Reflection on Content Knowledge

The central focus of this unit plan displayed on this page is to familiarize students with how traits

are passed on through sexual reproduction. Students will be asked to consider why individuals of

the same species vary in the way they look, function, and behave, as well as how they can predict

possible genetic outcomes of sexual reproduction. This lesson was designed to address standard

SB3, which states, “OBTAIN, EVALUATE, and COMMUNICATE information to analyze how

biological traits are passed on to successive generations. a. Use Mendel’s laws (segregation and

independent assortment) to ASK questions and DEFINE problems that explain the role of

meiosis in reproductive variability. b. Use mathematical models to predict and explain patterns

of inheritance.”

The lessons immerses students in the use of scientific concepts, such as patterns, by

requiring them to determine the genotypes of family members, in a picture, based on the patterns

of transmission of particular traits. They also learn about the use of models by using Punnett

squares and traditional genetic nomenclature to figure out cross probabilities. These concepts are

explored through the lens of inquiry, as students need to use a picture of a family to figure out

their genetic make up for particular traits, and pick out evidence from the family picture to back

up their claim (Hmelo-Silver, Duncan, & Chinn, 2007).

This unit builds on itself. It starts with students learning the basics of mendelian genetics,

in the context of discovering a real family’s genetic makeup (my family) using simple, complete-

dominance concepts. They begin by learning how to perform monohybrid crosses as a model for

working through inheritance patterns and as a way to familiarize themselves with genetic

vocabulary. The second day, they use the vocabulary and knowledge of monohybrid crosses to

work through a dihybrid cross. The knowledge they gained throughout the first two days is used
to assist them through the practices of asking questions and defining problems within my

family’s inheritance patterns, and using Punnett squares as a model, to analyze and interpret the

data they extrapolate from my family’s picture, that will help determine the probability that a

child born to one of the F1 generations in my family will have certain hair and eye colors. Once

the students have had a chance to practice and familiarize themselves with mendelian genetics,

the concepts of non-mendelian genetics are introduced to them. They will get to look back at the

eye and hair color predictions they made, and look at in the light of polygenetics as well as

incomplete and co-dominance, to put it in a more accurate light.

My students will grow in their ability to collect observation-based data throughout this unit.

They will learn to look at patterns a determine the appropriate mathematical model that will help

make sense of the data within the pattern. This is an interdisciplinary skill that will be useful for

students in any scientific, mathematical, or research-based field.

Before the starting this unit, a pretest was administered to the students. One of the questions

on the pretest asked students to determine the phenotypic ratio of offspring between a Rr and RR

cross. Four out of twenty-six students answered correctly. Although 85% of the students

answered incorrectly, the answer choices they selected gave evidence of familiarity with Punnett

squares. Many of the students even drew out a Punnett square and performed the cross correctly.

Almost half of the students (46%) answered the question giving the genotypic ratios instead of

the phenotypic ratio, and another 12% answered demonstrated confusion between which alleles

give dominance or recessive genotypes. Only 27% of the class picked an answer choice that

suggested there was no genetic reasoning behind the selection. Based on this data, an important

element of the unit is to provide students with a proper understanding of genetic vocabulary as

they move deeper into their understanding of making genetic predictions.

 Student Answers on PreTest

15%

85%

Right Wrong

My students are familiar with heredity from their personal lives and families. They know

that traits are passed on through their families that make them look alike. They often ask

questions about why they have a certain skin tone when their mom and dad have a different skin

tone, suggesting that they understand the skin tone (and other physical traits) are passed from one

generation to another.

The students in my accelerated course have been told that they are mentally capable of more.

This is evident by the reactions the parents have if I have had to contact them about a student

whose motivation has been lacking or who has not turned in assignments. The parental reaction

is always that students are capable. It is also evident that these students are grouped together

throughout more than just my class—they take other advanced and AP courses together. As a

result, my advanced students act out of a high sense of self-efficacy than other students (Pajares,

1996). Because of this, they fight against less resistance in believing they can complete certain

assignments. Their sense of self-efficacy gave me confidence in choosing an open-ended

question as their primary assignment for the first half of the unit.

