Pathogen-ID report submission
Safety gate · before any work
- Wear the required PPE, keep the bench clear, handle equipment only as directed, and know where the eyewash, sink, and spill kit are before you start.
- Human samples and data stay private: label with a code, never a name, and dispose of materials in the correct waste container, then wash your hands.
Do now
Submit a complete pathogen-identification report defending your BLAST result with evidence.
- Hand in
- Pathogen-ID report: claim naming organism, reasoning paragraph citing E-value/query coverage/percent identity, control validation explanation, and one limitation sentence.
- Where
- Turn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not.
You get two school days for every day you were absent, so this deadline moves with you.
You are ready to name the in your case. How do you turn a screenshot and three numbers into a claim a official would actually act on?
Submit a complete -identification report defending your result with evidence.
- • You will be able to defend a ID with evidence.
- • You will be able to cite E-value and coverage to justify a match.
- • You will be able to state a limitation of sequence-based identification.
- List the three match-quality numbers your report must cite for your top hit.
- Name one thing that could make a match wrong even when all the numbers look good.
- 1Assemble your hit-table screenshot, top organism name, E-value, and .
- 2Write a Claim naming the and a Reasoning paragraph using your match-quality numbers.
- 3Explain how your control run shows the was reliable.
- 4Add one sentence on a limitation of identifying a by sequence alone.
- 5Submit the report on the class site.
- 6Confirm it is turned in and note what you would test to confirm in a real lab.
What did this day actually feel like?
Pathogen-ID report submission
Full report: sequence, BLAST result, E-value, coverage, and a statement of what the identification does not prove.
Turned in: lab report → Lab Reports folder
Fiction. There is no such student. The lessons, labs and dates are the real planned course; the student, the classmates and the conversations are invented.
The same day, drawn.
Full report: sequence, BLAST result, E-value, coverage, and a statement of what the identification does not prove.
Fiction. There is no such student. The lessons, labs and dates are the real planned course; the student, the classmates and the conversations are invented.
🛠 Get unstuck · pick your level
Lab day: Tier 1 is the whole class at the bench. No extension today.
🔑 Today's words · 5
Tap a word in the lesson for a plain meaning and one example. Recycled into next week's Do-Now.
Reasoning: connecting evidence to the claim
What separates sound reasoning from bad reasoning, and how do you check your own?
Reasoning is the part where you explain why your evidence supports your claim. It is the bridge. Without it, a claim and some data are just sitting next to each other; reasoning shows how the data leads to the conclusion, often using a scientific principle.
Good reasoning is logical (each step follows from the last), it actually uses your evidence (not just restates the claim), and it considers alternatives (could the data mean something else?). Bad reasoning leans on logical fallacies: jumping to conclusions, confusing correlation with causation, or attacking the person instead of the idea.
Check your own reasoning by trying to break it: state the opposite and see if your evidence rules it out. Ask “what would have to be true for me to be wrong?” If you cannot answer, your reasoning is not finished yet.
- • Logical: each step follows from the one before it.
- • Grounded: it uses your evidence, and names the principle that links it to the claim.
- • Fair: it considers other explanations and says why yours is better.
- • Self-checked: you tried to prove yourself wrong and could not.
- • Correlation is not causation: two things moving together does not mean one caused the other.
- • Hasty generalization: one case does not prove a rule.
- • Ad hominem: attacking the person, not their evidence.
Write the reasoning that links your evidence to your claim from earlier this week. Then write the strongest objection to it, and answer that objection.
Do the work · 80-minute blockfirst 5 min = hook▸
💡 Big idea: A sequence match is evidence rather than proof, so a defensible identification report must cite match-quality numbers, show a working control, and name a real limitation, because databases are incomplete and errors can fake a match.
- 0-10 minAssemble materials: hit-table screenshot, top hit data, control run result, and comparison table from Thursday
- 10-25 minDraft the Claim: one sentence naming the with full organism name
- 25-45 minWrite the Reasoning paragraph: cite E-value, , and ; explain why each supports the claim
- 45-58 minAdd the control explanation: how the control run validates the
- 58-70 minWrite the limitation sentence; proofread the full report for accuracy and completeness
- 70-80 minSubmit on the class site; confirm it shows as turned in
- • This week you used the same public tool that labs use to identify outbreak pathogens: .
- • Today you write the report that would accompany that identification in a real investigation.
- • A good report explains not just what you found, but why you trust the result and where it could still be wrong.
