are combined with Integrated Human Practices (IHP), it is essential to gather input from as many different age groups, genders, and backgrounds as possible, especially given the diversity of the general public who will be the end users of the products.
Use of technical terms: Using the same specialized terminology that iGEMers are accustomed to could alienate the audience during Education events. It is important to adjust the language to simpler terms that are appropriate for each target group.
Creating a welcoming atmosphere: In Japan, people often feel reluctant to ask questions or express their opinions. It is important for us, as iGEMers, to create an environment where people feel comfortable asking questions. Additionally, it is necessary to make the complex knowledge of synthetic biology feel more accessible and relatable.

Section 4: Evaluation and Feedback of Practices

The evaluation criteria for our practices are:

Whether distrust in synthetic biology has been alleviated and interest has been promoted.
Whether synthetic biology has been positioned in a way that makes it feel more relatable in the context of daily life.

These criteria were assessed through post-event surveys. Additionally, any episodes or opinions regarding the distrust of synthetic biology shared during dialogue were processed as data and incorporated into the materials for future sessions. By analyzing and documenting all sessions, we created materials that are more useful and easily restructured for other teams, too.

This Year's Practices

Tips: Documenting for the Wiki

The records of Education events serve as the equivalent of lab notebooks in Wet Lab experiments. Especially when Education and IHP are conducted together, there is a risk that the records for Education and IHP may become fragmented. To prevent this, UTokyo 2024's wiki documents all records obtained through the events in the Education section, while any project modifications based on those records and feedback from the general public regarding those changes are recorded in the IHP section.

May Festival

May Festival is an annual school festival in the University of Tokyo. It is not limited to the university; more than 100 thousand diverse people come to the university.
To gain opinions of a wide range of people, and to make use of the feedback to classify attendants in our education practice onwards, we decided to set up our booth in May Festival.

Target

From small children to the elderly. While we assumed the primary audience would be university students, junior high and high school students, and their parents, we kept in mind that a broad range of ages and varying levels of biological knowledge would attend.

Development of Methodologies and Education Materials

Methodology Development

The May Festival attracts a wide range of people from diverse backgrounds. Among them, some may harbor distrust towards synthetic biology and biotechnology. Alleviating this distrust is more challenging than fostering interest and requires a strategic approach. Therefore, we focused on the daily contexts of ordinary citizens and developed a "narrative approach" based on understanding the background of their distrust of synthetic biology and biotechnology, aiming to reconstruct science from different perspectives.

The narrative approach is a dialogical method developed in clinical psychology, aimed at resolving imbalances in knowledge and power between experts and those seeking consultation. By applying this approach, we sought to bridge the "knowledge gap" between iGEMers, who are experts in synthetic biology, and ordinary citizens. Through equal dialogue, we developed and implemented an educational approach that helps alleviate public distrust and allows them to discover the enjoyment and value of synthetic biology from a new perspective.

Step 1: Listening to the Concerns of the Audience

First, we listen to the anxieties and concerns that the public holds regarding synthetic biology and biotechnology. At this stage, we do not refute their concerns but focus on understanding how external factors or personal experiences have shaped their current views. The key is to sympathize with their stories and respect their perspectives.

Step 2: Identifying the Causes of Distrust

Through dialogue, we explore the specific causes behind their anxieties. By asking questions, we highlight the cultural, social, and personal experiences that underlie their concerns. This process not only makes the subsequent scientific experience more effective but also helps participants understand the basis of their own concerns.

Step 3: Experiencing Scientific Facts and Deepening Understanding

Next, we provide participants with hands-on experiences using educational materials that demonstrate the basic concepts and applications of synthetic biology. The key here is not to simply impart knowledge but to create opportunities for participants to make their own discoveries. Through concrete experiments and experiences, they are expected to gain new perspectives that transcend their previous anxieties or misunderstandings.

Step 4: Integrating New Perspectives into Daily Life

Based on their newfound understanding of synthetic biology, participants are encouraged to consider how they can apply this knowledge in their everyday lives. This helps them reframe their initial perceptions and adopt a more positive view of synthetic biology. Additionally, by offering opportunities for collaboration between experts and citizens, we aim to empower citizens to make informed decisions using scientific knowledge.

Development of Educational Materials

We anticipated that visitors to the May Festival would have varying levels of biological knowledge. For those with less knowledge, it was important for them to intuitively grasp what "synthetic biology" is. Our goal was for visitors to positively incorporate synthetic biology into their daily contexts.

To this end, we improved the rules of the card game developed by UTokyo 2023, creating a board game called "I LOVE GMO♡", where players predict and acquire the best-equipped microorganisms by giving them abilities. This game not only facilitates intuitive understanding of synthetic biology but also serves as a tool for studying specific genes and proteins. The detailed rules are outlined in the PDF document below

For those with a higher level of knowledge, we anticipated questions such as "How far can we control genes?" or "Can we really manipulate genes?" To address these advanced questions and dispel negative images of synthetic biology, we took an approach that fosters deeper understanding.

We presented posters summarizing past iGEM projects to explain how genes are manipulated and their potential applications. Understanding these details not only reduces distrust of synthetic biology but also fosters interest.

We also used an opinion board to facilitate discussions about synthetic biology, using sticky notes for participants to express their thoughts, aligning with steps 1 and 2 of the methodology. Additionally, we conducted a survey board asking, "What kind of organisms would you like to create using synthetic biology?" This approach aimed to reposition synthetic biology as a familiar concept within daily contexts.

The sticky notes used on the opinion board were numbered to correspond with an entry survey conducted at the event's entrance, ensuring that information could be correlated without identifying individuals.

Feedback

The survey we used is available here:

Approximately 500 people visited our booth during the event, and we are grateful to everyone who participated.
The results of the pre-event survey on distrust of gene editing are as follows:

Additionally, about GMOs were as follows:

These results suggest that while a certain number of people do not harbor strong distrust towards genetic modification itself, there is notable resistance when it comes to commercial products.

Looking at the data by age group, we observed that older participants tend to have stronger distrust towards synthetic biology and more negative views on products involving gene-editing technologies.

During discussions on the opinion board, participants debated the dangers of gene-editing technologies, with many people, not just iGEMers, responding to questions posed by others via sticky notes. This seemed to function as a forum for scientific debate.

Key discussion topics included:

How do we prevent these technologies from leaking into the environment? What about legal issues?
What is the ethical limit of genetic research? If we consider gene editing unethical, is it ethical to knowingly have a child with disabilities?
What is the probability of successfully editing the targeted gene?

