This class runs in two periods and they do not do the same lesson on the same day. You are reading the Period 6A-7B calendar, the one with John Carroll bioethics on Mondays.
Bioprospecting ethics debate
Do now
Debate whether a living organism and the compounds it makes should be patentable, and defend a position with a reason you can state.
- Hand in
- One sentence recording the strongest opposing argument heard during the frontier medicine ethics debate.
- Where
- Submit this on the class form named on this page. The form requires the student's district Microsoft sign-in. The thank-you page is the submission receipt. A physical handoff counts only when the day page names that route. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not count as submitted.
You get two school days for every day you were absent, so this deadline moves with you.
If the form offers you a saved draft, choose New draft. If the Assignment box comes up empty, type it exactly: Bioprospecting ethics debate
Debate whether a living organism and the compounds it makes should be patentable, and defend a position with a reason you can state.
Debate whether a living organism and the compounds it makes should be patentable, and defend a position with a reason you can state.
- • Argue from the approval pipeline and its cost, not from whether patents feel fair.
- • Name a fact that would change your position.
- What do you already know about Bioprospecting ethics debate?
- What would you need to find out to answer today's question?
- 1Summarize how a compound found in nature becomes an approved drug, and roughly how long it takes.
- 2Research one therapeutic that came from a living organism, other than the examples given.
- 3State the strongest argument for allowing a patent, and the strongest against.
- 4Take a position and name the one fact that would change your mind.
- 5Record the opposing argument you found hardest to answer.
🛠 Get unstuck · pick your level
Check you have the right sheet: the top of it prints today's portal day, Bioprospecting ethics debate. The PLTW activity itself is in myPLTW and is not posted here.
Do the work · 80-minute blockfirst 5 min = hook▸
💡 Big idea: Biodiversity is the search space, so an argument about patents is also an argument about what gets searched and by whom.
- 0-8 minRead the frontier research case; annotate one everyday condition that might benefit from the frontier finding.
- 8-18 minDefine innovation, , disease prevention, frontier research.
- 18-35 minBuild two-point argument for your funding stance.
- 35-60 minStructured debate; teacher or peer facilitates.
- 60-72 minRecord the strongest opposing argument.
- 72-80 minDebrief; preview the story-map notes for Tuesday.
- • This is an optional extra-credit unit: you chose to go further than the standard course, and that choice itself reflects scientific curiosity.
- • Frontier medicine debates force you to reason about probability and value, not just facts.
- • WebXam 072110 Biotechnology strand rewards breadth of thinking about how new technology enters clinical practice.
- • The counterpoint you record today will become the limitation in your Thursday CER.
- • means moving a discovery from research to clinical application: not all frontier discoveries translate.
- • Space and undersea medicine address extreme physiological stressors that also model conditions seen in aging and critical care.
- • Disease prevention goals can justify frontier investment when the pathway is plausible and documented.
Innovation Synthesis: new frontiers and your final medical-innovation pitch · Bioprospecting ethics debate
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 myPLTW and locate Lesson 4.2 New Frontiers, Activity 4.2.2 Under the Sea. Complete the opening reflection prompt before the debate.
Submit the opening reflection before the debate begins.
You finished Lesson 4.1 last week. This reserve unit covers Lessons 4.2 and 4.3, the capstone synthesis. The platform prompt should be submitted within the first 18 minutes.
Platform submission plus handwritten opposing-argument note.
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. Submit this on the class form named on this page. The form requires the student's district Microsoft sign-in. The thank-you page is the submission receipt. A physical handoff counts only when the day page names that route. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not count as submitted.
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.
Innovation Synthesis: new frontiers and your final medical-innovation pitch · Bioprospecting ethics debate
Open myPLTW and locate Lesson 4.2 New Frontiers, Activity 4.2.2 Under the Sea. Complete the opening reflection prompt before the debate.
You finished Lesson 4.1 last week. This reserve unit covers Lessons 4.2 and 4.3, the capstone synthesis. The platform prompt should be submitted within the first 18 minutes.
This is how Mr. Mendoza sees the class keeping pace with PLTW. Be honest, it only helps if it is accurate.
🎯 Debate whether a living organism and the compounds it makes should be patentable, and defend a position with a reason you can state.