- • Exit goal: report submitted and confirmed as turned in before the bell.
- • A credible identification report cites , E-value, and together, not just one number.
- • A control run proves the tool worked correctly; without it, the result cannot be trusted.
- • Sequence-based identification has limits: databases are incomplete, and or sequencing errors can produce false matches.
DNA identification, sequencing, BLAST, controls, query coverage, and E-value. · -ID report submission
Day 4 of this lesson. Open this exact section in myPLTW (find it in Clever, Microsoft sign-in), then do the work below.
Do this: Open the -ID report submission assignment in myPLTW for Activity 1.1.3 Using DNA to Identify Pathogens.
Submit the completed report with all required sections before end of class.
Revised identification statement should be done (Thursday); report submitted and confirmed today.
-ID report submission visible in the course shell.
The official PLTW activity stays inside myPLTW. If myPLTW will not open, use F1 and E1-E3 on this page to complete today's local evidence decision, then make up the official activity when access returns. Turn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not.
Check things off as you work, then submit. This tells Mr. Mendoza how you're doing so he can help the class. It does not replace turning in your producible through the submission route shown below.
Use the code Mr. Mendoza gave you, not your name. Saved on this device.
DNA identification, sequencing, BLAST, controls, query coverage, and E-value. · Pathogen-ID report submission
Open the -ID report submission assignment in myPLTW for Activity 1.1.3 Using DNA to Identify Pathogens.
Revised identification statement should be done (Thursday); report submitted and confirmed today.
This is how Mr. Mendoza sees the class keeping pace with PLTW. Be honest, it only helps if it is accurate.
🎯 Submit a complete -identification report defending your result with evidence.
- Assemble your hit-table screenshot, top organism name, E-value, and .
- Write a Claim naming the and a Reasoning paragraph using your match-quality numbers.
- Explain how your control run shows the was reliable.
- Add one sentence on a limitation of identifying a by sequence alone.
- Submit the report on the class site.
- Confirm it is turned in and note what you would test to confirm in a real lab.
Lab report: -ID report: claim naming organism, reasoning paragraph citing E-value//, control validation explanation, and one limitation sentence.
Turn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not. Use the checklist just below and upload by 11:29 PM for full credit. Absent with an excused absence? You get two school days for every day you were absent, so this deadline moves with you.
| Task | Who |
|---|---|
| Assemble your hit-table screenshot, top organism name, E-value, and . | _______ |
| Write a Claim naming the and a Reasoning paragraph using your match-quality numbers. | _______ |
| Explain how your control run shows the was reliable. | _______ |
| Add one sentence on a limitation of identifying a by sequence alone. | _______ |
| Submit the report on the class site. | _______ |
| Confirm it is turned in and note what you would test to confirm in a real lab. | _______ |
Working solo? Put your own name in "Who" for every row.
- You will be able to defend a ID with evidence.
- You will be able to cite E-value and coverage to justify a match.
- You will be able to state a limitation of sequence-based identification.
- 1Do thisSubmit a complete pathogen-identification report defending your BLAST result with evidence.
- 2Use this resource
- 3Submit thisLab report: Pathogen-ID report: claim naming organism, reasoning paragraph citing E-value/query coverage/percent identity, control validation explanation, and one limitation sentence.
- 4Submit it here
- 1Open the drop folder.
- 2Sign in with your district Microsoft account, not a personal one.
- 3Upload the file, named Lastname_Firstname__Assignment Title.
- 4Your own upload panel says Uploaded with a green check: that is your receipt.
Turn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not. Genetics of Disease (Medical Interventions) › DNA identification, sequencing, BLAST, controls, query coverage, and E-value. › Lab reportOpen the drop folder
Learn it · deck, reading, 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 short region can match by chance, so a trustworthy identification needs high , a low E-value, and high together, because any one number alone can be fooled.
A sequence match is evidence rather than proof, so a defensible identification report must cite match-quality numbers, show a working control, and name a real limitation, because databases are incomplete and errors can fake a match.
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 E1-E3.
- • Possible explanations map to the decision options.
- • The next question maps to the evidence-based action.
Driving question: You are ready to name the in your case. How do you turn a screenshot and three numbers into a claim a official would actually act on?
What you already know: A short region can match by chance, so a trustworthy identification needs high , a low E-value, and high together, because any one number alone can be fooled.
