Clue 1: Orient yourself
Which cards establish sequence?
Use the labels and the picture's left-to-right, near-to-far, or before-and-after order. Name only what you can point to.
The question
Which cards establish sequence?
Why it matters: The face forms through a timed sequence of growth, movement, and joining. Locating the missed step helps researchers ask a testable question instead of treating every cleft as the same process. Today you practice the professional reasoning behind that work: Mateo's cleft is best explained as a developmental pathway outcome with bounded evidence, not as one proven cause.
On your WebXam
Synthesizing evidence to classify a cleft as isolated and multifactorial
For life
One result can have many causes; the outcome alone never tells you which.
Principle: Many roads, one ending
Five principles we return to
Having it is not using it
Same instructions, different switches
Same look, different cause
Change one thing and watch
Boss or doorman?
Decides the result or only allows it
Held down, not gone
Remove the brake and it returns
Many roads, one ending
One result can begin many ways
Try the everyday version first
An evidence board reconstructs a route without inventing a suspect
Investigators place confirmed times, locations, and records in order. They can reconstruct a route while keeping an unknown cause labeled as unknown.
Do not jump to the biology yet. Treat the picture as a small system. Track its parts, follow one change at a time, and keep more than one explanation open until the picture supplies a way to separate them.
Clue 2: Trace one change
Which cards identify a failed checkpoint?
Follow one object, stage, or path. Point to the first place where the situation changes instead of jumping to the ending.
Clue 3: Keep the cause open
What missing card prevents a one-cause conclusion?
List more than one explanation that still fits. Name the extra observation that would help you separate those possibilities.
Now inspect the illustration
Work from the visible evidence. A useful answer names the part of the picture that supports it and leaves unknown causes open.
- 1Which cards establish sequence?
- 2Which cards identify a failed checkpoint?
- 3What missing card prevents a one-cause conclusion?
Tier 1 check
Finish with the everyday model
Use the everyday picture to answer today's question in plain words: Which cards establish sequence?
You can complete today's required check without opening the technical details below.
Ready for the real names? Optional tier 2
Technical rules and limits
Rule 1: Build the story from ordered evidence.
Rule 2: Separate what you see, what the evidence supports, and what remains unknown.
Rule 3: End with the strongest claim the evidence permits.
Where the analogy stops: A developmental case is not a crime, and families are never responsible for a congenital difference.
Carry the previous idea forward
A rescue experiment supports a mechanism when restoring one step restores the outcome, but it is not yet a human treatment.
Today's technical takeaway
Mateo's cleft is best explained as a developmental pathway outcome with bounded evidence, not as one proven cause.
Now map the same rules onto biology
Assemble Mateo's complete developmental story
Timeline cards
Human lip and palate windows
Route and checkpoint cards
Growth, movement, adhesion, and fusion evidence
Missing suspect card
No single proven gene or exposure in the composite file
Educational illustration, not a clinical photograph. Use the labels and evidence cards to make the biological claim.
Mateo's case file: evidence supplied in this lesson
DEV20-E1
Mateo has complete unilateral left cleft lip and palate with no broader anomaly pattern established in the composite file.
Why it matters: The phenotype is specific while the cause remains open.
DEV20-E2
Lip and palate formation require ordered growth, cell movement, signaling, adhesion, and seam removal.
Why it matters: Several developmental checkpoints can contribute to the final pattern.
DEV20-E3
The case file does not establish one causal variant, exposure, or syndrome.
Why it matters: The final explanation must remain multifactorial and bounded.
Make the clinical decision
You are the lead developmental biologist at the final case conference.
The team must approve one paragraph for the family-facing case summary.
ADescribe the failed developmental outcomes and state that one cause is not established.
BName one gene as proven without a case result.
CSay development offers no useful explanation.
Choose the summary and cite the phenotype evidence plus the uncertainty evidence.
Evidence required
DEV20-E1 + DEV20-E2 Claim ceiling
You may synthesize the supported developmental pathway. You may not add a diagnosis, variant, or exposure absent from the case file.Go deeper Optional tier 3
Everything required for today is above. Open these only if you want the explainer, source trail, or download files.
The everyday model and Tier 1 check are the complete required path for this lesson.
Use these checks to keep your place. They are not turned in through the portal.
Check off as you finish
- Worked through the everyday picture and answered its three questions.
- Completed the Tier 1 check in plain words.
Turn in: Developmental lesson 20: Mateo's Complete Developmental Story
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.
Open Schoology PDF upload helpIf you cannot get in, see Mr. Mendoza. Do not skip the work.
Optional legacy technical materials Open only if you want the original notes, vocabulary, artifact, and CER work
Before this page, you should know
- A adds a missing signal back to test whether its loss caused the defect; it is the partner of the .
- Forcing a gene ON is , the opposite of a .
Today's new idea is only
Assembling twenty lessons, Mateo's is the visible endpoint of a that did not finish on schedule: an failure of lip and fusion in the weeks 4 to 12 window, multifactorial in origin.
Goal: Assemble the twenty-lesson evidence into one normal-versus-failed developmental account of Mateo's , and conclude that it is an isolated failure of in a specific window (nonsyndromic, multifactorial), with the handed off to the other teams.
Know by the end
- Synthesis means combining many separate findings into one explanation.
- Mateo's failure is local and late: lip-front (~week 6) and secondary fusion (~weeks 8 to 12) did not complete on the left, while everything else formed normally.
