Analyze the mutation
Do now
Interpret your mutation model with a CER and evaluate the model's limitations.
- Hand in
- CER arguing how the point mutation affects the resulting protein, using the Wednesday sequence comparison as evidence and connecting the protein change to a possible diagnosis in the reasoning.
- 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.
Looking at your own before-and-after amino acid sequences, how severe is your , and what evidence in the tells you so?
Interpret your model with a CER and evaluate the model's limitations.
- • I can interpret how a changes a .
- • I can connect a change to a diagnosis.
- Name one place in a where changing an amino acid would matter a lot, and one place where it might not.
- What does a stop codon do to the chain being built?
- 1Compare the original and mutated amino acid sequences.
- 2Write a CER: how does this affect the resulting ?
- 3Relate the change to a possible diagnosis.
- 4Identify two variables that determine a 's severity.
- 5State one limitation of a paper or virtual model of .
What did this day actually feel like?
Analyze the mutation
CER on how the mutation affects the protein and what diagnosis it might relate to. Severity depends on where the mutation falls, which amino acid changes, and what that amino acid was doing in the folded protein.
The model's limitation is that it is flat. Real proteins fold in three dimensions, and whether a substitution matters often depends on the fold, which our paper strips cannot show.
AT HOME, THE WEEKEND BEFORE MON OCT 26 Submit DNA evidence Sequences, mutation analysis, CER. The central dogma is the spine of everything after this, so this packet is one I will come back to before the WebXam.
Turned in: full DNA packet → recorded in Class Records
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.
The person next to me changed one base and got a stop codon. Same size change, completely different consequence.
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: A 's clinical severity is set by where it falls and how it changes the amino acid's chemistry, so identical-size changes can produce anything from no effect to a broken .
- 0:00Return Wednesday notebook entries; compare original and mutated amino acid sequences as a class (anonymized)
- 0:10Classify each group's (silent, , ) and discuss severity expectations
- 0:22Research: find one real genetic disease caused by a or similar to yours (NCBI Genes and Disease)
- 0:38CER writing: claim about how the affects the , evidence from sequence comparison, reasoning from amino acid property change and disease connection
- 0:58List two variables that determine severity; state one limitation of a paper model
- 1:10Pair-share CERs; preview Friday final submission
- • Yesterday you introduced a and got a new amino acid sequence. Today the question is: so what? Does the new sequence produce a that still works, works differently, or does not work at all?
- • The answer depends on two things: which amino acid changed, and where in the that amino acid does its job. An amino acid buried deep in the core of a protein and one sitting in the active site are not equally important.
- • You will write a CER today that connects your to a possible diagnosis. This is the payoff of the whole central dogma unit: a change in DNA, traced all the way through RNA and , producing a disease.
- • We will also be honest about what the model cannot show. Paper models are 2D. Real proteins fold into complex 3D shapes. The model is useful but limited.
- • Two variables that determine severity are the position of the changed amino acid in the (active site vs. structural region) and whether the new amino acid has different chemical properties (polar vs. nonpolar, charged vs. uncharged).
- • A introduces a premature stop codon, producing a truncated (shortened) that is usually nonfunctional; this often has severe clinical consequences.
- • A paper or virtual model of cannot represent the three-dimensional folding of the actual , which means the model can show the amino acid sequence but not the functional impact of that sequence change.
Unit 2.2 Decoding a Diagnosis: DNA, chromosomes, genes, proteins, protein synthesis, mutation, inheritance. · Analyze the
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: In myPLTW, complete the Lesson 2.2 Decoding a Diagnosis -analysis reflection in the lab activity.
Mark the Lesson 2.2 -analysis reflection complete in myPLTW.
You modeled the Wednesday. By the end of today your CER and the mutation severity analysis should both be done.
Completed CER with sequence comparison evidence and a real-disease connection in the reasoning.
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 2.2 Decoding a Diagnosis: DNA, chromosomes, genes, proteins, protein synthesis, mutation, inheritance. · Analyze the mutation
In myPLTW, complete the Lesson 2.2 Decoding a Diagnosis -analysis reflection in the lab activity.