- Summarize how a compound found in nature becomes an approved drug, and roughly how long it takes.
- Research one therapeutic that came from a living organism, other than the examples given.
- State the strongest argument for allowing a patent, and the strongest against.
- Take a position and name the one fact that would change your mind.
- Record the opposing argument you found hardest to answer.
Exit ticket: One sentence recording the strongest opposing argument heard during the frontier medicine ethics debate.
Submit this on the class form named on this page. The form requires the student's district Microsoft sign-in. The thank-you page is the submission receipt. A physical handoff counts only when the day page names that route. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not count as submitted. 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 |
|---|---|
| Summarize how a compound found in nature becomes an approved drug, and roughly how long it takes. | _______ |
| Research one therapeutic that came from a living organism, other than the examples given. | _______ |
| State the strongest argument for allowing a patent, and the strongest against. | _______ |
| Take a position and name the one fact that would change your mind. | _______ |
| Record the opposing argument you found hardest to answer. | _______ |
Working solo? Put your own name in "Who" for every row.
- Argue from the approval pipeline and its cost, not from whether patents feel fair.
- Name a fact that would change your position.
- 1Do thisDebate whether a living organism and the compounds it makes should be patentable, and defend a position with a reason you can state.
- 2Use this resource
- 3Submit thisExit ticket: One sentence recording the strongest opposing argument heard during the frontier medicine ethics debate.
- 4Submit it here
- 1Open the form. It must say For students at the top: if it says For parents and guardians, press Back and pick I am the student.
- 2If it offers you a saved draft, choose New draft: an old draft brings back the old assignment.
- 3Sign in with your district Microsoft account, not a personal one.
- 4Check the Assignment box says today's assignment from this page, then pick your period and type your student ID, all nine digits.
- 5Attach your file and press Submit. The thank-you page is your receipt.
Submit this on the class form named on this page. The form requires the student's district Microsoft sign-in. The thank-you page is the submission receipt. A physical handoff counts only when the day page names that route. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not count as submitted. Principles of Biomedical Technology (Principles of Biomedical Science) › Innovation Synthesis: new frontiers and your final medical-innovation pitch › Exit ticketTurn it in
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.
This is the first task in the course where better is not more: a coating that opens at three minutes fails exactly as hard as one that opens at nine.
Biodiversity is the search space, so an argument about patents is also an argument about what gets searched and by whom.
A review board sorts scientific evidence, stakeholder needs, possible benefits, possible burdens, and uncertainty before choosing a policy.
- Which statements are scientific evidence?
- Which statements express a value or priority?
- Who receives the benefit and who carries the burden?
Use science to estimate consequences, then state the value judgment and tradeoff that determine the decision.
A review-board model organizes reasoning but does not make one ethical principle automatically outweigh every other principle.
- • Evidence cards map to source-backed findings.
- • Stakeholder cards map to affected people and priorities.
- • The recommendation maps to an explicit tradeoff with a named uncertainty.
Driving question: Debate whether a living organism and the compounds it makes should be patentable, and defend a position with a reason you can state.
What you already know: This is the first task in the course where better is not more: a coating that opens at three minutes fails exactly as hard as one that opens at nine.
New idea: Biodiversity is the search space, so an argument about patents is also an argument about what gets searched and by whom.
Visual or model: F1. F1. A lesson illustration or teaching diagram for Bioprospecting ethics debate. Use it with E1-E3; it is a model or context image, not experimental or patient data. What to notice: Use the labels and arrows in F1 to identify the relationship that supports Bioprospecting ethics debate.
- Observe or measure the relevant feature in bioprospecting ethics debate.
- Organize the observation with a stable evidence ID.
- Apply this rule: Use science to estimate consequences, then state the value judgment and tradeoff that determine the decision.
- Choose the option the evidence supports and state the limit of the conclusion.
Real biomedical example: Debate whether a living organism and the compounds it makes should be patentable, and defend a position with a reason you can state.
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.
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 defensible biomedical decision separates scientific evidence from value judgments, identifies who may benefit or be burdened, and states the uncertainty and tradeoffs that remain.
Limit: Scientific evidence can inform the options and likely consequences, but it cannot choose a single value-neutral answer.
Use science to estimate consequences, then state the value judgment and tradeoff that determine the decision.
