Bioethics: brain data and consent
Do now
Debate whether brain-scan data should be used to predict behavior, then post a CER.
- Hand in
- One-paragraph CER taking a position on whether brain-scan data should be used by courts or schools to predict future behavior.
- 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.
Should a court or a school in Cleveland be allowed to order a brain scan and use it to predict how a student or a defendant will act in the future?
Debate whether brain-scan data should be used to predict behavior, then post a CER.
- • You can take a position on predictive use of brain data.
- • You can weigh a benefit against a civil-liberty risk.
- Name one thing a brain scan can measure and one thing you do not want anyone measuring about you without asking.
- Would you let a school scan your brain if it meant safer hallways? Give one reason for your answer.
- 1Read the prompt: should courts or schools use brain scans to predict how a person will act?
- 2List two possible benefits and two dangers of predicting behavior from brain data.
- 3Choose a side and write a one-sentence claim with your reasoning.
- 4Debate in your John Carroll bioethics group and note the strongest counterpoint.
- 5Post a CER response on consent and brain data.
What did this day actually feel like?
Bioethics: brain data and consent
ETHICS DAY Should brain scan data be usable for anything beyond the reason it was collected? A brain scan is closer to a person than most medical data.
Somebody made the point that a scan taken to find a tumor might also show something about cognition nobody asked to know. Consent for the first does not cover the second. That reframed it for me from privacy to purpose.
AT HOME, THE NIGHT BEFORE THU MAR 11 Neuron parts and the synapse Dendrites, cell body, axon, myelin, terminals, with the signal direction marked. Then the synapse, where the signal stops being electrical and becomes chemical and then electrical again.
That gap is the part I keep thinking about. The signal does not actually cross. A molecule crosses, and a new signal starts on the other side.
Turned in: labeled neuron diagram → Lab Notebooks 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.
Should brain scan data be usable for anything beyond the reason it was collected? A brain scan is closer to a person than most medical data.
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
🔑 Today's words · 5
Tap a word in the lesson for a plain meaning and one example. Recycled into next week's Do-Now.
Do the work · 80-minute blockfirst 5 min = hook▸
💡 Big idea: Neuroimaging shows brain structure and activity but not future choices, so using scan data to predict behavior without consent trades away individual autonomy for a promise the technology cannot keep.
- 0-5Intro: what neuroimaging can and cannot tell us
- 5-20Independent reading and benefit/danger list
- 20-40John Carroll bioethics debate
- 40-55Draft claim and strongest evidence
- 55-75Write and post CER
- 75-80Class share: strongest civil-liberty vs public- arguments
- • This week we study the nervous system: neurons, synapses, brain regions, and the organization of the central and peripheral systems.
- • Before we go inside the brain, here is the question the technology raises. If a brain scan could tell a judge that someone is likely to reoffend, should that be used as evidence?
- • This is not science fiction. Courts have admitted neuroimaging data in sentencing. Today you decide whether that is ethical.
- • Your CER must engage with both the science and the ethics. A weak science claim or a vague ethical argument will cost you points.
- • Neuroimaging modalities include MRI (structure), fMRI (blood flow as a proxy for activity), and EEG (electrical activity). None can reliably predict specific future behavior.
- • Using brain data without violates the same principles as using any other medical data without patient permission.
- • The tension between social utility (public benefit) and individual autonomy (right to privacy of thought) is a core bioethical conflict in neuroscience.
Unit 2.1 Getting Nervous: Nervous system structure, brain anatomy, neurons, signaling, sheep brain or virtual alternative. · Bioethics: brain data and consent
Day 1 of this lesson. Open this exact section in myPLTW (find it in Clever, Microsoft sign-in), then do the work below.
Do this: Open Lesson 2.1 Getting Nervous in myPLTW and complete the introductory task; use a fact about brain-scan technology in your brain-data-and-consent CER.
Mark the introductory task complete after posting your CER.
You finished Lesson 1.3 rehab content; this begins Lesson 2.1, and the introductory task should be checked off today.
myPLTW completion status plus CER screenshot.
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.
Unit 2.1 Getting Nervous: Nervous system structure, brain anatomy, neurons, signaling, sheep brain or virtual alternative. · Bioethics: brain data and consent
Open Lesson 2.1 Getting Nervous in myPLTW and complete the introductory task; use a fact about brain-scan technology in your brain-data-and-consent CER.
