CER mini-report
Open your materials, follow the steps, then turn in your work.
Write a CER conclusion that states limitations of your physiology analysis.
1. Open your materials
Use the materials named in the first step below. Open lesson resources.
2. Start the work
State a claim answering your research question.
Show all 5 required steps
- State a claim answering your research question.
- Cite your statistical evidence to support the claim.
- Explain your reasoning linking evidence to claim.
- List at least two limitations of your study.
- Submit the Problem 2 analysis mini-report.
Lost your place? Locate your place: if you have not written your claim yet, state it first; if you have a claim, cite your statistical evidence (the means and the t-test result); then write the reasoning linking evidence to claim; then list at least two limitations; then submit the Problem 2 mini-report.
Check your work before submitting
- Your mini-report contains a complete CER conclusion.
- You name at least two honest limitations.
3. Turn in your work
DueCheck Schoology- Hand in
- Problem 2 CER analysis mini-report: specific claim, statistical evidence with values, reasoning, and at least two honest limitations.
How to submit and name your file
Use the submission route shown on today's today's page.
In Schoology, open your course and the assignment for this lesson. Attach your file, select Submit, and check that it appears in the submission.
PDF upload helpYou get two school days for every day you were absent, so this deadline moves with you.
How this lesson connects
Keep using what you learned last class: A difference between averages could come from chance when the data are spread out, so you run a t-test and record every step, because that is what lets you (and anyone else) trust the result is real and repeatable. Today: A CER conclusion links a claim to your own statistical evidence with explicit reasoning, and naming honest limitations bounds that claim rather than breaking it, so admitting what could have gone wrong is what makes the finding trustworthy.
Optional: listen or watch a unit review▸
Need help? Warm-up, timing, and directions▸
💡 Big idea: A CER conclusion links a claim to your own statistical evidence with explicit reasoning, and naming honest limitations bounds that claim rather than breaking it, so admitting what could have gone wrong is what makes the finding trustworthy.
- 0-10Review the CER mini-report format: claim, evidence, reasoning, and limitations
- 10-25Write the claim: answer your directly and specifically
- 25-45Cite statistical evidence: include specific values (mean, SD, t-test result) that support the claim
- 45-60Write the reasoning: explain how the statistics connect to the claim
- 60-75List at least two honest limitations and explain why each matters
- 75-80Submit the Problem 2 analysis mini-report; confirm it is in before Fall Break
- • You have run your analysis. Now you need to say what it means.
- • A CER mini-report is the vehicle: claim from your , evidence from your statistics, and reasoning that connects them.
- • Naming limitations is not a sign of weakness -- every published study includes them because they show you understand the boundaries of your evidence.
- • CER writing fluency is tested across all four WebXam 072125 strands.
- • How to write a CER conclusion that states a claim, cites statistical evidence, and connects them with explicit reasoning.
- • How to identify and name at least two limitations of a physiology study without undermining the conclusion.
- • Why honest limitations strengthen rather than weaken a scientific report.
PLTW connection and today's work
Open Problem 2 in your myPLTW course shell and locate the CER or analysis-report activity to review the expected format and evidence standards.
Today's stopping point: The statistics analysis is done; today you write the CER conclusion with two honest limitations and submit the mini-report before Fall Break.
PLTW activity titles identify the course connection. If your account will not open, use the posted materials for today and tell Mr. Mendoza. Do not mark an online activity complete unless you completed it.
Course connection
- Activity 2.1.3 Making Results Meaningful
Use the turn-in directions at the top of this page. Do not create a second submission unless your teacher asks for one.
Show another explanation or a smaller first step
Need help? Choose a starting point
Lesson resources: reading, slides, and vocabulary▸
The deck carries the prior idea forward, lets you inspect an analogy, maps the rule to biology, and ends with the same evidence decision and exit ticket used on this page.
Generated from this lesson's canonical data with a red-team citation check.
A difference between averages could come from chance when the data are spread out, so you run a t-test and record every step, because that is what lets you (and anyone else) trust the result is real and repeatable.
A CER conclusion links a claim to your own statistical evidence with explicit reasoning, and naming honest limitations bounds that claim rather than breaking it, so admitting what could have gone wrong is what makes the finding trustworthy.
A detective board holds observations, possible explanations, and one next question.
- Which notes are direct observations?
- Which notes are explanations?
- What new evidence would separate the explanations?
Keep observations separate from explanations, then collect the evidence that can distinguish the options.
Biomedical investigations use controlled procedures and validated measurements, not intuition alone.
- • Board notes map to the signs, results and measurements you recorded.
- • Possible explanations map to the competing biological causes.
- • The next question maps to the test or observation that would separate them.
Driving question: Your statistics are done. Now, what exactly can you claim about your , what evidence backs it, and what two honest limitations should a reader know before they trust it?