Limit: A review-board model organizes reasoning but does not make one ethical principle automatically outweigh every other principle.
Argue from the approval pipeline and its cost, not from whether patents feel fair.
Limit: E3 defines the classroom product or success criterion. It is not independent scientific evidence and cannot justify a clinical or causal claim.
PLTW-PBT@P67-2026-12-15 · Simulated classroom evidence scenario
Your role: biomedical team member
Decision: Your team must decide what the evidence from bioprospecting ethics debate supports before submitting the exit 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 exit response.
Claim ceiling: Today's evidence supports a classroom claim about bioprospecting ethics debate. It cannot prove causation, diagnose a real patient, or justify action outside this room.
Reason for review: Your team must decide what the evidence from bioprospecting ethics debate supports before submitting the exit response named on the lesson page.
Context: Debate whether a living organism and the compounds it makes should be patentable, and defend a position with a reason you can state.
- • T1: Summarize how a compound found in nature becomes an approved drug, and roughly how long it takes.
- • T2: Research one therapeutic that came from a living organism, other than the examples given.
- • T3: State the strongest argument for allowing a patent, and the strongest against.
- • T4: Take a position and name the one fact that would change your mind.
- • T5: Record the opposing argument you found hardest to answer.
- • E1: A defensible biomedical decision separates scientific evidence from value judgments, identifies who may benefit or be burdened, and states the uncertainty and tradeoffs that remain.
- • E2: Use science to estimate consequences, then state the value judgment and tradeoff that determine the decision.
- • E3: Argue from the approval pipeline and its cost, not from whether patents feel fair.
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 Bioprospecting ethics debate. Use the labels and arrows to identify the decision-relevant relationship. 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.
- • The solution must address the stated need in bioprospecting ethics debate.
- • The decision must be supported by E1-E3.
- • The final product must make the success criteria visible.
- • Complete the work inside the 80-minute block.
- • Use only supplied or teacher-approved materials and evidence.
- • Do not trade , accessibility, or privacy for speed.
- • and evidence quality: must pass before scoring other criteria.
- • User need and effectiveness: highest scored criterion.
- • Time, cost, and ease of use: compare only after and effectiveness pass.
Test evidence: For each option, record the E1-E3 result that supports or fails each criterion. Do not assign a score without a named observation.
- Version or option tested
- Criterion met or missed
- Evidence ID and result
- Revision made
- Reason for the revision
- Need and user
- Criteria and constraints
- Chosen option and evidence
- Test result
- Revision and reason
1. Decision or claim I am testing: ____
2. Evidence ID and exact observation: ____
3. Second evidence ID and exact observation: ____
4. Rule that connects the evidence to my claim: ____
5. Strongest alternative or tradeoff: ____
6. Limitation or missing evidence that controls my confidence: ____
7. Revision I would make if the missing evidence changed: ____
This model shows the level of evidence and organization needed to complete: A blank structure for organizing the assigned response. It contains no claim, ranking, calculation, data interpretation, or recommendation from today's task.
- Name the prompt or task.
- Answer it directly with the key evidence.
- Check that the response matches the requested format.
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: Hand in your exit-ticket card, or turn it in on the class site under today's exit-ticket.
- 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.
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: Today's evidence supports a classroom claim about bioprospecting ethics debate. It cannot prove causation, diagnose a real patient, or justify action outside this room.
Go further and get help▸
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.
Structured debate: Should biomedical funding prioritize space and undersea frontier research or proven everyday care? Assign frontier and established-care teams.
NIH: Health InformationThen submit your Exit ticket. Submit this on the class form named on this page. The form requires the student's district Microsoft sign-in. The thank-you page is the submission receipt. A physical handoff counts only when the day page names that route. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not count as submitted.
Class still runs. Complete the online activity above (it's self-guided). Need the concept taught without a teacher? Use this authoritative explainer:
NIBIB: biomedical engineering science topics and new frontiersYou've passed Unit 2, so the optional extra-credit track is open. Complete reserved-unit work from home, including virtual labs, for extra credit. Each item shows its correct submission route.
Open the extra-credit track- 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 through the one route named under Submit here and confirmed by the form receipt or the named physical handoff. Not in Schoology: that is where the report-card grade appears later.