| Three things that stood out | Type of knowledge | What makes these things stand out for you | Evidence/how you would test someone on this (select one “thing” only!) | |
| 1 | The degree interconnectedness between different genes and many different forms of regulation | Factual/conceptual | Simply that all examples we have looked at are not clear-cut A or B solutions. They have many different explanations with different degrees of influence from many different sources | Have the individual asked whether they can list many different means of regulating a gene’s expression or do a series of knockouts/gain-of-function mutations in a lab setting for the gene of interest. |
| 2 | Paternal imprinting | Factual | I always thought that there was little evidence for paternal imprinting and here it is looked at in great detail. I have learned a lot. | Show the individual a genetic situation (a hereditary tree with labeled illnesses) and have them identify the possible explanations for the hereditary pattern, where one of the solutions is paternal imprinting. |
| 3 | How much jargon there is recent/modern/current scientific literature and how to navigate it. | Skill/conceptual | This stands out because all past research has been on older topics, the stuff of typical biology lectures where most of our education is based off of experiments/observations done before 2000. These modern papers can have a high learning curve to grasp their content. | Have the individual read and interpret the literature and report on it. Have them identify the key observations and any issues they can identify (identifying issues usually implies deep understanding of processes and methods used) |
LJ 3
Leave a reply