What you already know: A difference between averages could come from chance when the data are spread out, so you run a t-test and record every step, because that is what lets you (and anyone else) trust the result is real and repeatable.
New idea: A CER conclusion links a claim to your own statistical evidence with explicit reasoning, and naming honest limitations bounds that claim rather than breaking it, so admitting what could have gone wrong is what makes the finding trustworthy.
Visual or model: F1. F1. A lesson illustration or teaching diagram for CER mini-report. Use it with E1-E3; it is a model or context image, not experimental or patient data. What to notice: Trace the labeled system, test, or design relationship and identify which evidence should trigger revision.
- Observe or measure the relevant feature in CER mini-report.
- Organize the observation with a stable evidence ID.
- Apply this rule: Keep observations separate from explanations, then collect the evidence that can distinguish the options.
- Choose the option the evidence supports and state the limit of the conclusion.
Real biomedical example: Your statistics are done. Now, what exactly can you claim about your , what evidence backs it, and what two honest limitations should a reader know before they trust it?
What the evidence supports: E1-E3 and F1 support the daily take-home when the response meets the stated success criteria.
What it cannot prove: The package does not support claims beyond this lesson's or any real patient diagnosis.
- • t-test: A statistical test that compares the average values of two groups to judge whether their difference is likely real or just due to chance.
- • validity: How well a test or study actually measures what it claims to, so the conclusions truly reflect reality.
- • reliability: The degree to which a measurement, method, or person produces the same dependable result each time under the same conditions.
- • limitation: A weakness or boundary of a study, design, or method that restricts how far its results can be trusted or applied.
- • : A result unlikely to be due to chance, often shown by a p-value below a set threshold such as 0.05.
Use it now: Choose one decision option. Cite E1 and E3, then explain how the rule connects the evidence to your choice.
Go further, optional: The source links below are optional enrichment. Every fact required for today's local evidence decision appears in this lesson package.
Biomedical evidence supports a conclusion only to the level allowed by the measurement, comparison, controls, source quality, and uncertainty in the investigation.
Limit: The classroom evidence supports the stated learning decision, not a real clinical diagnosis, causal conclusion, or treatment recommendation.
Keep observations separate from explanations, then collect the evidence that can distinguish the options.
Limit: Biomedical investigations use controlled procedures and validated measurements, not intuition alone.
Your mini-report contains a complete CER conclusion.
Limit: E3 defines the classroom product or success criterion. It is not independent scientific evidence and cannot justify a clinical or causal claim.
PLTW-BFH-2027-03-16 · Simulated classroom evidence scenario
Your role: biomedical design team member
Decision: Your team must decide what the evidence from CER mini-report supports before submitting the claim-evidence-reasoning response named on today's page.
- • Write a claim tied to your own statistics with reasoning, then name two honest limits that bound what you claim.
- • Summarize what you did step by step and leave limitations out, since admitting problems makes the work look weak.
- • Hold the claim until a second class repeats your protocol, since one class cannot show that the difference reappears.
Response: State one choice, cite at least two evidence IDs, explain the rule that connects them, and add one limitation. Submit it as the claim-evidence-reasoning response.
Claim ceiling: Today's evidence supports a classroom claim about CER mini-report. It cannot prove causation, diagnose a real patient, or justify action outside this room.
Mean = sum of values / number of values. Median = middle ordered value. Range = maximum - minimum.
For 2, 4, 4, and 10: mean = 20 / 4 = 5, median = 4, and range = 10 - 2 = 8.
Mean, median, and range keep the measurement unit. Order the values before finding the median.
Calculate the requested summary for today's supplied values, then write what it reveals and what it hides.
Students often think Students think a conclusion should summarize what they did step by step, and that admitting limitations makes their work look weak or wrong.. The trap: A conclusion is not a recap of your procedure, and limitations are not admissions of failure. A claim must be answered with evidence and reasoning, and naming honest limits (small sample, uncontrolled variables) shows you understand the boundaries of your result, which is exactly what makes readers trust the part you do claim.
Research question for this parallel case: Does a slow paced-breathing exercise lower a person's resting breathing rate compared to normal quiet sitting?\n\nClaim: A slow paced-breathing exercise significantly lowers resting breathing rate compared to normal quiet sitting.\n\nEvidence: My quiet-sitting mean was 15.4 breaths per minute (SD 1.1) and my paced-breathing mean was 9.8 breaths per minute (SD 1.3), a difference of about 5.6 breaths per minute. A two-sample t-test gave p of about 0.0003, below 0.05.\n\nReasoning: Because the p-value is below 0.05, the 5.6 breath-per-minute drop is too large to be explained by normal measurement variation alone, so the paced-breathing exercise is the most likely cause of the lower breathing rate. The small standard deviations show my readings within each condition were consistent, which strengthens the comparison.\n\nLimitations:\n1. I tested only one subject, so I cannot generalize to all people; lung capacity and baseline breathing habits vary from person to person.\n2. I controlled the sitting position but not factors like recent physical activity or anxiety before the session, which could raise the baseline breathing rate and exaggerate the difference.\n\nThese limitations do not erase the result; they tell a reader exactly how far the conclusion can be trusted.