Some opinions collected on the opinion board were as follows:

"I think it's a dream-like technology, but honestly, it seems a bit dangerous."
"Many people seem to have an unfounded aversion, like 'it's scary' or 'it seems dangerous.'"
"I see the great potential for substance production and mediation, but I'm also scared because we don't know what kind of organisms might be created through gene editing."
"As long as it's not misused by bad actors, I think it's fine."
"It feels like a counterintuitive practice."
"No field of study, including chemistry and physics, is immune to misuse, but that doesn't mean we should stop researching."
"I'm concerned about the risk of biological weapons."
"While it poses risks, the enormous potential requires proper guidelines and regulation."
"It's a bit sad to change the natural form of organisms."

These comments highlight the public's concerns about altering the natural form of organisms and the potential for the creation of biological weapons. However, we also received positive feedback, which is documented in the following pdf.

We also conducted a post-event survey to ask whether participants felt synthetic biology was becoming familiar to them, whether they thought it would spread in the future, and whether they had developed an interest in the field. The results are as follows:

There was some confusion in the responses, likely due to inconsistencies in the placement of positive and negative answer options across the survey questions. This inconsistency may have led to conflicting responses from participants, which we identified as an issue for future surveys. However, we believe that many people showed interest in synthetic biology, marking this education event as a success.

Feedback on the project included:

"It would be more appealing if there were slides or explanation booths to explain synthetic biology in a way that non-experts could understand."
"It was interesting, and I'd like to know more simplified explanations."
"The game was fun and made the subject feel more relatable. If the game were for sale, I'd buy it."
"The game was very interesting. Like a knife, it all depends on how it's used—keep up the good work!"
"Even if something is logically safe, people will still feel anxious. Maybe if it affected things outside the body, unlike injections, people would be less worried."
"It's shocking to know that bacteria smarter than me exist."
"It was a fascinating project that's hard to imagine. I became more interested in iGEM. The card game was fun and helped me grasp concepts like cells and proteins. Thank you for today."

It's clear that the decision to set up the card game, keeping in mind that children would attend, was a major success.

The results from the surveys are summarized in the following spreadsheet:

Milestone 1

Education Survey Lessons

Based on the failures in the survey process, we decided to focus on the following for future events:

Align positive and negative options consistently across all questions.
Use even-numbered scales for surveys to reduce the tendency for participants to choose the middle option.
Focus questions more narrowly to improve the quality of responses.

Conducting an Awareness Survey

To assess the public's awareness of glaucoma, we conducted an awareness survey using Google Forms starting from the May Festival. Although this survey was not directly related to education, it has since significantly influenced our educational policy. For detailed results, please refer to Brochure and Questionnaire.

Feedback from the May Festival

Many attendees showed interest in our past projects and synthetic biology itself, with some asking for more detailed explanations. However, we also received feedback that some explanations were difficult to understand, prompting us to redesign our next educational event accordingly.

Next, we planned an Education event at the online community "Scientia Meetup," where science enthusiasts gather, aiming to gain new perspectives on the potential risks and areas for improvement in our projects by carefully explaining synthetic biology and our past projects.

Scientia Meetup

Scientia Meetup is a group of university students and technical college students who aim to promote interactions between the fields of science and engineering and are actively engaged in seminar presentations and other activities. Based on the feedback we received at the May Festival, we participated in Scientia Meetup's Lighting Talk to conduct an education session on synthetic biology with the aim of having university and technical college students interested in science learn about synthetic biology while having fun, and to get feedback on our project.

Target

University and technical college students who love science. Since they are not necessarily good at biology, we carefully explained the basics of biology while also including more advanced topics.

Development of Methodologies and Education Materials

Methodology development

In Scientia Meetup, we attempted to provide an understanding of biology, including synthetic biology and biotechnology, by lecturing on more advanced synthetic biology. This was intended to elicit appropriate insight into the issues, concerns, and areas for improvement in our project for effective public participation.
On the other hand, we were concerned that participants would become bored or left out of the lecture if the iGEMer simply gave a lecture or presentation, so we created a new interactive methodology, a cyclical active learning methodology.

Step 1: Shift in image and consciousness based on questionnaire and dialogue

Step 1 aims to clarify the image participants have of biotechnology and motivate them to learn.
A discussion using a questionnaire is used to share and discuss preconceptions and to deepen involvement in the event. If there are any negative comments at this time, the methodology used during the May Festival can be used to alleviate the participant's distrust.

Step 2: Lecture on theory of gene circuit design

Next, we give a lecture on genetic circuit design. The purpose of this lecture is for participants to acquire basic knowledge of the synthetic biology and biotechnology behind the project, and to understand the process of genetic circuit design.

Practice based on the gene circuit lecture

In Step 3, based on the content of the lecture in Step 2, participants actually assemble a genetic circuit according to a theme, with the aim of encouraging creative thinking through trial and error. The iGEMer will provide the theme and facilitate the discussion, allowing the participants to experience what iGEMers usually do.

Step 4: Ask feedback on the project

Finally, in Step 4, we ask the participants to critically review our project based on their previous learning and experiences. This step is an interactive time in which the participants not only reflect on what they have learned so far and make knowledge about synthetic biology more established, but we also learn the opinions from the perspectives of participants.

Development of Education materials

We were able to get an hour and a half for the day of the Education event. We prepared the teaching materials with the intention of providing 15-30 minutes to delve into the questionnaire, 45 minutes for lecture time, and 15-30 minutes for gene circuit design and feedback.
The survey asked the questions "Do you have any concerns about biotechnology?" and "Do you think there are advantages to biotechnology and products that use it compared to other technologies?".
The slides used in the lecture are attached below.

Feedback

Preliminary survey results were as follows.

On the other hand, a post-event survey after this Education event was as follows.

Because some people responded only to the pre-survey, and because we were unable to tie the responses to the pre- and post-surveys, we could not understand the extent to which the concerns were actually addressed.

On the other hand, the following opinions were collected:

"I've heard a lot about iGEM, but I didn't know what it meant to design a gene circuit, so it was nice to get an overview."
"The part about making circuits was interesting because it was like a puzzle. I thought it would be even more interesting when I could actually make it."
"I thought it was a good project to be able to test for glaucoma, which affects so many people, at home in a noninvasive way. It was amazing that the fmol order could be amplified at a constant (and relatively low) temperature, but I felt that the use of expensive polymerase might be a barrier to affordable testing."
"I felt it was unfortunate that the number of participants was so small, given the richness of the content."

Therefore, we thought that it might be effective to conduct the gene circuit design method as Education.
The following opinions were also collected:

"I was wondering if it would be better to pre-share the material, except for the hints/answers, since I wanted to go back to the previous material in the middle of the exercises part, especially if you are going to use it elsewhere (like in an Education event at a high school, etc.)."
"I was very happy that they took the time to do the exercises. I thought it could be improved to show both the question text and hints at the same time, since the question text is hidden while the hints are being shown."

