Playing God — ready-made English lesson, C2

Lesson goal: Students can debate the ethics of scientific progress, weigh up risks and benefits, and present hypothetical scenarios with were to, should, but for and inverted conditionals.

Add the lesson to get your own copies of the word set and exercises; the lesson opens in the builder, where you can adjust the steps and teach it.

Lesson plan

1
Warm-up
Questions to get the student talking and lead into the topic.
- Which scientific discovery of the last hundred years has changed your life the most?
- Would you want to know which diseases you are genetically likely to develop?
- Should there be limits on what scientists are allowed to research?
2
New words
Meet the words and practise them in games.
Match the pairsSpell it
genetic engineering · designer babies · clone · informed consent · play God · a slippery slope · a moral dilemma · peer review · breakthrough · ethically dubious · the sanctity of life · tamper with · unforeseen consequences · falsify · safeguard
All words in the set
3
Exercises
The lesson's words in context. Only you see the answers.
1. Fill the gap
  Before taking part in the trial, every volunteer must give informed ___.
  Answer: consent
2. Fill the gap
  He lost his post when it emerged that he had chosen to ___ his results rather than admit the experiment had failed.
  Answer: falsify
3. Fill the gap
  But ___ the discovery of antibiotics, millions more people would have died of simple infections.
  Answer: for
4. Fill the gap
  ___ the treatment prove unsafe, the trial would be stopped immediately.
  Answer: Should
5. Multiple choice
  Critics argue that letting parents choose their child's eye colour would be the first step on ...
  a slippery slopea moral dilemmaa breakthroughpeer review
6. Multiple choice
  Which sentence is grammatically correct?
  Were scientists to clone a human, the public reaction would be enormous.Were scientists clone a human, the public reaction would be enormous.If scientists were to clone a human, the public reaction will be enormous.Should scientists to clone a human, the public reaction would be enormous.
7. Multiple choice
  Why does peer review matter in science?
  Other experts check a study's methods and conclusions before it is published.It lets the public vote on which research gets funded.It guarantees that the results are true.It protects the researchers' identity.
8. True / false
  Read: "In 2018 a researcher announced that he had edited the genes of twin girls to make them resistant to HIV. Far from being celebrated as a breakthrough, the experiment was condemned around the world: the parents had not been properly informed of the risks, and the long-term consequences for the children remain unknown. He was later sentenced to three years in prison." The scientific community welcomed the experiment as a breakthrough.
  Answer: False
9. True / false
  Read the text again. One criticism was that the parents had not been given enough information.
  Answer: True
10. Discussion question
  Should gene editing be allowed to prevent serious inherited diseases, even if it could later be used to create designer babies? Argue your case using at least two advanced conditional structures.
  Sample answer: Were we to ban gene editing outright, we would condemn thousands of families to illnesses that could be prevented. Had such a technique existed a generation ago, my uncle might have lived a normal life. That said, should the technology become cheap and unregulated, the line between curing disease and designing babies would quickly blur, so strict safeguards are essential.
4
Speaking
The student answers using the new words.
- Is 'playing God' a meaningful objection, or simply a way of resisting change?
- Should animals be used in medical research if it saves human lives?
- Who should decide where the ethical limits of science lie: scientists, governments or the public?
- Can a breakthrough ever justify research that was carried out unethically?
- Which current technology do you think will have the most unforeseen consequences?
5
Review
A quiz on the lesson's words. With a student, it's homework on their link.
Quiz

Lesson plan

Warm-up

Questions to get the student talking and lead into the topic.

Which scientific discovery of the last hundred years has changed your life the most?
Would you want to know which diseases you are genetically likely to develop?
Should there be limits on what scientists are allowed to research?

New words

Meet the words and practise them in games.

Match the pairsSpell it

genetic engineering · designer babies · clone · informed consent · play God · a slippery slope · a moral dilemma · peer review · breakthrough · ethically dubious · the sanctity of life · tamper with · unforeseen consequences · falsify · safeguard

All words in the set

Exercises

The lesson's words in context. Only you see the answers.

Fill the gap
Before taking part in the trial, every volunteer must give informed ___.
Answer: consent
Fill the gap
He lost his post when it emerged that he had chosen to ___ his results rather than admit the experiment had failed.
Answer: falsify
Fill the gap
But ___ the discovery of antibiotics, millions more people would have died of simple infections.
Answer: for
Fill the gap
___ the treatment prove unsafe, the trial would be stopped immediately.
Answer: Should
Multiple choice
Critics argue that letting parents choose their child's eye colour would be the first step on ...
a slippery slopea moral dilemmaa breakthroughpeer review
Multiple choice
Which sentence is grammatically correct?
Were scientists to clone a human, the public reaction would be enormous.Were scientists clone a human, the public reaction would be enormous.If scientists were to clone a human, the public reaction will be enormous.Should scientists to clone a human, the public reaction would be enormous.
Multiple choice
Why does peer review matter in science?
Other experts check a study's methods and conclusions before it is published.It lets the public vote on which research gets funded.It guarantees that the results are true.It protects the researchers' identity.
True / false
Read: "In 2018 a researcher announced that he had edited the genes of twin girls to make them resistant to HIV. Far from being celebrated as a breakthrough, the experiment was condemned around the world: the parents had not been properly informed of the risks, and the long-term consequences for the children remain unknown. He was later sentenced to three years in prison." The scientific community welcomed the experiment as a breakthrough.
Answer: False
True / false
Read the text again. One criticism was that the parents had not been given enough information.
Answer: True
Discussion question
Should gene editing be allowed to prevent serious inherited diseases, even if it could later be used to create designer babies? Argue your case using at least two advanced conditional structures.
Sample answer: Were we to ban gene editing outright, we would condemn thousands of families to illnesses that could be prevented. Had such a technique existed a generation ago, my uncle might have lived a normal life. That said, should the technology become cheap and unregulated, the line between curing disease and designing babies would quickly blur, so strict safeguards are essential.

Speaking

The student answers using the new words.

Is 'playing God' a meaningful objection, or simply a way of resisting change?
Should animals be used in medical research if it saves human lives?
Who should decide where the ethical limits of science lie: scientists, governments or the public?
Can a breakthrough ever justify research that was carried out unethically?
Which current technology do you think will have the most unforeseen consequences?

Review

A quiz on the lesson's words. With a student, it's homework on their link.

Quiz