This model shows the level of evidence and organization needed to complete: Worked CER on a parallel case: models the Problem 2 mini-report format (claim answering a research question, statistical evidence with values, reasoning, and at least two honest limitations) using a different physiology comparison so it guides format and depth without answering today's heart-rate prompt.
- Write one defensible claim.
- Choose specific evidence that supports the claim.
- Explain the scientific rule that connects the evidence to the claim.
Keep the structure. Replace the question, facts, measurements, and evidence. Then recheck units, vocabulary, and whether the conclusion goes beyond the evidence.
Also due today: Submit the Problem 2 analysis mini-report on Schoology before the end of Thursday class. This is due before Fall Break.
- CER:
- Claim, Evidence, Reasoning: make a claim, back it with evidence, explain your reasoning.
- SOP:
- Standard Operating Procedure, the exact steps to follow (especially in a lab).
- Tracker:
- Your PLTW progress log where you record completed evidence.
- myPLTW:
- The PLTW course site where you do the online activities. Find it in Clever with your Microsoft sign-in, right next to Schoology.
Tap the speaker to hear a term. Add two of these to your notebook glossary with a definition and an example in your own words.
Pick just 2 or 3 words from today and make them yours: write what each one means in your own words, name the context clue or evidence that helped, then give one example from what you actually did in CER mini-report. Try your own words first; the glossary is there if you get stuck. This is voluntary and counts as extra credit, so keep it short.
Saved on this device. Show Mr. Mendoza or add these to your notebook glossary to claim the extra credit.
Classroom documents for this lesson are posted in Schoology. Open Clever, then Schoology, and find each one by the name shown on its card.
Use this if you were absent, got stuck, or need another pass before you submit the lesson artifact.
Placement rationale
Matched Statistical analysis and t-test reasoning by path:Biomedical-Innovations/Problem-2_Human-Physiology/2.1_Human-Physiology; keywords:statistical analysis. Score 138. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
Use this if you were absent, got stuck, or need another pass before you submit the lesson artifact.
Placement rationale
Matched Statistical analysis and t-test reasoning by path:Biomedical-Innovations/Problem-2_Human-Physiology/2.1_Human-Physiology; keywords:statistical analysis. Score 134. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
Open this when the class reaches this activity and use it to complete the required lesson artifact.
Placement rationale
Matched Statistical analysis and t-test reasoning by path:Biomedical-Innovations/Problem-2_Human-Physiology/2.1_Human-Physiology. Score 126. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
Sign in to Clever with your district Microsoft account to open Schoology or myPLTW. Follow today's posted steps. If myPLTW will not open, use the posted alternative and tell Mr. Mendoza. Turn in your completed work through the Schoology assignment.
Practice: try a question, then check your answer▸
Claim ceiling for this check: Today's evidence supports a classroom claim about CER mini-report. It cannot prove causation, diagnose a real patient, or justify action outside this room.
A peer writes: 'Our sample was only 12 people, so our whole conclusion is probably wrong and we should not claim anything.' Is that the right way to handle the limitation? What should they do instead?
Write an answer and pick a confidence to unlock the key.
Fast retrieval with instant answers, not the commit-then-reveal check above. Try each from memory first: write what you remember about the earlier units, then check yourself here.
Missed class or ready for more?▸
Run this before you touch the bench. It is built from the real lab procedure, so the decisions you make here are the ones you will make with the equipment in your hands.
What today's skills lead to. These are real health-science careers this course builds toward. Tap one to see, on the US Department of Labor's O*NET site, what the job actually involves, what it pays, and how fast it is growing.
Today is individual work you can do from home: complete the same target above, then submit your CER.
Go to Schoology to turn this in. Submit one PDF. Put your first and last name in the document header. Name the file: FirstName LastName - Assignment Title - YYYY-MM-DD.pdf. If you cannot get in, see Mr. Mendoza. Do not skip the work.
Class still runs. Complete the online activity above (it's self-guided). Need the concept taught without a teacher? Use this authoritative explainer:
Khan Academy Statistics and Probability- CompleteEvery required part of the artifact is present, nothing left blank.
- AccurateThe science and the data are correct and match the evidence.
- Scientific reasoningYou explain your claim with evidence and reasoning (CER), not just an answer.
- Professional communicationClear, organized, labeled, and written the way a clinician or scientist would.
- SubmittedGo to Schoology to turn this in. Submit one PDF. Put your first and last name in the document header. Name the file: FirstName LastName - Assignment Title - YYYY-MM-DD.pdf. If you cannot get in, see Mr. Mendoza. Do not skip the work.
This week
My Progress dashboard