1

Science Teaching Report: Genes to Proteins

Lesson Overview and Design
The lesson on October 28, 2014 was meant to occur about mid-way through a unit on the
way changes at a genetic level affect proteins, and thus the organism. In the lesson students were
given information on codons, and then worked with a codon decoder to get a feel for how three
nucleic acids coded for an amino acid, the basic building block of a protein. Using previous
knowledge from the unit, theyd then build a comprehensive model of the steps from genes to
proteins. This units NGSS standard was Develop and use a model to describe why structural
changes to genes (mutations)located on chromosomes may affect proteins and may result in har
mful, beneficial, or neutraleffects to the structure and function of organisms, and its Arizona
College and Career Readiness literacy standard was Acquire and use accurately gradeappropriate general academic and domain-specific words and phrases; gather vocabulary
knowledge when considering a word or phrase important to comprehension or expression.
A guiding big idea for the lesson itself was that a series of three nucleic acids create the
code that makes life possible, and that small changes to it can have big effects on bigger
molecules. The class opened up with a question concerning how information is communicated.
What happens if someone misspeaks a single sound in a word? Does it always make it
impossible to understand? After students discuss their experiences with miscommunication, they
are directed to the code, DNA sequences, on each of their tables. First students were to create a
decoder, a spin-wheel that could show you what each three nucleic acid sets would produce
amino acid-wise. Each student was arranged in a group containing biology major to simulate the
accommodation that would be needed for an English Language Learner, by example. Sorting the
groups on known knowledge proficiencies enables students that may not have that background to
have a ready resource at hand. These groups were further divided into a decoder, a scribe to write
down the decoders results and draw the amino acids that were produced, and a reporter. Each
group had a sequence of 3 codons given to them from a disease, except for one normal strand
given to the smaller group. After decoding the sequence, and realizing that the decoders were for
RNA and so theyd have to convert from DNA to RNA, they used their electronic devices to
look up what each amino acid produced looked like.
Students then worked in their groups, using their previous knowledge and electronic
resources, to draw out a model of what steps the decoder is involved in. Where is the DNA that
is converted into RNA that the decoder starts with? Where does the RNA message produce a
protein and how? Models were compared and updated as each group shared both their drawings
and their verbal explanations for why they thought the steps and molecules involved were
important.
After this students looked at their mutated sequence and were asked if they think that
such small changes would have a big effect on an organism. They were invited to compare the

amino acids produced before and after. A video detailing the different kinds of mutations
possible was then shown as a preview for the next lesson that would delve much deeper into
mutations, and the disease that each sequence represented would be revealed. Students were
asked to contemplate which of the mentioned mutations were likely the one affecting their
strand, and why it would have an impact.
Unit Connection
As mentioned previously, the NGSS standard was to develop and use a model to describe
why structural changes to genes may affect proteins and may results in harmful, beneficial, or
neutral effects to the structure and function of organisms. The Arizona College and Career
Readiness literacy standard for the lesson concerned using appropriate academic and domainspecific vocabulary words. This lesson supported the NGSS standard by affording an opportunity
for students to compile the knowledge gained previously with the knowledge just being
introduced, codons and eventually mutations. It served as a good checkpoint for assessing their
knowledge so far, and gave them an opportunity to create by using the decoder to ease the task of
translating sequences to amino acids. Knowing the steps involved and how DNA is read is
crucial to then being able to understand how a change within that codon will lead to bigger
changes throughout the organism.
Our initial unit plan for this was covering ten days. As I developed this lesson though, I
found it more likely that the original material covered on this day would have to be split in two,
with mutations being covered more in depth on a day separate than us reviewing the genes to
proteins pathway and codon reading frames. The time availability for something already
covering two weeks is questionable, though since it covers such a wide variety of material and
part of it is review it could use time that would otherwise be spent reviewing this material
anyways for other standards in the life sciences.
Lesson Critique
This lesson suffered from a change in focus from the original outline. After consultation
with Dr. Lyons, my original approach of direct instruction along with an activity gave way to a
more constructivist approach. I over compensated though as the number one complaint
concerning the lesson was that there was a lack of clear structure and defined expectations.
Introducing a second sequence early on was very distracting to students as well. Instead of what
Id hoped to be a matter of increasing interest and anticipation as they wondered what the second
sequence, that was so close to their first and yet different, it merely confused them. Leaving
students to figure out that the decoder was for reading RNA and DNA was also not helpful, as
while at least one group caught on and seemed proud to have figured that out, the other groups
wasted valuable time moving ahead with their faulty understanding.
The consensus on how effective the lesson was in sense-making was mixed. While
scientific sense-making is how students negotiate every day and scientific ways of knowing,

while developing increased awareness of the nature and practices of science via engagement in
scientific/engineering practices (National Research Council, 2012) some of the students felt that
the lesson did not allow them to engage the material in a way that increased their understanding,
while others believed it brought back a lot of what they had thought was forgotten and helped
them pull back together the disparate facts they remembered into a more cohesive model that
they could use to explain changes brought on my mutations in a future lesson. The deciding
factor seemed to be their background knowledge in biology, and so an actual class with the
previous lessons supporting them would likely feel more like the former and less the latter.
The presence of scientific/engineering techniques though was limited in the current
iteration of the lesson. While students did construct a model of steps showing how DNA leads to
proteins, the model wasnt used to construct any explanations yet. Students who had troubles
with the material were never called upon to use it until they became more comfortable with
applying the model to aid with their reasoning in a situation or scenario, as that was coming in a
future lesson.
A final critique, though by no means exhaustive, was of the contextualization. The attempt at
relating mutations to changes in auditory messages did get responses from students, but was not
related to throughout the lesson as it moved into the model construction portion and didnt come
back to the application context until near the end. The video shown spent some time trying to
build context by relating mutations to changes in a recipe, but only some of the students caught
the attempt at context. The importance of building context is that few students are motivated to
succeed by an overall desire at academic success or a natural curiosity in the content (Aikenhead,
2006). Given that, building context to engage their curiosity along with a sense of familiarity to
make accessible content is needed
Lesson Revisions
The first revision to the lesson I would do is split off the mutation video. Instead I would
give much more structure to the review and construction of the DNA to Protein model. A
worksheet would be added that holds the vocabulary for the intended model. This would help set
clear expectations, not only of what needs to be included, but also where they can stop. We had a
student in the lesson start talking about the helicase activity of the RNA polymerase, and the
class quickly started to panic. If that word wasnt included in the worksheet, they would know
that is beyond the scope of what we hope to include for this model. A correct version of the
model should be shown too at the end. The hand-written ones could be too messy for someone
that is struggling with the concept to figure out, and any ELLs would benefit from clearly written
labels and colored diagrams instead of trying to read their classmates handwriting.
With the video removed then there would be another need for contextualization. The
recipe metaphor could still be kept, and an entrance activity where they change letters in a
message or recipe to see how sometimes it can be tolerated, but other times it would create

disaster could get them thinking in those terms before actually introducing the technical phrases
and even the word mutation. Then we could tell the students that just as we see individual
words, we need to know how DNA is broken up into words and demonstrate the decoder. The
decoder being demonstrated is also something that was mentioned as needing to be introduced,
with the RNA instead of DNA requirement being explained.

References
Aikenhead, G. (2006). Science education for everyday life: evidence-based practice. New York:
Teachers College Press
National Research Council (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: practices,
Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. National Academies Press: Washington, D.C.