You finished Lesson 1.3 rehab content; this begins Lesson 2.1, and the introductory task should be checked off today.
This is how Mr. Mendoza sees the class keeping pace with PLTW. Be honest, it only helps if it is accurate.
🎯 Debate whether brain-scan data should be used to predict behavior, then post a CER.
- Read the prompt: should courts or schools use brain scans to predict how a person will act?
- List two possible benefits and two dangers of predicting behavior from brain data.
- Choose a side and write a one-sentence claim with your reasoning.
- Debate in your John Carroll bioethics group and note the strongest counterpoint.
- Post a CER response on consent and brain data.
CER: One-paragraph CER taking a position on whether brain-scan data should be used by courts or schools to predict future behavior.
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 |
|---|---|
| Read the prompt: should courts or schools use brain scans to predict how a person will act? | _______ |
| List two possible benefits and two dangers of predicting behavior from brain data. | _______ |
| Choose a side and write a one-sentence claim with your reasoning. | _______ |
| Debate in your John Carroll bioethics group and note the strongest counterpoint. | _______ |
| Post a CER response on consent and brain data. | _______ |
Working solo? Put your own name in "Who" for every row.
- You can take a position on predictive use of brain data.
- You can weigh a benefit against a civil-liberty risk.
- 1Do thisDebate whether brain-scan data should be used to predict behavior, then post a CER.
- 2Use this resource
- 3Submit thisCER: One-paragraph CER taking a position on whether brain-scan data should be used by courts or schools to predict future behavior.
- 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. Human Anatomy & Physiology (Human Body Systems) › Unit 2.1 Getting Nervous: Nervous system structure, brain anatomy, neurons, signaling, sheep brain or virtual alternative. › CEROpen 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.
You revise a plan in response to and defend each change with a metric and a goal so that the revision reads as purposeful clinical reasoning, because unexplained changes cannot be trusted to have made the plan safer or more effective.
Neuroimaging shows brain structure and activity but not future choices, so using scan data to predict behavior without consent trades away individual autonomy for a promise the technology cannot keep.
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: Should a court or a school in Cleveland be allowed to order a brain scan and use it to predict how a student or a defendant will act in the future?
What you already know: You revise a plan in response to and defend each change with a metric and a goal so that the revision reads as purposeful clinical reasoning, because unexplained changes cannot be trusted to have made the plan safer or more effective.
New idea: Neuroimaging shows brain structure and activity but not future choices, so using scan data to predict behavior without consent trades away individual autonomy for a promise the technology cannot keep.
Visual or model: F1. F1. A lesson illustration or teaching diagram for Bioethics: brain data and consent. Use it with E1-E3; it is a model or context image, not experimental or patient data. What to notice: Trace the labeled structure, movement, or system relationship that connects form to function.
- Observe or measure the relevant feature in Bioethics: brain data and consent.
- 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: Should a court or a school in Cleveland be allowed to order a brain scan and use it to predict how a student or a defendant will act in the future?
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.
- • : A nerve cell that carries electrical and chemical signals, with branches that receive input and a long fiber that sends the signal onward.
- • : A branching extension of a that receives incoming signals from other nerve cells and carries them toward the cell body.
- • axon: The long, slender fiber of a that carries electrical signals away from the cell body toward other cells.
- • : The tiny junction where one passes a signal to the next, usually by releasing chemical messengers across a small gap.
- • : A chemical messenger released by a that crosses the to pass a signal to the next neuron, muscle, or gland.
- • CNS: The central nervous system, made of the brain and spinal cord, which processes information and directs the body's responses.
- • PNS: The peripheral nervous system: all the nerves outside the brain and spinal cord that carry signals between the body and the central nervous system.
- • : The largest part of the brain, split into two hemispheres, that handles thinking, voluntary movement, sensation, language, and memory.
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.
Neuroimaging modalities include MRI (structure), fMRI (blood flow as a proxy for activity), and EEG (electrical activity). None can reliably predict specific future behavior.
Limit: E1 supplies context or an observation; it does not by itself establish the explanation.
Neuroimaging shows brain structure and activity but not future choices, so using scan data to predict behavior without consent trades away individual autonomy for a promise the technology cannot keep.
Limit: E2 is a teaching statement or comparison and must be checked against the task evidence.
You can take a position on predictive use of brain data.
Limit: E3 supports only the result or product criterion named here; it cannot justify a broader clinical or causal claim.