These opinions provided an opportunity to improve the education materials for the next Education event.
The full survey is included below:

Milestone 2

Regarding gene circuit design

We felt the benefits of interactive learning through "gene circuit design" through the Education at Scientia Meetup, and wondered if we could develop this into Education for junior high and high school students by creating more easy-to-understand materials. For the next example of how the gene circuit design method was handled in an Education event, please see Yotsuba Gakuen Secondary School.

Regarding the Glaucoma Awareness Survey Questionnaire

With regard to the glaucoma awareness survey questionnaire that has been conducted since the May Festival, the results of the survey of this phase showed that although the majority of people have heard of glaucoma, more than half of the people do not know that glaucoma is the leading cause of blindness due to illness in Japan. Based on these results, we decided that in order to make our Education event more meaningful, we needed to spread awareness not only about the synthetic biology behind our project, but also about glaucoma, which is our target.
For final survey results, please see the Brochure and Questionnaire page.

Dialogue with GFN

We also had a dialogue with GFN ³, a glaucoma patient association, for the project Human Practices. For a record of Human Practices, please refer to the Human Practices page. In our conversations with the GFN people, they told us that glaucoma is not easily detected without going to an eye doctor for an examination anyway, and about the need for early diagnosis and early treatment. People who were diagnosed with glaucoma after the symptoms had progressed said that early diagnosis of glaucoma and educational activities are quite important. As for public awareness activities, the Glaucoma Society's Light Up Green campaign ⁴ was mentioned. We were able to recognize the importance of continuing such events and awareness campaigns in addition to starting treatment before it is too late. They also talked about the fact that many people are pessimistic about having glaucoma. They said that many people panic when they do a Google search and see a picture of a discolored eye, for example, even though there are not that many people who really lose their vision if it is detected early and treated appropriately.

Through the glaucoma awareness survey and dialogue with GFN, we decided to incorporate into our subsequent Education activities the importance of early detection of glaucoma and the fact that even if glaucoma does occur, early detection and appropriate treatment can control the progression of symptoms and the likelihood of blindness becomes low.

N High School Research Club

The N High School research club is a community that supports junior high and high school students aspiring to engage in academic research. One of the members of UTokyo is a graduate of the N High School research club, and we are grateful to have been given the opportunity to introduce this year's project during the summer lodging of the N High School research club.

Target

Initially, we mainly focused on junior high and high school students from the N High School research club. However, since there were adults serving as mentors, we expanded our target audience to include adults as well.

Development of Methodologies and Education Materials

Methodology development

During the presentation time we received at the summer lodging of the N High School research club, while other junior high and high school students were doing poster presentations, we used slides and invited participants to visit our booth. As a result, the participants had limited time, so we aimed to facilitate quick understanding and encourage active engagement from them.

First, regarding the lecture, we used slide presentation to cover the scientific and social aspects of the project, similar to a poster presentation. We aimed to make it engaging for junior high and high school students aspiring to academic research, striving to convey the project's background and the biological intrigue behind it in a short amount of time.

Additionally, we conducted a survey before and after the event, along with an idea board that focused on project improvements using sticky notes. By using this idea board, we aimed to encourage interactive thinking about the project, fostering two-way engagement.

Development of Education materials

Based on the aforementioned methodology, we focused on making slides that would convey the project's background and the biological intrigue behind it as effectively as possible within a short timeframe. Below, we have attached the slides that we actually used.

We also conducted an idea board with the topic, "What do you expect from the glaucoma detection device?" This idea board not only encourages two-way engagement but also fosters a deeper understanding of our project.

Feedback

The questionnaires used are described below:

The results of the preliminary survey were as follows.

While many people were familiar with genetic modification, as for the distrust, the number of respondents who chose the fourth level was about the same as those who chose the first level of "not at all," indicating that many people have a feeling of "I can't say either way, but I am a little concerned."

The results of the post-survey were as follows.

All of the participants chose the third or fourth levels when asked about their level of understanding of synthetic biology and familiarity with it. Despite the short time we spent with the students, it seems that our Education program was effective.
In addition, we received feedback on our project, such as

"I want the device to have the ability to tell the severity of the disease."
"I thought it would be good to realize a price range where people would be willing to check for glaucoma just in case, and to spread awareness among the general public."
"I would like this detection device to be a design that clearly shows the coloring conditions, since that of the flu detection device is opposite."
"I think it will be good to establish a method to keep the temperature at 37°C."

The full survey is below.

Milestone 3

Dialogue with Dr. Yoshida

In order to improve our Education activities, we talked to Associate Professor Rui Yoshida of the Institute for Innovation in International Engineering Education affiliated with the School of Engineering at the University of Tokyo.
We spoke with Dr. Yoshida for the purpose of creating a questionnaire. Dr. Yoshida told us that the current version is sufficient for our purpose. He advised us that if we are going to talk about the risks associated with genetic modification, we should also make sure to mention safety and specific risks.
We were also taught that it is important to focus on the necessary elements. Since there are many first-time students in the discussion, we were taught that if you want to convey the fun of the technology, you need to explain the technology, but otherwise, it is important to answer questions briefly without explaining the details of technical matters if there are any. He also said that we need to reflect on whether we were allocating time according to our objectives based on this.
Regarding the post-survey, he also said that free-response statements should be read carefully and used only for reflection, both quantitative and qualitative. He said that if those questionnaires are not involved in the dissertation process, you can only use it to improve your activities in this case.

As for discussion, he said it is important to have the participants think by themselves once and then share their opinions in pairs or groups. Moreover, he said that it is even better if the group has a sense of collaboration, and that it is important to have a goal, such as having the group come up with a final opinion.
Finally, it was pointed out that glaucoma affects older people and may not be familiar or interesting to high school students.

Improving Education Based on Dialogue

Through dialogue with Dr. Yoshida, we established the following basic policies.

For junior and senior high school and university students, education will be provided to explain not only the risks of glaucoma but also the technical aspects of the disease through the gene circuit design method, in order to increase their interest in glaucoma, which they may not be familiar with.
For adults, we will focus on the necessary information without going into too much detail about the technical aspects.
For the discussion,we will make the group have a goal such as presenting the final result as a group, so that the group will have a sense of collaboration.

Subsequent Education events were conducted with the above points in mind.

Yotsuba Gakuen Secondary School

Having felt the benefits of interactive learning through "gene circuit design" at the Education event at Scientia Meetup, we wanted to make this into a more developed education material. We therefore organized an Education event at the science club of Yotsuba Gakuen Secondary School, the alma mater of one of our iGEM UTokyo members.