You modeled the Wednesday. By the end of today your CER and the mutation severity analysis should both be done.
This is how Mr. Mendoza sees the class keeping pace with PLTW. Be honest, it only helps if it is accurate.
🎯 Interpret your model with a CER and evaluate the model's limitations.
- Compare the original and mutated amino acid sequences.
- Write a CER: how does this affect the resulting ?
- Relate the change to a possible diagnosis.
- Identify two variables that determine a 's severity.
- State one limitation of a paper or virtual model of .
CER: CER arguing how the point affects the resulting , using the Wednesday sequence comparison as evidence and connecting the protein change to a possible diagnosis in the reasoning.
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 |
|---|---|
| Compare the original and mutated amino acid sequences. | _______ |
| Write a CER: how does this affect the resulting ? | _______ |
| Relate the change to a possible diagnosis. | _______ |
| Identify two variables that determine a 's severity. | _______ |
| State one limitation of a paper or virtual model of . | _______ |
Working solo? Put your own name in "Who" for every row.
- I can interpret how a changes a .
- I can connect a change to a diagnosis.
- 1Do thisInterpret your mutation model with a CER and evaluate the model's limitations.
- 2Use this resource
- 3Submit thisCER: CER arguing how the point mutation affects the resulting protein, using the Wednesday sequence comparison as evidence and connecting the protein change to a possible diagnosis in the reasoning.
- 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. Principles of Biomedical Technology (Principles of Biomedical Science) › Unit 2.2 Decoding a Diagnosis: DNA, chromosomes, genes, proteins, protein synthesis, mutation, inheritance. › 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.
Modeling and by hand makes each base pairing visible, so you can pinpoint exactly where one changed base rewrites the .
A 's clinical severity is set by where it falls and how it changes the amino acid's chemistry, so identical-size changes can produce anything from no effect to a broken .
A library keeps a master plan protected while working copies guide production at different stations.
- Why protect the master copy?
- What information moves?
- Where can an error change the final product?
Stored information can be copied, read, and converted into a functional product.
Genes are regulated biological sequences, not conscious instructions, and one gene rarely determines a whole trait alone.
- • Master plan maps to DNA.
- • Working copy maps to RNA.
- • Production output maps to or a regulated cell function.
Driving question: Looking at your own before-and-after amino acid sequences, how severe is your , and what evidence in the tells you so?
What you already know: Modeling and by hand makes each base pairing visible, so you can pinpoint exactly where one changed base rewrites the .
New idea: A 's clinical severity is set by where it falls and how it changes the amino acid's chemistry, so identical-size changes can produce anything from no effect to a broken .
Visual or model: F1. F1. A lesson illustration or teaching diagram for Analyze the mutation. Use it with E1-E3; it is a model or context image, not experimental or patient data. What to notice: Trace the labeled observation or evidence sequence before choosing an explanation.
- Observe or measure the relevant feature in Analyze the .
- Organize the observation with a stable evidence ID.
- Apply this rule: Stored information can be copied, read, and converted into a functional product.
- Choose the option the evidence supports and state the limit of the conclusion.
Real biomedical example: Looking at your own before-and-after amino acid sequences, how severe is your , and what evidence in the tells you so?
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.
- • DNA: The molecule that stores genetic instructions in a twisted double helix, with paired bases that spell out the code for building an organism.
- • : A tightly coiled package of DNA wrapped around proteins that carries genes; humans normally have 46 of them, arranged in 23 pairs.
- • gene: A stretch of DNA that codes for a product (usually a ) and carries an instruction for the cell.
- • : One of the alternative versions of a gene found at the same spot on a , like the blue or brown options for eye color.
- • : A folded chain of amino acids that a gene's instructions are used to build, serving as the cell's machines and structural building blocks.
- • : The first step of making a : copying a DNA gene into messenger RNA.
- • : The second step of making a : the ribosome reads the mRNA and builds a chain of amino acids.
- • : A change in the ; some change a enough to cause disease, many do not.
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.
