Being able to interview multiple students from many different socioeconomic, racial, and

educational backgrounds opened up an entirely new field of understanding of both teacher and
student. Most of the students of the middle school are from affluent families that are highly
invested in their schooling and the quality of education that their child receives. However, I
made a conscious effort to interview students that come from all of the socioeconomic levels as
well as educational back that are represented in the school. I strove to understand and be able to
reach every child in the classroom, not just those that typically raise their hand or ask questions.
This prior knowledge interview also gave me a chance to lose my own preconceptions of the
students that I have been in the classroom with two days a week for nine weeks. Some of the
students that I believed would be able to grasp the concepts of Modern Genetics quickly
struggled to leave their alternate conceptions behind them. One of the students that I thought
would strain to understand was able to give me more concrete explanations. This activity was not
only to help me shape my lesson plans but to remind me that students cannot simply be placed in
small boxes based on past occurrences and my own personal alternate notions of their work or
ability.
When deciding how to assess the students prior knowledge on genetics, I decided that I
must look at multiple students from varying backgrounds and I wanted to have a few questions
that I would use to start the conversation and then mold the conversational direction based on
their answers. I also decided that I would use those same questions at the end of the lessons so
that I could have a direct comparison. All four of the students that I interviewed were able to
explain that children inherit their traits from previous generations. However, most also believed
that children can get traits from aunts and uncles as well as parents and grandparents. A common
idea that was heard from each child was the idea that traits could skip a generation. Three-
fourths of the students said those exact words to explain the occurrence of traits throughout a
family. I wanted to assess if the students had understood genotype and phenotype, concepts that
we had been talking about for the last two weeks. Two students were able to explain that
genotypes are the genetic makeup of the organism and phenotypes are the physical appearance
of an organism. Examples allowed other students the opportunity to differentiate between the
two terms (i.e. genotypes are the letters, like Rr or BB, and phenotypes are blue eye or brown
hair). The largest alternative conception came from a student who stated, genotypes are the
certain traits from a parent like the dad [while] phenotypes are the certain traits from the mom.
When asked why there are so many different hair and eye colors, a few of the students simply
stated because there are many different genotypes. A fair statement, but when pushed, they
could not explain why those genotypes could influence the varying hair color. One student
declared there are so many different colors because that is sometimes how you can tell one
person from another. Another student brought his understanding of heterozygous versus
homozygous alleles by stating that some people mate with heterozygous people so there is a
chance for a new hair color/eye color. He recognized that a differing hair/eye color than parents
would have to come from the dominated allele of the parents and when pushed, he brought up
the concept of codominance in flowering plants.
After hearing the alternate conceptions and the seeing that the students had a somewhat
solid foundation in genetics, I decided that I would dig deeper into genetics and how traits can be
passed from one generation to the next through different types of chromosomes including
autosomal and sex-linked. The Pipe Cleaner Babies activity gave the students a chance to review
normal chromosomal crossing, Punnett squares, genotypes and phenotypes, and introduced
them to the concept of sex chromosomes. When we discussed sex chromosomes, some students
were able to distinguish males versus females by the occurrence of XY and XX. The activity
show the students the first discrepant eventthe lack of a gene (or bead) on only one
chromosome (or pipe cleaner), the Y chromosome. Many students had a hard time wrapping
their minds around the idea that a chromosome could not have a specific gene, causing some to
become fixated on that idea. After walking around the classroom to assess understanding and
further discussion between group members, I decided that coming together as a class would be
more effective for all of the students learning. The students were able to build upon the
understanding of each other to create a solid definition of sex-linked traits. Not, all of the periods
were as detailed in their definition as others, however, most were able to recognize that those
traits were dependent of the sex of the person.
The Turkey Pedigree activity allowed for further discussion of the passing of genes
throughout familiar generations, sex-linked disorders and traits, and an introduction to the idea of
pedigrees in a holiday celebratory way. The students were able to use manipulatives, pom-poms,
to determine how traits could be passed from grandparents to parents onto children. The
simplistic passing of traits opened up the discussion from whom children get their genes. We
discussed as a class how parents, and indirectly grandparents, gave children their traits. In
retrospect, I wish I would have shown the students a more detailed pedigree that included the
family of an aunt, which would have no connection to the specific child we were discussing.
However, from the pedigrees given to them, all of the students understood that children received
smatterings of their parents genes.
When I interviewed the same four students after my lessons, I was able to see the
effectiveness of my plans and activities. All of the students were able to explain the definition of
genotype and phenotype and with further questions, each gave me similar examples. The student
with the alternate conception of genotype and phenotype recognized her confusion and could
explain the concepts clearly. Each student was able to explain that children only get their traits
from their parents and grandparents. One student stated that children inherited their traits from
alleles and when asked where those alleles came from, he quickly exclaimed, the parents! I
decided to add another question into my short list so that I could assess my own teaching. I asked
the students to explain sex-linked traits. Most of the students were able to explain the concept
that children got an X or Y from the father and one X from the mother. One student explained
that the traits are controlled by the father, he can pick an X or Y chromosome, controlling the
sex of the organism. Another student claimed that sex-linked traits are traits that are passed
down by an X or Y chromosome. When further questioned, she gave an example, x-linked
traits like hemophilia. The students seemed to understand that the sex-linked traits were passed
down differently than the traits we had discussed before, but were not able to explain what made
them different. I believe I increased the understanding of how differently traits can be passed
down through the generations and the difference (and the connection between) genotypes and
phenotypes, however, I am not sure how effective my teaching of sex-linked traits was for the
students.
Baker and Piburns Constructing Science in the Middle and Secondary School
Classrooms surmised that teaching genetics in the classroom might call for a lesson plan that
focuses more on the alternate conceptions of students and less on getting the correct answer
(91). This idea would seem most effective in my classroom and calls for the pre-lesson
interviews. It is amusing to see that many of the alternate conceptions of genetic terms that I saw
in my classroom are the same as those found in this research from the twentieth century. Baker
and Piburn also call for the use of Punnett squares to clear up more confusion that could be
caused by the students reliance and focus on phenotypes rather than genotypes (89). In my
own classroom, I saw many students falter to the same reliance on phenotype and question how
there could be such variance in children from similar parents. Again, using the Punnett squares to
help visualize the cross of alleles was greatly effective.
I sincerely enjoyed using the techniques, such as pre-interviews and post-interviews,
from this assignment because I feel like I was able to find a deeper understanding of my students,
their thinking, and my own thinking. Finally I feel as though I am able to see how to use the
knowledge of students to my own and their own advantage, unassumingly.

References
Baker, D. R. & Piburn, M. D. (1997). Constructing Science in Middle and Secondary School
Classrooms. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.