Target

Junior high and high school students interested in science. Many students have yet to choose the subjects they will take in high school science, so we assumed that their level of knowledge about biology was not that high.

Development of Methodologies and Education Materials

Methodology development

Basically, we adopted a methodology based on the cyclical active learning used in the Scientia Meetup. One major change was that we did not delve into the questionnaire in Step 1, but restricted the subject to ophthalmic diseases in Step 3, "Practice based on the gene circuit lecture". This was based on the idea that by asking junior high and high school students, who are the general public, to think about gene circuits related to ophthalmic diseases, ideas for gene circuits that reflect perspectives on the eye that we have overlooked in the detection of glaucoma might be generated. The reason why we did not choose "glaucoma" as the topic of the discussion was based on our concern that a narrow topic would not stimulate discussion and was meant to encourage a broader discussion. In addition, based on the points raised by Dr. Yoshida, we decided to have a student representative present at the final discussion.

Development of Education materials

We were able to get two hours of Education event time on the day of the event. Based on the various feedback we had received, we created a new set of lecture slides. The slides used are included below.

Feedback

Quite a lively discussion ensued during the event, and opinions like below came out.

"I want to solve hay fever based on my experience of suffering from itchy eyes."
"I want to prevent my contacts from sticking to my eyes."
"I want to solve dry eyes."

member facilitated or assisted in the discussion, and some participants presented ideas even considering safety aspects.

A post-survey was taken via Google Forms with the following results:

While the results on the level of understanding of synthetic biology were quite good, there were a few who did not feel so familiar with the subject. This may be due to the need to explain more familiar applications during Education. We got opinions like:

"I think it's important not to turn away from negative opinions, but to refute them with solid evidence."
"It would be nice to get some acknowledgement from doctors and others that it is safe for people."
"It would be good to use the media to inform people about safety and provide them with opportunities to learn about the technology."
"It would be good to disseminate information on the benefits and disadvantages of implementation so that there are no errors in the information, and if we implement the product for sale, it would be good to make it as low-priced and accessible as possible."
"It would be nice to explain what the safety concerns are and how safe they are."

Feedback on the project as a whole was

"I enjoyed the group discussions very much. There was a lot to think about, but I think we came to a good conclusion thanks to the support of the seniors and their ideas on how to approach the problem."
"I was very excited about synthetic biology, a field I had never heard of before. I found it interesting that it is similar to programming in that it involves a specific response to a specific reaction."
"I enjoyed learning about synthetic biology through the activity of creating our own gene circuits."
"I would have liked more time for discussion if possible."

These comments indicate that the gene circuit design method is effective for interactive learning.
The full survey is as follows.

Milestone 4

Regarding SNS operations

In the Education survey at Yotsuba Gakuen, one participant left the opinion that "it is important to use the media to inform people about safety and provide them with opportunities to learn about the technology."
Believing that it is important in today's Internet society to let people know about our activities through social networking services, we decided to become more active on X (formerly Twitter) than we had been in the past year.
We also decided to post the glaucoma awareness survey questionnaire on X to solicit further opinions.

Our X account can be found at:

In addition, this year we opened an Instagram account to reach a wider audience.

Genki Juku

The results of the May Festival survey showed that the older people get, the greater their distrust of synthetic biology and the more negative their opinions of products using genetic modification techniques.

We thought that education not only for junior high school, high school, and university students, but also for elderly people and adults would provide more meaningful feedback for future activities. We decided to hold an Education session at Genki Juku, a community for elderly people.

Target

Elderly people and staff members at Genki Juku. Some of the staff members were relatively young, in their 20s or so.
Concerning the level of knowledge of biology, we assumed that the participants basically did not have that much knowledge of advanced molecular biology.
Many of the participants had farming experience and seemed to be interested in agricultural and environmental issues. The staff was enthusiastic enough to hold regular study sessions, and they seemed to be learning about making fertilizer from food scraps and recycling nursing diapers.

Development of Methodologies and Education Materials

Methodology development

The Education event at the Genki Juku was divided into two parts.
The first part included an explanation / lecture on iGEM, synthetic biology, and biotechnology, and a discussion that leads to a positive image while eliciting fears and concerns with a methodology derived from the narrative approach used at the May Festival, while investigating the causes in detail.
In addition, it was identified in advance that many of the participants were interested in agriculture and environmental issues. Therefore, we were keenly aware of the need to design a learning model that aims to gradually increase knowledge to a practical level while promoting mutual understanding when people of different knowledge levels and job functions face one common issue.

Based on the above discussion, we assembled a methodology in the second part with a strong emphasis on "applied cases and their relevance to practice".

Step 1: Introduction of specific applications

We explain past iGEM projects that may be of interest to them, such as those in the fields of nursing care and medicine, agriculture, and the environment. At this time, we are conscious of what Dr. Yoshida once told us in our conversation, and tried to explain what synthetic biology can do as easily as possible, without going into depth about specific technologies.

Step 2: Application Discussion

Focusing on issues in the nursing, medical, and agricultural fields, the discussion is based on the topic "How can synthetic biology be used to solve the problems we face in our daily lives?"
Not only senior citizens but also staff members participate in this discussion, sharing their awareness of the issues from various perspectives to promote mutual understanding and deepen the understanding of synthetic biology.
In addition, based on the dialogue with Dr. Yoshida, participants are asked to make a final presentation.

Step 3: Feedback on the project

We now ask participants, who have gained a deeper understanding of the benefits and concerns of synthetic biology based on the lectures and discussions up to this point, to provide feedback to our project. In this step, the iGEMer learns from the participants' concerns and areas for improvement that the iGEMer may not have been aware of, and this leads to learning on the part of the iGEMer, establishing mutual learning.

Development of Education materials

At the Genki Juku, we assumed that no one was that knowledgeable about biology, so it was required to provide easy slide explanations that did not go into the technical aspects of the subject. The previous technology-based slides were reworked, and the following slides were used for the Education session.

Feedback

The following pre-survey was used.

The answers to the question of whether biotechnology might be useful are as follows:

The following responses were received regarding the reasons for the above questions:

"It should be well researched and used with certainty."
"It can make up for food shortages. It will lead to the development of vaccines and medicines for unknown diseases."
"It depends."
"I don't know."
"Honestly, I don't know."

As shown above, before the implementation of the Education Program, many respondents answered that they "don't know much about it.

TThe answers to the question of whether they distrusted biotechnology are as follows:

The following responses were received regarding the reasons for the above questions:

"I don't really trust recombination that goes against nature."
"I don't distrust it, but I do worry a little about allergies, etc."
"Don't I have a problem with eating foods that have been genetically modified? I am worried about the side effects of vaccines and medicines."
"Because it's a new world and I don't know much about it."
"I can't understand it easily."
"I've never heard so much good about genetically modified foods and plants."

