Chance or Genetic? Reading Mateo's Family Tree
Genetics domain · Lesson 1 of 20 · Medical Interventions (MI), with PBS overlap
Today's goal: Students will read and build a three-generation pedigree using standard symbols and use it to tell an isolated cleft from a familial (inherited) one when the family history is sparse and uncertain.
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.
Pedigree (three generations, standard symbols):
- Generation I: both grandparents drawn open (unaffected), no clefts reported.
- Generation II: mother (open circle) and father (open square), both unaffected.
- Generation III: older sister (open circle, unaffected) and Mateo (filled square) with an arrow marking him as the proband.
- Off to the side, dashed and labeled "?": a distant great-uncle, possible repaired lip, unconfirmed.
Chart line: This case appears isolated because the only confirmed affected person is Mateo, his parents and sister are unaffected, and the one possible relative is an unverified family story. Note for the clinical geneticist: a syndrome screen is still owed before we call it isolated.
Also due today: Hand the pedigree to the clinical geneticist with the note that a syndrome screen is still owed.
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: Is Mateo's a one-time chance event, or is it written into his family?
- 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: Redraw Mateo's pedigree cleanly with standard symbols, label the proband with an arrow, fill only confirmed findings, mark the uncertain relative with a question mark, and write one chart sentence about whether the case looks isolated, familial, or uncertain.
- 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 "Redraw Mateo's pedigree cleanly with standard symbols, label the proband with an arrow, fill only confirmed findings, mark the uncertain relative with a question mark, and write one chart sentence about whether the case looks isolated, familial, or uncertain.".
- 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.