Keeping Mateo Fed and Growing
Disease domain · Lesson 6 of 20 · Shared clinical backbone (the cleft team)
Today's goal: Students will explain why an open palate prevents normal sucking and choose feeding interventions (specialized bottle, positioning) that let Mateo grow.
What a finished product looks like
This is a model of the work you should turn in. Use it to check your own: match the structure and the level of detail, do not copy it. Your wording should be your own.
Mateo's feeding plan for tonight:
1. Bottle/nipple: use a compressible (assisted-delivery) bottle and gently squeeze it in rhythm with his sucking attempts. Why: his open palate means he cannot build the vacuum to pull milk in, so the caregiver delivers the milk instead.
2. Position: hold him more upright (vertical) during feeds. Why: gravity carries milk down the throat instead of refluxing back up into the nose, which lowers choking and nasal leakage.
3. Report this sign of failure to thrive: if he keeps losing weight or does not start regaining it after about day 3, call the team; continued weight loss means intake is still too low for growth.
Also due today: Reassure parents that surgery is not needed today; lip repair comes around 3 months and palate later.
How this was built, step by step
The finished product above did not appear all at once. Here is the path from the question to the turned-in work, so you can follow the same steps.
- 1Start from today's question: Why can't Mateo feed like a baby without a , and what can we change today so he grows?
- 2Work the Model and the Explore questions to reason it out before writing anything.
- 3Pull the specific evidence the product needs from the reading and any database you used.
- 4Write it up in the required format: Write a 3-line feeding plan a parent could follow tonight: (1) which bottle/nipple type and why, tied to the missing vacuum; (2) how to position him during feeds and why; (3) one sign of the parents should report.
- 5Check it against the rubric, then submit.
| 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 the right way (Schoology for routine work) and confirmed. | Turned in, but in the wrong place or unconfirmed. | Not turned in. |
- CompleteProficient: Nothing is left blank: the model fills every part of "Write a 3-line feeding plan a parent could follow tonight: (1) which bottle/nipple type and why, tied to the missing vacuum; (2) how to position him during feeds and why; (3) one sign of failure to thrive the parents should report.".
- 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 turned in on Schoology and confirmed.
WebXam problem for today's skill
One exam-style question that uses exactly what you practiced today. Try it before you reveal the answer, then read why each choice is right or wrong.
Tap an answer to see the full explanation. Nothing is recorded or graded.