PLTW-HAP-2027-03-09 · Simulated classroom evidence scenario
Your role: anatomy and physiology consultant
Decision: Your team must decide what the evidence from Bioethics: brain data and consent supports before submitting the claim-evidence-reasoning response named on the lesson page.
- • Select the option best supported by E1-E3.
- • Select a reasonable alternative and name the evidence it would require.
- • Delay the claim because the evidence does not distinguish the options.
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: The supplied lesson evidence can support an observation, pattern, classroom mechanism, or next-step decision about Bioethics: brain data and consent. 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 Bioethics: brain data and consent supports before submitting the claim-evidence-reasoning response named on the lesson page.
Context: Medical data about the brain is still medical data, so the right to consent and to privacy of thought does not disappear just because a scan can see inside your head.
- • T1: Read the prompt: should courts or schools use brain scans to predict how a person will act?
- • T2: List two possible benefits and two dangers of predicting behavior from brain data.
- • T3: Choose a side and write a one-sentence claim with your reasoning.
- • T4: Debate in your John Carroll bioethics group and note the strongest counterpoint.
- • T5: Post a CER response on consent and brain data.
- • E1: Neuroimaging modalities include MRI (structure), fMRI (blood flow as a proxy for activity), and EEG (electrical activity). None can reliably predict specific future behavior.
- • E2: Neuroimaging shows brain structure and activity but not future choices, so using scan data to predict behavior without consent trades away individual autonomy for a promise the technology cannot keep.
- • E3: You can take a position on predictive use of brain data.
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 Bioethics: brain data and consent. Trace the labeled structure, movement, or system relationship that connects form to function. 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 often think a brain scan reads your thoughts and can predict what you will do, the way it looks in movies.. The trap: That is the trap. An fMRI shows blood flow averaged over groups, not a crystal ball for one person, so treating a scan as proof of future behavior punishes people for a picture that cannot actually predict them.
Claim: An employer should not be allowed to use a worker's genetic test results to decide who gets hired or promoted.
Evidence: A DNA test can show whether a person carries a gene variant linked to a condition, such as the BRCA1 variant tied to higher breast-cancer risk, but carrying a variant is not the same as having the disease or being unable to do a job. Most conditions also depend on many genes plus environment, so a single result gives a probability, not a certainty. In the United States, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 already bars employers from using genetic information in employment decisions, and results shared for a medical reason cannot be repurposed without the person's informed consent.
Reasoning: Because a genetic result reports a risk rather than a fact about present ability, using it to screen workers would penalize people for a condition they may never develop and cannot control. That trades a person's privacy over their own genetic code for a hiring benefit the data does not actually deliver, so the civil-liberty cost outweighs the weak predictive gain. The strongest counterpoint I considered was that an employer might want to know about health risks to plan for absences, but that concern is better met through voluntary accommodations and consent, not through a test result the worker never agreed to share for that purpose.
This model shows the level of evidence and organization needed to complete: A parallel one-paragraph Claim-Evidence-Reasoning model on whether an employer should be allowed to use a worker's genetic test results in hiring, citing a fact about what a DNA test can and cannot show. It models the CER format and depth for a different consent question and does not answer today's brain-scan 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: Post to class board and screenshot for your evidence packet.
- 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 Bioethics: brain data and consent. 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.
Hand-picked readings, videos, and interactives for this lesson, all free and from authoritative open organizations (NIH, CDC, OpenStax, Khan Academy, PhET, HHMI, and more).
A fillable, Cornell-style notebook for Unit 2: Research Ready. Type your notes, cues, and summaries right in the PDF, or print it and write by hand. Each lesson page has a cue column, a notes column, and a summary box, plus dated lab-record pages you can turn in.
HBS Unit 2 notebook: Research Ready Fillable PDFCornell notes + lab recordsOpenVetted readings and references for this unit. Use them to prepare, to catch up if you were absent, or to go deeper on today's target.
This site may ask you to verify you are human. If it blocks you on a school device, ask for the class copy.
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 Bioethics: brain data and consent. It cannot by itself prove causation, establish a real clinical diagnosis, or justify action outside this classroom task.
A prosecutor says an fMRI 'proves' the defendant is dangerous. What is the single biggest problem with that claim?
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▸
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.
Read the linked overview on the brain, then post a written CER on whether brain-scan data should predict behavior, citing one fact from the resource.
MedlinePlus: Brain diseasesThen submit your CER. 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.
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: Nervous System- 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.