The cleft team and the surgical timeline
Mateo's chart lists a surgeon, an ENT, an audiologist, a , an orthodontist, a geneticist, and a . Why does one child need so many people, and in what order do they act?
Caring for a child with a is a years-long team effort with a staged surgical timeline. No single specialist could do it alone, and the schedule follows how the child grows.
Prerequisite check
- Suction needs a sealed mouth; an open lets air leak between the mouth and nose, so a baby cannot build the pressure to feed normally.
- Specialized bottles and feeding positions let a baby with a get enough milk safely.
What to learn
Goal: Identify the members of a multidisciplinary care team and the job each one does, and place the staged repairs (lip in infancy, next, later steps as the child grows) in order.
- A care team is multidisciplinary: a surgeon, ENT, audiologist, , orthodontist, geneticist, and each contribute.
- The surgical timeline is staged: the lip is repaired in infancy, the next, with later steps such as bone grafting and orthodontics as the child grows.
- The schedule is set by development and growth, so a child returns to the team over many years, not once.
- These specialties are real health careers students can explore, including through the HOSA clinic.
- Coordinating care across many people is itself a skill, and the and team coordinator make it work for the family.
Guided notes
Who is on the team
- Match each team member to one job: surgeon, ENT, audiologist, , orthodontist, geneticist, .
- Circle the two members most connected to the hearing thread from Session 18.
The order of repairs
- Place these in order along a timeline: lip repair, repair, later steps such as bone graft and orthodontics.
- Explain why the schedule follows the child's growth rather than fixing everything at once.
From team to careers
- Pick one team role and write two questions you would ask that professional at the HOSA clinic.
- Name one skill (besides medicine) that the team needs to work well together.
Reading the Research
- 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.
Using the database (what to capture)
Plain-language explanations of a gene or condition, written for patients and families.
- 1Open medlineplus.gov/genetics and search the gene or condition (IRF6).
- 2Read the summary written in everyday words.
- 3Note the conditions the gene is linked to at the bottom of the page.
- Topic: IRF6 gene
- Plain-language summary: IRF6 helps the tissues of the face join correctly before birth.
- Linked conditions: Van der Woude syndrome; nonsyndromic cleft
Pick your level
Use the sentence starters, a word bank from the vocabulary, a labeled diagram, and the exact source link.
Complete a partly blank model or table and explain it.
Make a claim from a new example or an unfamiliar entry in the same database.
Work as a research team
- Manager: keeps the group moving
- Recorder: writes the shared model or table
- Evidence checker: verifies each claim against the source
- Reporter: explains the group's reasoning
- What evidence changed your thinking today?
- What did your group disagree about, and how did you resolve it?
- What question is still unresolved?
Demonstration of learning
By the end of this session, submit ONE of: a labeled diagram with a 2-sentence explanation; a claim, evidence, reasoning paragraph; a completed data table from a real database; or a one-question exit ticket using today's vocabulary.
| 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 "Identify the members of a multidisciplinary cleft care team and the job each one does, and place the staged repairs (lip in infancy, palate next, later steps as the child grows) in order.".
- 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.