Two variables that determine severity are the position of the changed amino acid in the (active site vs. structural region) and whether the new amino acid has different chemical properties (polar vs. nonpolar, charged vs. uncharged).
Limit: E1 supplies context or an observation; it does not by itself establish the explanation.
A 's clinical severity is set by where it falls and how it changes the amino acid's chemistry, so identical-size changes can produce anything from no effect to a broken .
Limit: E2 is a teaching statement or comparison and must be checked against the task evidence.
I can interpret how a changes a .
Limit: E3 supports only the result or product criterion named here; it cannot justify a broader clinical or causal claim.
PLTW-PBT-2026-10-22 · Simulated classroom evidence scenario
Your role: biomedical investigator
Decision: Your team must decide what the evidence from Analyze the supports before submitting the claim-evidence-reasoning response named on the lesson page.
- • Keep the current design.
- • Revise the feature that misses a criterion.
- • Run one more fair test before choosing.
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 Analyze the . 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 Analyze the supports before submitting the claim-evidence-reasoning response named on the lesson page.
Context: A 's harm depends on where it lands and what it changes, so location and chemistry, not the mere fact of a mutation, decide how sick a person gets.
- • T1: Compare the original and mutated amino acid sequences.
- • T2: Write a CER: how does this affect the resulting ?
- • T3: Relate the change to a possible diagnosis.
- • T4: Identify two variables that determine a 's severity.
- • T5: State one limitation of a paper or virtual model of .
- • E1: Two variables that determine severity are the position of the changed amino acid in the (active site vs. structural region) and whether the new amino acid has different chemical properties (polar vs. nonpolar, charged vs. uncharged).
- • E2: A 's clinical severity is set by where it falls and how it changes the amino acid's chemistry, so identical-size changes can produce anything from no effect to a broken .
- • E3: I can interpret how a changes a .
Measurements: No patient measurement is supplied unless it appears explicitly in E1-E3 or F1. Do not invent a value.
Figure finding: Teaching diagram for Analyze the . Trace the labeled observation or evidence sequence before choosing an explanation. 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.
Students often think Students often assume every is bad, and a bigger-looking change must be a worse disease.. The trap: The trap is thinking all mutations harm equally. A silent can change nothing, while a mutation can be catastrophic. Severity comes from position (active site vs. structural region) and chemistry (polar vs. nonpolar), not from the fact that a base changed.
Claim: The change shown in the karyotype model is a whole-chromosome error that could seriously affect development.\n\nEvidence: In the model, chromosome 21 appears three times instead of the normal pair, so the cell carries 47 chromosomes rather than 46. Every other chromosome pair looks typical, and no single band or gene was rewritten.\n\nReasoning: The severity of a genetic change depends on how much genetic material is added or lost and how many genes that touches. An extra copy of an entire chromosome means hundreds of genes are present in three doses instead of two, which raises how much of each protein the cell makes. Because so many genes are affected at once, this whole-chromosome error tends to have broad, body-wide effects rather than one narrow change, and a trisomy of chromosome 21 is consistent with a diagnosis of Down syndrome. This differs from a change that swaps or deletes a single base, which alters at most one gene. A limitation is that a karyotype shows chromosome number and shape but not how active each gene is, so the model can suggest that an effect is likely but cannot show exactly which traits will appear or how strongly.
This model shows the level of evidence and organization needed to complete: A claim-evidence-reasoning paragraph interpreting a modeled chromosomal change (a karyotype), citing the chromosome count as evidence and connecting the change to a possible diagnosis, with a stated limitation. This is a parallel model, not an answer to today's own point-mutation 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: Upload the CER to the tracker or hand in the written copy by end of class.
- 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 Analyze the mutation. 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 and interactives for this lesson, from authoritative open organizations and PLTW's own public course outline.
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 Analyze the . It cannot by itself prove causation, establish a real clinical diagnosis, or justify action outside this classroom task.
A point mutation changes a codon from GAA to UAA partway through a gene. What kind of mutation is this, and why would it likely be severe?
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.
Today is individual work you can do from home: complete the same target above, then submit your CER.
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:
Learn.Genetics (University of Utah): DNA to protein- 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.