VGCC Biology Simple and Complex Bird Cladogram Project

Description

Submit photographs or scanned copies of your results from Parts A, B, & C. In Part A, you must include photographs of each of your taxa with their labels in addition to a final cladogram (scanned or photographed). In Parts B and C, you must include photographs or scans of your filled out character matrices and final cladograms. Make sure to include labelled dashes to indicate the evolution and loss of traits.

Cladistics Exercise Submission Checklist:

Part A: 10 labeled images of each taxon
Part A: final cladogram
Part B: character matrix
Part B: final cladogram
Part C: character matrix
Part C: final cladogram

PART A – HOUSEHOLD OBJECTS

1. Select 10 household objects to use as your “taxa” (anything you find laying around your home).
2. Document your “taxa” by taking photos of them and labeling them either by placing a handwritten label in the frame with the object(s) or by editing the photo to include a text label. Think of it as cataloging the species your studying!
3. Define and describe your characters using whatever criteria you want (e.g. morphology, physiology, development, etc.). You can make a character matrix to help you make your cladogram, but you do not need to turn it in.
4. Draw your cladogram making sure to indicate all of your characters with labeled dashes like in the example walkthrough in the video (Cladistics Exercise Part III).

PART B – SIMPLE BIRD CLADOGRAM

1. Review the four taxa and eight characters provided in “Simple Bird Example.pdf“.
2. Fill out the character matrix.
3. Draw the most parsimonious cladogram making sure to indicate character evolution and losses with labelled dashes.

PART C – COMPLEX BIRD CLADOGRAM

1. Review the ten taxa and ten characters provided in “Complex Bird Example.pdf“.
2. Fill out the character matrix.
3. Draw the most parsimonious cladogram making sure to indicate character evolution and losses with labelled dashes.

Grid View

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Main Postinga	45 (45%) – 50 (50%) Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	40 (40%) – 44 (44%) Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Responds to some of the discussion question(s). One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors.	0 (0%) – 34 (34%) Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately. Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible sources. Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness	10 (10%) – 10 (10%) Posts main post by day 3.	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not post by day 3.
First Response	17 (17%) – 18 (18%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	15 (15%) – 16 (16%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	13 (13%) – 14 (14%) Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 12 (12%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Second Response	16 (16%) – 17 (17%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	12 (12%) – 13 (13%) Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 11 (11%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Participation	5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100