Regarding this as well, there were responses such as "not really sure".

The above results suggest that "not sure" may be the biggest concern, but in a sense, this is a deficit model conclusion.
Of course, the deficit model is not an absolute evil. It is natural for participants who are not familiar with science and technology to feel uneasy. It is also undesirable to simply conclude that the "lack of understanding" is deficit-model-like, since it may be due to differences in the way the information is provided or the context. In such a situation, if the iGEMer can engage in a dialogue that addresses the participant's concerns while carefully explaining the technical and application aspects of the iGEMer's side without ignoring externalities on the part of the participant, the iGEMer will be able to implement good practices whether the receiving model is deficit model-like or context-model-like.

In addition, the following comments were gathered regarding concerns and experiences related to glaucoma:

"My mother had glaucoma and wanted to have surgery no matter how much money it would cost, but there was no way to do it and she lived the rest of her life. She always said, 'My eyes, my eyes.'' It would be very good if there is a way to treat it. Good luck."
"My brother has glaucoma and I am scared because I have heard that glaucoma can make people blind."
"I feel high anxiety in my life because of the progressive nature of the disease."

The following comments were made during the discussion:

"I don't have an image that everything is good. It's something that has been handed down from generation to generation."
"Anxiety that something we have cherished since our birth will change."
"I'm scared, anxious, don't understand, and hearing about it for the first time."
"I am concerned that the genetic changes will have a negative impact on my body."

We found that there is still a lot of concern with a system that interacts with the body.

Finally, let's look at the post-program questionnaire.
When asked to what extent they understood synthetic biology through this event, we received the following responses.

Overall, the results are considered to be approximately understandable.

In addition, it appears from the following results that many people became interested in synthetic biology.

The following results also show that many people became more familiar with synthetic biology through this project.

Also, regarding the most interesting part of the project, we received comments such as:

"Discussion and being able to talk with people from the same group. I felt at first that it was a difficult subject, but the explanations were very good and easy to understand in response to questions. I would like to share what I learned with my children and others. Thank you very much for your valuable lecture today."
"The group work was good because we could all think together."
"I could hear individual opinions."
"I enjoyed the group discussions. I thought synthetic biology was familiar to me."
"The yeast's approach to bedsores (?) was very interesting. It was good to hear everyone's ideas. The lecture was very easy to listen to and responses to the questions were great. I have hope for the future of Japan."

These are a few of the comments we received.

We found that listening to various people's opinions through group discussions was quite interesting for the elderly.
The full results of the actual questionnaire can be found below:

Milestone 5

About the Practice for the Elderly

The results of the Genki Juku program indicate that discussion is quite effective in the practice for the elderly. In addition, as can be seen from the post-survey, there is a great potential to eliminate distrust of synthetic biology and biotechnology through appropriate communication.
Young people are not the only users of our products. Improving our products through communication with the elderly is also an important key to product development.

Science Connect

The Science Connect education event, organized jointly by the iGEM Japan Community, was held on August 25. This Education event was planned with the thought that while the possibilities within synthetic biology are vast, individual education efforts may not fully convey its diversity. We wanted to raise awareness about how different teams are attempting to solve various challenges using synthetic biology through booth displays.

Our team, UTokyo, participated in weekly meetings for discussions and contributed mainly by creating pre- and post-event surveys, as well as survey boards. Additionally, we conducted booth exhibitions and iGEMer experience workshops.

We would like to express our heartfelt gratitude to the Japanese teams, including TUPLS-Japan and iGEM Kyoto team, as well as everyone in the iGEM Japan Community for their significant contributions to this event.

Target

The education was conducted under the assumption that junior high and high school students, as well as their parents, have a relatively basic level of knowledge in biology.

Development of Methodologies and Education Materials

Methodology development

At Science Connect, nearly all participating teams set up booths, and any interested teams could conduct experimental workshops. Due to constraints inherent in the planning, we focused more on implementing the best practices possible within those limitations rather than constructing a specific methodology.

At the UTokyo booth, we explained our current project and conducted the card game we used during the May Festival. Additionally, we offered an experimental workshop titled "One-Day iGEMer Experience", which aimed to provide a different hands-on approach compared to traditional "gene circuit design methods." Only UTokyo and TUPLS-Japan conducted these workshops, highlighting UTokyo's significant contribution to enhancing Science Connect.

From an outsider's perspective, iGEM is often perceived primarily as an "experimental" activity. However, we wanted to emphasize aspects beyond just experiments and gather feedback on our project. Thus, while we named it an "Experimental Workshop," we aimed to allow participants to experience both the Dry Lab and social implementation aspects of our activities.

One-Day iGEMer Experience

Through the experiences in the Dry Lab and social implementation teams, we aimed to provide participants with insights into aspects of iGEM beyond just the experiments, while also gathering feedback on our project.

Experience in the Dry Lab

In the Dry Lab, we conducted lectures and hands-on sessions focused on the dry techniques used in iGEM projects. We provided materials designed for junior high and high school students to help them understand the design and analysis of gene circuits, as well as protein structure analysis using Alpha Fold. This allowed participants to engage with the often abstract activities of the Dry Lab. Participants learned that they could start Dry Lab activities without special equipment, which enhanced their understanding of iGEM. At the same time, iGEMers had the opportunity to think about how to communicate their specialized knowledge to the general public, fostering a two-way interaction that helped address questions through dialogue.

Experience in the social implementation team

In the social implementation team, participants experienced the full range of tasks including stakeholder mapping related to our project, identifying concerns and areas for improvement, and determining whom to consult. This provided participants with valuable insights into the activities of the social implementation team. On the other hand, engaging with participants allowed us, iGEMers to gain new perspectives and understand concerns from the audience's viewpoint, fostering a reciprocal learning environment.

Development of Education materials

At the booth exhibition, we used the following posters to provide explanations:

We also used the board game that received positive feedback during the May Festival. For details on its educational effectiveness, please refer to the May Festival page.

The slides used in the experimental workshop are as follows:

Feedback

The survey results for the overall Science Connect event are as follows:

Additionally, the survey board results are as follows:

This was our first time holding such a large-scale event, and not everything about the event management itself went well. There are likely to be many points for reflection. However, as a UTokyo activity, we received a lot of feedback and can say it was a success.

The survey results for the experimental workshop are as follows:

There were a notable number of comments indicating that the lectures on Dry Lab and IHP were difficult to understand. One free-response comment read: "The explanations were very clear, even for parents who have a fear of science lol. I learned about iGEM for the first time, and I think it's a field full of dreams. Thank you!"

