Samantha Wilson

FYE- Orth
Reflection on Inquiry

Prompt 1: What topic of inquiry did you explore? How did you develop and/or
select this topic? Why did this topic appeal to you?
I chose to explore the interface of disease between humans and wildlife
because I wanted to combine my existing interest in animals with the
current outbreak of Ebola in Western Africa. I knew beforehand how Ebola
spread, how it originated most likely, and that it was a serious threat to
West Africa. This topic appealed to me because I wanted to research
something relevant, current, but still had not been publicized dramatically
yet. Disease, in general, has always captured my attention because it
always has unforeseen effects and is never fully understood. I wanted to
research something that would show people why studying wildlife is
important and frequently affects us as humans.
Prompt 2: What strategies did you use to access existing knowledge, research,
and/or views on your topic? What strategies did you find most effective? Least
effective?
How would you describe the knowledge, research, and/or views that you found in
your search was it credible? Did it make sense to you? Was it useful? What
challenges did you encounter in your search process?
How did you ultimately use the information that you found? What purpose did it
serve for you? How well did the information serve its purpose?
I did research using Google Scholar as well as through the Library
databases. However, I also attended a public health seminar of Kathleen
Alexander. Even though her research was not in the same geographical
location, nor exactly the same disease it opened my eyes to realize Ebola
has always been a problem in Africa and now the media coverage of Ebola
is masking the other diseases killing just as many people. Hearing a
credible source in person was by far the most effective because it gave
reason and passion to this topic; something a journal article cannot
emphasize. The least effective was the encyclopedias because they often
contained general information about the disease and was hardly ever
specific to my topic. Overall the research I found was by credible science
associations or journal articles. Not all of it made sense due to the high
level of vocabulary and scientific background, but I attempted to
comprehend the most I could. Certain challenges included finding specific
vaccines actually in use or in trial. Most of the articles contained general
medications, but few actually described the biology and science behind
the vaccine. Ultimately, I used the more general articles and information

as the beginning explanations in my paper and then built upon the piece
by introducing more advance terminology.

Prompt 3: In your own words, describe the difference between information that is
common knowledge and information that requires you to cite a source and give
credit to others.
Describe your approach to using other sources to support your own original thesis
statement, argument, opinion, or point of view.
What safeguards did you use in your inquiry to ensure you were giving proper credit
to others?
Common knowledge would be a fact that someone does not have to think
twice about when responding. If it takes more than a few seconds to
respond, or if more than two people do not know the answer, then it is
probably information you need to cite. During my research, I attempted to
demonstrate both the positives and negatives to vaccinating western
gorillas. I tried to show the financial burden it could place on the already
poverty-stricken countries as well as the difficult to actually administer
this vaccine. For safeguards, I put in a citation every time I knew I could
not explain something without the additional help of a source. If I did not
know something beforehand, a citation was made.