Fall 2005 Final Reports

The Montessori Community School 7th Grade Science Class Durham, NC, USA
Our class was able to complete the project as it was designed. We collected data from students, teachers, and parents on our campus and also surveyed friends and neighbors in our neighborhoods.

We learned several important lessons about data collection in carrying out this prtoject: a) data must be collected carefully and checked for accuracy (i.e does the sum of the individuals with recessive and dominant traits add up to the total number of people surveyed for thattrait?) b) it helps to think about potential sources of error BEFORE you begin collecting data so that you can do everything possible to avoid them.

If we had to do this project over again, we would be more careful collecting and checking our data before beginning our analysis. We would also be sure that, when checking for color blindness, everyone was asking the same questions (not using leading questions). Overall, the project instructions were very clear and easy to follow. We did, however, come accross one error: the column headings in the verified data table were incorrect. This led to a bit of confusion, but we soon figured it out.

Before we began collecting data we formulated a hypothesis about the outcome. We hypothesized that the dominant trait would occur more often than the recessive trait. Both our data and the complete data set from the project proved our hypothesis wrong - the recessive trait is often present more frequently. We thought about it and realized that a genotype must be homozygous recessive in order to exhibit the recessive phenotype, whereas the genotype can be either homozygous dominant or heterozygous dominanant when exhibiting the dominant phenotype. This led our teacher to introduce us to the Hardy-Weinberg principle showing us that the terms dominant and recessive can be misleading.

We used Microsoft Excel to create bargraphs that woudl help us analyze our data and the complete data set. We found that while the absolute percentages were not the same in our data set and in the overall data set, it remained true that the dominant trait did not dominate in terms of frequency. In our own data set, the % of people exhibiting the dominant trait ranged from 20% to over 60%. In the case of color blindness, a sex linked recessive trait, the dominant phenotype (not color blind) was 98%. We are currently studying possible reasons for the differences between out data setand the overall data set.

We had a lot of fun participating in this project and hope to participate in others in the future. Thank you to everyone who made this possible and thanks also to al of the schools that contricuted data.

Final Report from Homeschool Montrose, PA USA

I was not able to do the Human Genetics project in the same way most participants were. Since I am a homeschooler, and I don’t have as much access to large classes to survey, I surveyed my extended family and friends. It was interesting, to look at the data in my family at the end of the project and see how the traits were passed down through the generations.

About half of the traits I observed showed that the dominant trait was more prevalent, both in the data I collected and in the data collected by other participants in the project. This makes sense, because if a recessive trait is present in both parents, their offspring would carry that trait as well, making it possible to have recessive traits as common as dominant ones. However, I was surprised to find this, since I had assumed that the most common traits would be the dominant traits. Before doing this project, I just assumed most people had dominant traits.

The way we calculated our data after collecting it was by calculating the total numbers for each trait, and then compiling the percent of each trait. One of the main things I learned from this project was how long it can take to compile and analyze data when there are just two people working on it! I had done research in the past, but never anything of this magnitude. It took a very long time for us to compile all that data.

If I were to do the project again, I think I would focus more on recording data from larger extended families so I could map out the family trees in more detail.

My only suggestion to the project leader would be to make it an option to study traits in an extended family.

Final report, Proston School, Australia

Proston State School science class was able to complete this project to study the genetics of humans, as it was designed by the CIESE. We were able to complete this because the process was easy and straight forward, plus the people we surveyed were keen because it was something we had never really thought about our genetic make-up.

By doing this project we were able to grasp the concept that our genetic make-up is programmed before we are even born. We learnt that even simple things like whether you have hair on the middle of your finger is a genetic trait.

The project was successful – we taught people about genetics and students even went home and talked to their parents about genetics.

If we were to do this project again we would endeavour to survey a wider range of people.

We have only one suggestion to make to the project leader - if the project is ever repeated that they should survey different traits. We would also like to thank the project leader for his help when we had so much technical difficulty getting onto the website.

The results were surprising, we had expected that the dominant traits would be more dominant – in our results the recessive traits were more dominant!

We did not have a large amount of data so it was easy to count the information we had surveyed.

100% of students surveyed were not colour blind while 3% of students surveyed had a white forelock.

Out of the traits we surveyed, dimples were the only trait which actually correlated with it’s category of dominance.

Our teacher told us that colour blinded ness is sex linked and most colour-blind people are male.

We enjoyed taking part in this project.