As a reflection on this experience, one of the main points we identified was that the content may have been too challenging. The full survey results are as follows:

Milestone 6

Difficulty of the Education Materials

In this Education event, we took a somewhat challenging approach and raised the difficulty level of our materials. However, the feedback we received was not very positive, and the results were less successful compared to our previous gene circuit design methods.
From this result, we realized the importance of creating materials that are more appropriate for the participants' skill levels, rather than overly complex ones.
Moving forward, we focused on developing our educational materials to strengthen the gene circuit design methods specifically for junior high and high school students.

Kurume University Junior and Senior High School

The slides for the "Gene Circuit Design Method" used in previous Education events were further improved, and Education event was conducted at Kurume University Junior and Senior High School, the alma mater of several UTokyo members.

Target

High School Student interested in biology.

Development of Methodologies and Education Materials

Methodology Construction

Basically, we used the methodology used in the Education event at the science club of Yotsuba Gakuen Secondary School.
As for discussion, we had a session asking the participants to think about where they could apply our project.

Development of Education materials

We were able to have an hour and a half on the day of the event.
Based on the various feedback we have received before, we created a new set of lecture slides. The slides we used are listed below:

Feedback

The results of the preliminary survey were as follows.

The result showed that there is still a little bit of distrust regarding genetic modification.
During the discussion, we asked them to think about where our project could be used outside of glaucoma.
The ability to conduct simple detections could reduce the number of annual examination items at hospitals, leading to decreased social security costs, which benefits both the nation and individuals. It was also pointed out that gastroscopy could be replaced by detection devices as a less invasive alternative. Additionally, tests related to AIDS and COVID-19, which are better performed more frequently at home, as well as DNA tests, were mentioned. However, some expressed concerns about the ease of conducting DNA tests at home.
There were suggestions that blood tests could reveal a wider range of concentration differences, and ideas were discussed about tracking COVID-19 infection rates through virus levels in wastewater. The use of environmental DNA from roads and rivers for search and rescue operations or crime investigations was also raised.
The results of the post-survey were as follows:

While there were those who said they did not understand much, there were a certain number of people who found synthetic biology familiar. In addition, when referring to the free-response comments, those who chose "Didn't understand much" wrote, "There were many words that I have learned or heard in my previous biology classes, and I realized that these words are useful in my daily life."
This was a solid result that our Education event also led to further learning.

The full survey is below:

Toshimagaoka Joshi Gakuen Junior and Senior High School

As the culmination of the "Gene Circuit Design Method" used in previous Education events, we decided to hold an Education event for junior high and high school students. We held an Education event at Toshimagaoka Joshi Gakuen Junior and Senior School. The entire two-day event consisted of a lecture on synthetic biology on the first day and a lecture on gene circuit design on the second day.

Target

junior high and high school students
The degree of knowledge of biology was assumed to be basically none, although some may be taking biology class.

Development of Methodologies and Education Materials

Methodology development

We were able to have two days of Education at Toshimagaoka Joshi Gakuen Junior and Senior High School.
The first day consisted of an overall synthetic biology lecture, an introduction to past projects and the projects we would be doing this year, followed by a discussion on our projects to deepen their understanding of synthetic biology. In order to enable appropriate discussion, the lectures included detailed explanations of the safety aspects of synthetic biology and legal and ethical issues.
See below for the details of the discussion.

Thinking about the world in the future - The world where UTokyo 2024 project has been realized -

The goal of this session is to get the public's opinion on the mid- to long-term impact of our project by asking the students to consider what the world in future might be like with the project in existence.
In this session, students think about those impacts of the project and synthetic biology in the background. Then through not only the input of the lecture but also the output, participants deepen their understanding about synthetic biology to be able to appropriately recognize the benefits and risks of it.
The iGEMer collects the opinions of the participants and sends feedback, which leads to learning on the part of the iGEMer as well as on the part of the participants, making two-way communication possible.

Considering Dual-Use - Potential Dangers of the Project -

What must be avoided in synthetic biology projects is potential military use of the project. Through this discussion, we, the iGEMer side, can explore the possibility of military use of the project and the concerns we have, while the participants can deeply recognize the points to be careful about when handling biotechnology through the output of the discussion.

Interactive learning through gene circuit design method

On the second day, a lecture on gene circuit design methods was conducted more carefully than before, followed by a discussion.
As for the discussion, the theme is "eye disease" and the participants are asked to create the gene circuit, and we are trying to deepen the knowledge over the two-day event by asking participants to come up with ideas based on the synthetic biology knowledge they gained throughout the first day.
This practice also leads to interactive learning because we can also reflect participants' ideas in our own projects based on the gene circuits and systems they have created.

Development of Education materials

Based on the above methodology, lecture materials were created with slides that covered more of the conveniences and risks of synthetic biology than ever before. On the first day, the event was conducted using the following slides.

Further, the practical session on the second day was designed to help participants better visualize their ideas by making slides featuring various examples of genetic circuits compared to previous events. On the second day, the event was conducted using the following slides.

Feedback

Record of Day 1

The questionnaires used are described below:

The results of the preliminary survey for the first day were as follows:

While many people are not very familiar with genetic modification, there has been a consistent trend since the May Festival indicating that young people do not have a strong sense of distrust towards genetic modification. As mentioned in the Education event at Genki Juku, it is evident that older individuals tend to have greater concerns and distrust towards unfamiliar things, while young people exhibit a high level of flexibility in accepting the unknown. This could be attributed to the fact that older generations have been more exposed to negative news about incidents and accidents related to new technologies, such as biotechnology, leading to ingrained negative perceptions. However, there may also be other factors.
When looking closely at the post-survey question, "How do you think new, controversial technologies such as synthetic biology can be made more acceptable to society when they are implemented?", the following responses are frequently noted.

"It would be nice if the safety instructions are easier to understand."
"Distinguish between advantages and disadvantages and properly report both points around and show correct usage."
"Show how synthetic biology has helped in practice. Explain countermeasures against the dangers of synthetic biology."
"Let more people know how it works and what it is in the first place."
"Organize events like this lecture to deepen understanding and increase awareness."

The responses include "helping others understand the fundamental technology" and "correctly explaining its advantages and disadvantages." This may be because younger generations, including junior high and high school students, have grown up in an age of information overload through the Internet, making them accustomed to appropriately filtering and assessing vast amounts of information regarding technology and its advantages and disadvantages.

If the above hypothesis is reasonable, it becomes clear that for younger generations, including junior high and high school students, it is important to focus on providing detailed explanations of the correct technology and its advantages and disadvantages. In contrast, for adults and older generations, an approach that emphasizes making synthetic biology feel more accessible is essential. Thus, adapting strategies by generation will be crucial.
As for the discussion, the following comments were made regarding long-term impacts.