New idea: A sequence match is evidence rather than proof, so a defensible identification report must cite match-quality numbers, show a working control, and name a real limitation, because databases are incomplete and errors can fake a match.
Visual or model: F1. F1. A lesson illustration or teaching diagram for Pathogen-ID report submission. Use it with E1-E3; it is a model or context image, not experimental or patient data. What to notice: Trace the labeled testing, treatment, or biological process and identify where evidence limits the decision.
- Observe or measure the relevant feature in -ID report submission.
- 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: You are ready to name the in your case. How do you turn a screenshot and three numbers into a claim a official would actually act on?
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.
- • : The exact order of the four bases (adenine, thymine, guanine, cytosine) along a strand of DNA, which spells out genetic instructions.
- • PCR: Polymerase chain reaction, a lab technique that uses heat cycles and an to make millions of copies of a chosen DNA segment.
- • : A DNA reading method that uses chain-terminating dideoxynucleotides to make fragments of every length, then sorts them by size to reveal the base order.
- • : A search tool (Basic Local Search Tool) that compares a DNA or sequence against a database to find similar sequences and likely relatives.
- • E-value: In a search, a number estimating how many matches that strong you would expect by chance alone, so a smaller E-value means a more meaningful hit.
- • : In a sequence search, the percentage of your input sequence that lines up with a database match, showing how much of it was compared.
- • control: The comparison condition that isolates the effect of the variable being tested by keeping everything else the same.
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.
A credible identification report cites , E-value, and together, not just one number.
Limit: E1 supplies context or an observation; it does not by itself establish the explanation.
A sequence match is evidence rather than proof, so a defensible identification report must cite match-quality numbers, show a working control, and name a real limitation, because databases are incomplete and errors can fake a match.
Limit: E2 is a teaching statement or comparison and must be checked against the task evidence.
You will be able to defend a ID with evidence.
Limit: E3 supports only the result or product criterion named here; it cannot justify a broader clinical or causal claim.
PLTW-GEND-2026-09-14 · Simulated classroom evidence scenario
Your role: medical interventions team member
Decision: Your team must decide what the evidence from -ID report submission supports before submitting the lab report named on the lesson page.
- • Choose the strongest supported explanation.
- • Choose the next evidence to collect.
- • Hold the decision because the evidence is insufficient.
Response: State one choice, cite at least two evidence IDs, explain the rule that connects them, and add one limitation. Submit it as the lab report.
Claim ceiling: The supplied lesson evidence can support an observation, pattern, classroom mechanism, or next-step decision about -ID report submission. It cannot by itself prove causation, establish a real clinical diagnosis, or justify action outside this classroom task.
Reason for review: Your team must decide what the evidence from -ID report submission supports before submitting the lab report named on the lesson page.
Context: A scientific claim is only as strong as the evidence and the honesty about its limits: naming a means citing your match quality, proving your control worked, and stating what could still be wrong.
- • T1: Assemble your hit-table screenshot, top organism name, E-value, and .
- • T2: Write a Claim naming the and a Reasoning paragraph using your match-quality numbers.
- • T3: Explain how your control run shows the was reliable.
- • T4: Add one sentence on a limitation of identifying a by sequence alone.
- • T5: Submit the report on the class site.
- • T6: Confirm it is turned in and note what you would test to confirm in a real lab.
- • E1: A credible identification report cites , E-value, and together, not just one number.
- • E2: A sequence match is evidence rather than proof, so a defensible identification report must cite match-quality numbers, show a working control, and name a real limitation, because databases are incomplete and errors can fake a match.
- • E3: You will be able to defend a ID with evidence.
Measurements: Use only the measurements, units, graph, or counts supplied in today's task. No additional patient measurement is implied.
Figure finding: Teaching diagram for -ID report submission. Trace the labeled testing, treatment, or biological process and identify where evidence limits the decision. This is a teaching model, not patient or experimental data.
Uncertainty: This is a composite classroom scenario. Missing history, measurements, or confirmation tests remain unknown and limit the conclusion.
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 naming the top organism is the whole report, and treat a sequence match as final proof.. The trap: A sequence match is strong evidence, not proof, because databases are incomplete and or sequencing errors can produce a confident false match, so a credible report must state that limit. Skipping the limitation makes the claim look overconfident and less scientific, not more.
Claim: The unknown pathogen is most likely Escherichia coli.