Knowing that students came in to my class with functional knowledge of heredity and

Punnett squares, I designed a lesson plan that emphasizes use of genetic vocabulary and using
observations to make predictions. I used students’ understanding, that families share similar

traits, to give them a starting place from which they can make observations and collect genetic

data. I also made sure to follow through the progression of genetics starting from what they have

learned before (simple mendelian genetics, monohybrid crosses) to lead them in to new concepts

(dihybrid crosses, incomplete dominance... et c). One of the reasons I chose this progression is

because memory psychology has shown that students are more likely to store and recall new

information when they can connect it with information they already know (Ormrod, 2015). By

structuring my lesson in a way that students can connect new content with old, I am also making

it easier for them to recall what they have learned in a more organized fashion (Ormrod, 2015).

Another reason for building the lesson on the foundation of families and heredity is that students

are more likely to take in new information in the context of their prior knowledge (Settlage,

Southerland, Smetana, & Lottero-Perdue, 2017). By using an obvious connection to family traits, I

will be able to probe students with questions that will reveal their prior knowledge and

misconceptions on the way traits are passed on.

I chose to use a scaffolded inquiry strategy for this series. Inquiry based learning allows each

individual to wrestle with concepts that are at the edge of their individual knowledge. It allows

each student to grow in the concept and encourages them to ask questions. Because of this, it is a

strategy that can be used on students at all levels of learning. Students who are stronger in the

concepts of genetics are able to work through the problems quicker and ask questions that

indicate higher-level thinking. Students that are weaker in, or have less exposure to, genetics will

take longer to come to make their genetic predictions. Because of this, I built scaffolding into the

lecture. Not only will I provide examples that directly help students with their eye and hair color

predictions, I will walk around and help students in need as they work through practice
problems. Students that are stronger in the material can use this time to work on their homework,

or they can use it to ask questions and fill in the gaps to genetic misconceptions they hold.

Students are aware of traits that are passed along through generations; they know that DNA

is responsible for the passing of these traits. In previous units, they learned about mitosis and

meiosis, and the importance of genetic diversity. They are aware that chromosomes and genes

exist. Even though they have learned how to transcribe and translate, many of them do not seem

to grasp the concept that a gene is responsible for a trait or proteins that make up those traits.

They have not yet learned bout alleles and how they are responsible for genetic diversity. I will

use these preconception as a starting point for the unit. The warm up on the first day of the unit

asks the students to recall that meiosis is responsible for gamete formation and forms four

gametes, each carrying independently assorted genes. I will use their awareness of family

heredity as a point of inquiry, where they can develop their understanding further in making

sense of trait passage along a family line.

On days one and two, students will need to make a prediction about the phenotypic

probabilities of a baby. In order to make their predictions, students will need to know new

vocabulary terms—monohybrid, dihybrid, gene, genotype, phenotype, homozygous,

heterozygous, dominant, recessive. Students will also need to learn the nomenclature for

genetics—how to write “gene” using upper and lower-case lettering (ex. EE, Ee, ee). Students

will be supported in their knowledge of the vocabulary by going over it in the lecture, reiteration

during examples and practice problems, and by their ticket out the door questions. On day one

they will be instructed to make a general prediction based on a picture. They are familiar with

this kind of prediction. The second day, they will be asked to make a formal prediction using the
knowledge about genetics they have just learned. This will be a learning exercise for them to

grow in their ability to make informed predictions.

My informal assessment, a ticket out the door, will provide information on how well the

students understand and remember the vocabulary after the first day. My formal assessment, the

probability predictions of the baby, will tell if the students were able to piece together the two

days’ worth of lecture and practice problems.

After the first day (ticket out the door), I will be able to tell how much time should be taken

out from the lessons to reiterate the vocabulary. After the second day, I will be able to tell if

students are comfortable determining probabilities using a dihybrid cross. If the assessment

shows that they have not understood it, then more attention can be given to the cross as we go

over the non-mendelian genetics. Because the prediction assignment is inquiry-based, it will

allow me to see at what stage of the thinking process students are getting stuck. In this way, it

will be a good way for me to help students with specific needs.

 References:
Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R., & Chinn, C. (2007). Scaffolding and Achievement in Problem-Based and

Inquiry Learning: A Response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational

Psychologist, 42(2), 99-107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368

Ormrod, J. (2015). Human Learning + Pearson Etext Access Card (7th ed.). Pearson College Div.

Pajares, F. (1996). Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Academic Settings. Review of Educational Research, 66 (4),

543 – 578. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066004543

Settlage, J., Southerland, S. A., Smetana, L. K., & Lottero-Perdue, P. S. (2017). Teaching science to every

child: using culture as a starting point (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.