The longer the treatment period, the more money it will continue to cost.
But wouldn't it be better to spend cheap money all the time?
It might become a social problem and the government might pay for it.
Who would be more likely to receive a diagnosis and treatment thanks to the big data?
- Patients will increase in number because more people are nearsighted.
- Increased levels of early detection will buy time and during the time a fundamental cure may be found.
Impact of Aging Population
- Testing makes the medical condition of the elderly more objective.
- Slowing the decline of the senses may reduce the risk of dementia.
The concern will be how to increase the publicity of the detection device, since people don't want to do the test if they don't have any subjective symptoms or other symptoms.
- For example, how about making it compulsory for people in their 40s and above to use the device for health checkups?
- I want young people, such as those in their 20's, to get checked.
There are books written in Braille, but if fewer people go blind due to early detection of glaucoma and other conditions, the use of Braille may decrease.
- In an electronic society, the blind are left behind and become a minority.
Regarding digitization, there may be an increase in support equipment for people with moderate visual impairments, rather than those who are blind.
On the other hand, there may be a need for treatment, which could lead to financial burdens. There is also the psychological burden.
- It seems that those who are blind may face even higher costs. Since it is normal for people to have sight, there may be additional expenses needed for special support.
If we could get some kind of medical assistance for glaucoma, that would reduce the financial burden.
- If there were more people suffering from glaucoma than expected, maybe the government would take notice.
Even if the cost of diagnosing glaucoma is not subsidized, people will have a better understanding of the disease, and perhaps there will be more researchers.
If more people recognize glaucoma, the number of patients visiting clinics may increase.
- The treatment itself may not change.
Detection devices were used for the Covid19 pandemic because it was a fad, but would they pay that much attention now?
- Without mandatory use of detection devices in hospitals and publicity efforts, few people may use them.
- How do we get people to understand the credibility of the testing device before we spread awareness of it?
There will be more devices to detect other diseases. If there were one for cancer, I would like to use it.
There may be some commercial revenue when the device first comes out, but after that it may only be bought a little. It is as if they have used the detection device once and don't need to use it anymore.

They shared various insights, including concerns for the future. These opinions have been valuable for improving our project and for implementing future activities.
Additionally, there were the following opinions regarding dual-use.

The ability to detect individuals' health conditions without their consent could lead to the military using this information to investigate the health conditions of enemy commanders, potentially employing it as a strategy.
- While it may raise suspicion in a hospital, it's risky because they can do it by themselves at home.
- Even though it's a detection device for glaucoma, it might be able to detect other diseases.
Big data
- In creating big data, it may be possible to assess the strength of weapons through human experimentation and detection devices.
- There is a possibility that trends related to race or ethnicity could be exploited.
By placing a virus on the Schirmer strips, it could potentially cause harm to the eyes.
The detection of miRNA that is specific to certain groups of people could lead to discrimination and potentially trigger wars.

The opinions mentioned above were also considered in terms of their feasibility for further examination. For more details, see Human Practices

The results of the post-survey for the first day were as follows.

While there were some opinions expressing that certain aspects were difficult or felt distant, overall, many people were able to understand the content well, and it can be considered a general success. Additionally, the following feedback was provided regarding the event itself.

"I enjoyed the discussion."
"It was easy to understand with lots of concrete examples. I want to participate next time, too."
"It was interesting to test by amplifying a few substances."
"It was interesting to hear the various opinions during the discussion."

There are participants who expressed a desire to attend the second day as well, which suggests that the first day was a great success.
The full survey for the first day is below.

Record of Day 2

On the second day, during the gene circuit design session, more participants responded to our example problems than we had anticipated. Some participants mentioned that they found gene circuits interesting, likening them to puzzles.
During the discussion, the following ideas were shared.

Microorganisms that can replace contact lenses
- I want the microorganisms to secrete a substance that will prevent thirst in the eyes.
- It could be used to treat dry eyes.
Cells to treat stye
- Incorporate into their cells to automatically secrete antimicrobials if they develop stye.
- While there are discussions about safety, it could be powerful if we could incorporate antimicrobial substances into the tear fluid.

The results of the post-survey for the second day are as follows.

There were many opinions stating that our explanations were very easy to understand, and most participants indicated that they were able to grasp the content fairly well. Additionally, regarding the question of whether the event sparked interest in biology, the following results were observed.

This could serve as evidence that our event was able to promote interest in biology among junior high and high school students.
The following responses were received regarding the reasons for the above question.

I had been interested in genes for a long time, but I thought it was interesting to learn more about gene circuits, of which I had no knowledge.
Because this event inspired me to start reading about genes and I wanted to learn more about biology.
I became interested in biology when I realized that biology is closely related to everyday life.
I am very interested in the use of microorganisms and other living organisms in the treatment of diseases.
Because I learned that biology is useful in many areas of our lives and felt close to it.
Because I was not familiar with genetic design and found it very new and interesting.
Biology is not my favorite field, but I had a lot of fun figuring out these gene combinations!

In this way, our activities have had a positive impact on promoting understanding and interest in biology.
The full survey for the second day is below.

KOMAD・Labcafe

KOMAD

KOMAD is a co-learning space located near the Komaba Campus of the University of Tokyo. We, iGEM UTokyo, as well as various other student groups from inside and outside the University of Tokyo, use KOMAD for the activities based on the philosophy of learning together, studying seriously, and discussing.

LabCafe

LabCafe is a cross-disciplinary third place for university students at the Hongo Campus of the University of Tokyo and beyond, and is used as a café and bar, as well as a meeting and event space for student-led side projects. iGEM UTokyo also uses LabCafe as a place for meetings and events.

We wanted to hold project presentations and discussions at these two locations, where the emphasis is on learning and discussing together.
KOMAD is located near the Komaba Campus, where many first and second year undergraduates of the University of Tokyo study, and LabCafe is located near the Hongo Campus, where many third and fourth year undergraduates of the University of Tokyo study. We thought that by holding an Education event at both of these locations, we would be able to gather more opinions from university students.

Target

University students with a strong enthusiasm for learning and discussing together.

Development of Methodologies and Education Materials

Methodology development

Since both places emphasized discussion among students, we too held Education events with an emphasis on "discussion."
Assuming that there was a great deal of enthusiasm for learning among the participants, we carefully explained the project from a technical perspective, and if there were any questions or concerns along the way, we were ready to answer them immediately.
The discussion sessions were named "Public Consultant Sessions" and included dialogues based on a variety of subjects.

Development of Education materials

The slides used on the day are as follows:

Feedback

KOMAD

The following points were raised in the discussions at KOMAD.

Some commented that the Education event was in line with KOMAD's philosophy of "learning together" and that they hope the event will be held again in the future.