Reasoning (using match-quality numbers): The top BLAST hit was E. coli at 99 percent identity with an E-value of 2e-120 and 100 percent query coverage. High percent identity plus a very low E-value plus full query coverage together mean the alignment is strong and unlikely to be due to chance.
Control validation: My control run returned its known organism at the expected high identity, which shows the tool and my workflow were reliable before I trusted the unknown result.
Limitation: Sequence-based identification depends on the database being complete and the sample being clean. If the true species is not in the database, or if the sample is contaminated or has sequencing errors, BLAST can return a misleading top hit.
This model shows the level of evidence and organization needed to complete: A short report defending your BLAST identification with match-quality numbers, an explanation of how the control validated the workflow, and one stated limitation of sequence-based identification.
- State the question and method.
- Present the observations and data with units.
- Explain the result, limitations, and next investigation.
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 on the class site; confirm it shows as turned in.
- 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 Pathogen-ID report submission. 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.
Open this when the class reaches this activity and use it to complete the required lesson artifact.
Placement rationale
Matched identification, PCR, sequencing, by path:Medical-Interventions/Unit-1_How-to-Fight-Infection/1.1_The-Mystery-Infection; keywords:blast, sequencing, pathogen, dna, identification. Score 162. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
Use this after the required lesson work when you are ready for a harder application or a deeper connection.
Placement rationale
Matched identification, PCR, sequencing, by path:Medical-Interventions/Unit-1_How-to-Fight-Infection/00_Unit-Overview; keywords:blast, pathogen, dna, identification. Score 150. 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 identification, PCR, sequencing, by path:Medical-Interventions/Unit-1_How-to-Fight-Infection/00_Unit-Overview; keywords:blast, pcr, pathogen, identification. Score 150. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
How to get there: open Clever and sign in with your Microsoft (district) account. Both myPLTW and Schoology are in Clever. Do the activity in myPLTW. Turn the work in on this site or hand it to Mr. Mendoza, because that is the step that counts as submitted. Schoology only shows your report-card grade later.
Check yourself · commit, then reveal▸
Claim ceiling for this check: The supplied lesson evidence can support an observation, pattern, classroom mechanism, or next-step decision about -ID report submission. It cannot by itself prove causation, establish a real clinical diagnosis, or justify action outside this classroom task.
A classmate's report says only: 'The pathogen is Staphylococcus aureus because BLAST returned it as the top hit.' Name two things this report is missing that make it not yet defensible.
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.
Go further and get help▸
I can name the procedure's purpose and the evidence I will record. I can identify each named hazard and the control that reduces it: Wear the required PPE, keep the bench clear, handle equipment only as directed, and know where the eyewash, sink, and spill kit are before you start. My data table is ready before materials are handled.
Finish the checklist before you handle any material.
- • Wear the required PPE, keep the bench clear, handle equipment only as directed, and know where the eyewash, sink, and spill kit are before you start.
- • Human samples and data stay private: label with a code, never a name, and dispose of materials in the correct waste container, then wash your hands.
- 1Before materials are handled, identify the purpose, variables or comparison, controls, measurement units, and stop-work condition.
- 2Assemble your hit-table screenshot, top organism name, E-value, and query coverage.
- 3Write a Claim naming the pathogen and a Reasoning paragraph using your match-quality numbers.
- 4Explain how your control run shows the workflow was reliable.
- 5Add one sentence on a limitation of identifying a pathogen by sequence alone.
- 6Submit the report on the class site.
- 7Confirm it is turned in and note what you would test to confirm in a real lab.
- 8Record each result in the prepared table before interpreting it. Mark missing, repeated, or invalid results truthfully.
- 9Complete the named cleanup and waste route, remove PPE safely, wash hands when required, and confirm the station is ready for the next group.
| Trial or sample ID | Independent condition | Measured result with units | Observation before interpretation | Quality-control note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Before the procedure, predict the result and cite the rule behind the prediction.
After the procedure, compare the result with the prediction and name one limitation or source of uncertainty.
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 Lab report.
Open the drop folderTurn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not.
Class still runs. Complete the online activity above (it's self-guided). Need the concept taught without a teacher? Use this authoritative explainer:
NCBI BLAST- 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.
- SubmittedTurned in the right way, on the class site or handed to Mr. Mendoza in class, and confirmed. Not in Schoology: that is where the report-card grade appears later.
- Error analysis and method · counts doubleName a specific limit of the method and how it moved your result, and compare what you predicted to what happened. "Human error" does not count; say what about the procedure or instrument caused it.