- Because no other structure or organ is involved, the is isolated, also called nonsyndromic, not part of a named syndrome.
- Because the family pattern is sparse and the biology behaved as many small pushes over a threshold, it is multifactorial: several small genetic, epigenetic, and environmental contributions, not one all-or-nothing gene.
1
Assembling the story
Model start: This is synthesis: combining many separate findings into one explanation.
- Between weeks 4 and 12 the lip-front (~week 6) and the secondary fusion (~weeks 8 to 12) did not complete on the left, while everything else formed ____ (normally).
- So the failure is local and late: one step, on one side, in one ____ (window), not a breakdown of the whole program.
2
Naming it (earned, not declared)
- Because no other structure or organ is involved, Mateo's is ____ (isolated), also called ____ (nonsyndromic).
- Because the family pattern is sparse and the biology behaved as many small pushes adding up, it is ____ (multifactorial): several small genetic, epigenetic, and environmental contributions, not one all-or-nothing gene.
Everything you need for today is on this page. These links are optional.
What to read
Read the short plain-language explanation written for this lesson. Plain-language explainer for this lesson
Why this source matters
This explanation gives you the background for today's idea without making you decode a research paper: Assembling twenty lessons, Mateo's is the visible endpoint of a that did not finish on schedule: an failure of lip and fusion in the weeks 4 to 12 window, multifactorial in origin.
Words to unlock first
Reading moves
- Skim the title and abstract first to get the gist.
- Circle the one sentence that states the main claim.
- Box the evidence the authors give for that claim.
- Mark one sentence that confuses you, and move on.
Stop point
Stop after the final 'Use it now' section. The research citations are available separately for advanced readers.
Your output
Write one claim-evidence sentence: state the main idea, then name the example or evidence that supports it.
Where this fits
Tested on (Ohio WebXam)
Genetics of Disease · 072130
PLTW lesson
MI · Developmental domain · PLTW PBS 072110
WebXam domain
Molecular and Genetic Technology
Evidence to produce
Write the developmental team's one-paragraph entry for Mateo's Domain Report. It must (1) name the failed step and its window, (2) give two pieces of evidence that the failure is isolated rather than syndromic, (3) state that it is multifactorial and say what that means, and (4) end by handing the case to the next teams. Keep it honest and free of overpromising; Mateo is a composite case.
Lab / skill
Principles of Biomedical Science (PBS)
Everything required for today's decision is already in the case file and plain-language explainer. The links below are original papers and database records for teachers and advanced readers, not assigned student reading.
- Lan & Jiang 2015, Cellular and Molecular Mechanisms of Palatogenesis (Curr Top Dev Biol)
- Alvizi et al. 2017, Differential methylation in nonsyndromic cleft lip and palate and penetrance (Sci Rep)
- Zhang et al. 2002, Rescue of cleft palate in Msx1-deficient mice by transgenic Bmp4 (journal link; use class excerpt if blocked)
- Claim: Mateo's is an , multifactorial failure of lip and .
- Evidence: Two findings from your evidence board that support isolated and one that supports multifactorial.
- Reasoning: Explain how the evidence ruled out a single-gene syndrome and pointed to a local, late with many small causes.
How this is graded (rubric)
For: Write the developmental team's one-paragraph entry for Mateo's Domain Report. It must (1) name the failed step and its window, (2) give two pieces of evidence that the failure is isolated rather than syndromic, (3) state that it is multifactorial and say what that means, and (4) end by handing the case to the next teams. Keep it honest and free of overpromising; Mateo is a composite case.
| Criterion | Proficient | Developing | Beginning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Complete | Every required part of the artifact is present and filled in. | Most parts are present, but one is missing or left blank. | Several parts are missing. |
| Accurate | The science and data are correct and match the evidence. | Mostly correct, with a small factual slip. | Key science or data is wrong. |
| Scientific reasoning (CER) | States a claim, backs it with specific evidence, and explains the reasoning. | Has a claim and evidence, but the reasoning is thin or missing. | Gives an answer with no evidence or reasoning. |
| Professional communication | Clear, organized, and labeled the way a clinician or scientist would write it. | Readable but disorganized or missing labels. | Hard to follow. |
| Submitted | Turned in through the route named under Submit here and confirmed. | Turned in, but in the wrong place or unconfirmed. | Not turned in. |
How the model answer scores against this rubric
- CompleteProficient: Nothing is left blank: the model fills every part of "Write the developmental team's one-paragraph entry for Mateo's Domain Report. It must (1) name the failed step and its window, (2) give two pieces of evidence that the failure is isolated rather than syndromic, (3) state that it is multifactorial and say what that means, and (4) end by handing the case to the next teams. Keep it honest and free of overpromising; Mateo is a composite case.".
- AccurateProficient: Every number and claim matches the case evidence.
- Scientific reasoning (CER)Proficient: It names a claim, cites the specific evidence, and explains the reasoning, not just the answer.
- Professional communicationProficient: It is organized and labeled like a real chart note.
- SubmittedProficient: It would be attached to your class form or handed in, and confirmed.
What's next: Mateo's is an isolated, multifactorial failure of in the weeks 4 to 12 window, with the rest of development normal. The developmental team now hands his fusion-failure story to the genetics, anatomical, and clinical teams. Do their stories agree with ours?