LabCafe

Many iGEM UTokyo alumni also participated in the LabCafe practice and gave us feedback on our project.
Feedback from non-iGEMers is as follows.

Thank you to the participants for raising all these opinions.
Also, thank you to the alumni who pointed out other things that only iGEMers can do besides the above opinions.

Milestone 7

Through Education up to this point, we have strongly felt the strength of the interactive nature of the events, where not only the participants can learn, but iGEMers can also learn by receiving feedback on the project.
Up to this point, with the exception of the May Festival and the event at Genki Juku, the main target was students. Finally, however, we were driven by the need to provide Education targeting adults.
All generations will use our detection devices, and we need to improve our project by listening to all generations. On the other hand, organizing an Education event for the adult generation can be challenging in terms of attracting participants.
Then, we came up with the following solutions:

Street Interviews

Most of the Education activities we have conducted so far have been relatively targeted at college students and younger, and few have been targeted at adults. It is difficult to gather adults, and we need to be creative in our practice.
We realized that instead of holding Education events and gathering adults in one place, we could solve these problems by going there in person and conducting street interviews.
Our street interviews took place in the open space of the Komaba Campus and Hongo Campus of the University of Tokyo. There are many tourists as well as local residents who were sightseeing or walking around the campuses.

Target

From small children to the elderly. We basically assumed the general public, and kept in mind that there would be a wide range of people in terms of age and biological knowledge.

Development of Methodologies and Education Materials

Methodology development

An ordinary interview does not constitute Education. We have developed a methodology we have named the "Quiz-and-Talk Approach".

Step 1: Give some quizzes

The purpose of the quizzes is to help participants learn about synthetic biology. The quizzes were created to be as plain as possible. On the other hand, they were created with an emphasis on being just enough to be enjoyable without being too easy.
This quiz approach allows participants to learn the basics of the biology behind the project.

Step 2: Explain our project and take a survey

First, we explained our project. At this point, we tried to give only a brief overview of the project, rather than going into depth about the technical aspects, referring to what was said in our interview with Dr. Yoshida. When participants ask questions, it is important for us to answer them in detail.
By taking a survey on the project content after explaining the project, participants can think more deeply about the project and the synthetic biology that exists behind it. We hoped that this would be an output and lead to the effectiveness of the Education event

Step 3: Aiming for further educational effects using our own brochure

By handing out our brochure (see Brochure and Questionnaire), we hoped to promote further understanding of synthetic biology and glaucoma.

Development of Education materials

Based on the above methodology, quizzes and questionnaire were developed as follows:

The brochure used in step 3. is described in the Brochure and Questionnaire chapter.

Feedback

Feedback on the project was as follows:

We found that the general public is still concerned about the accuracy and price of detection devices. They also had a very good impression of the convenience of our detection devices.
When asked about their concerns when it comes to actually detecting for glaucoma using POIROT, we received the following responses.

"I want to use it."
"I want to use it. I'm not too worried about it."
"Worried about accuracy."
"Cost."
"Worried about putting it in the eye."
"Prevalence of delay in going to an eye doctor due to false negative results."

Some mentioned concerns about the possibility of injury from use of a detecting device and the possibility of delay in going to an eye doctor when the results are false negative.
We asked if they would like to use our devices if it were commercialized. We received some opinions, for example, "I would," "I might go to the hospital," "I would like to use it, but only as a reference," and "I would go to a doctor who would be more likely to perform a more accurate test." We found that while there are those who would like to use the system, there are also those who think that accuracy is important and would go to an eye doctor.

Next, we asked about their understanding of synthetic biology to measure the effectiveness of Education by quizzes

Many of the public said that they gained a better understanding of synthetic biology through the quizzes. This shows that even at short times, education through street interviews using quizzes is very effective.
The full survey results are below.

Brochure and Questionnaire

Brochure Simulating Glaucoma Vision

To make our activities more widely known to the public, we have created a brochure. This brochure replicates the visual fields of glaucoma patients with blurred texts and pictures based on our discussions with members of GFN, and as a result, the content of the brochure cannot be fully understood on its own. For more information on our discussions with GFN, see Human Practices.

Education Is at the Core of the Project

Education for Public Participation in the Project

At the beginning of this article, we posed the question, "Why do iGEMers engage in Education?". We believe we have sufficiently demonstrated the answer through our practices thus far. Education in iGEM is not merely about promoting synthetic biology or enhancing understanding. It is about ensuring that the general public can accurately comprehend the project and the underlying scientific technologies. After that, by eliciting feedback from the general public , we gain valuable insights that guide our work. Education can thus be seen as a tool to facilitate this entire process. We assert that Education in iGEM should ideally be conducted to encourage healthy public participation in the project.

Mutual Learning and Diverse Public Participation

In our education activities, we always simultaneously carried out Integrated Human Practices. This approach allowed us to gather numerous opinions from the general public, clearly demonstrating that our efforts promoted mutual learning. For details on how these insights have been reflected in the project, please visit the Integrated Human Practices page Human Practices.
Additionally, we engaged not only with young generations, such as small children, junior high and high school students, and university students, but also with adults including elder communities through street interviews. This wide-ranging participation allowed us to gather valuable feedback from diverse participants. As a result, we can confidently say that more people have been able to shape, contribute to, and participate in our synthetic biology project.

Improvement of Education Itself

We did not compromise on improving the Education events themselves. We conducted surveys before and after each event to carefully reflect on the content of our practices. To ensure transparency in our surveys and discussions, we meticulously documented the discussions and survey content during the events. You can find this information, along with our careful reflections, in the feedback sections of each chapter.
Furthermore, our Education events were thoughtfully planned before implementation. By examining the Methodology and materials sections for each event, you can see that we designed each Education event with great care.
Additionally, these Methodology sections, materials, and analyses of each practice are invaluable for other iGEMers. Based on our documented Education events, future iGEMers will be able to conduct even higher-quality practices.

Continuing to Move Forward with Public Feedback

Our Education events do not end here. It is essential to incorporate public feedback not only during the product implementation phase but also after its launch. We remain committed to actively gathering public input through future Education events. The journey of education is intrinsically linked to the path that POIROT will continue to pursue.

References

Bucchi, M., & Neresini, F. (2002). Biotech remains unloved by the more informed. Nature, 416, 261–262. https://doi.org/10.1038/416261a
Mahiko, D. (2022, Nov.), Todai Kotohazime- Shitteokitai Kihonzyouhou[the introduction to UT Basic Basic Information You Need to Know]. UTokyo, your university.
Ippan syadan hozin ryokunaisyo friend network. https://www.gfnet.gr.jp/
Sekai ryokunaisyo syukan. https://www.ryokunaisho.jp/light_up/