Biology • Year 12 • Module 6 • Lesson 12
Biotechnology Synthesis — Evaluating Benefit, Risk and Biodiversity
Lock in the five-step evaluation framework, the language of qualified judgement, and the three case categories (medical, agricultural, animal) that an IQ2 synthesis answer must compare.
1. Label the five-step evaluation framework
The flow below sets out the structure a strong IQ2 response should follow. Write the missing labels into boxes A–H. Each label is drawn from Card 1 (Judgement Structure), the Key Terms panel, or the Card 4 conclusion model. 8 marks
- A — step 1 (name what is identified): _______________________
- B — step 2 (name what is identified): _______________________
- C — step 3 (whose situation is examined): _______________________
- D — step 4 (the dimension that must NOT be replaced by "productivity"): _______________________
- E — step 5 (style of the final conclusion): _______________________
- F — the conditional phrase used in step 5 (give one example): _______________________
- G — name one biodiversity LEVEL a student must specify in step 4: _______________________
- H — what step 3 asks about the distribution of benefit and risk: _______________________
| Box | Your label |
|---|---|
| A | |
| B | |
| C | |
| D | |
| E | |
| F | |
| G | |
| H |
2. Term–definition match
The ten definitions below are shuffled. In the right-hand column write the matching term from this list: synthesis, evidence-based evaluation, trade-off, stakeholder impact, biodiversity effect, qualified judgement, monoculture, conditional language, case comparison, productivity-only response. 10 marks
| # | Definition (shuffled) | Matching term |
|---|---|---|
| 2.1 | A judgement supported by relevant examples, conditions and limitations rather than absolute claims. | |
| 2.2 | Combining multiple ideas and examples into one coherent judgement. | |
| 2.3 | How different groups (e.g. patients, farmers, consumers, communities) are affected differently by the same biotechnology. | |
| 2.4 | A conclusion using language such as "to a large extent", "in some contexts" or "provided that". | |
| 2.5 | A situation where a benefit is associated with a cost, risk or competing consequence. | |
| 2.6 | The effect of a biotechnology on genetic, species or ecosystem diversity. | |
| 2.7 | Words like "may", "depending on", "provided that" — the linguistic marker of step 5 of the framework. | |
| 2.8 | A large-scale planting of one genetically uniform crop — a recurring agricultural-biotech risk. | |
| 2.9 | Setting two or more biotechnology examples beside each other so different balances of benefit and risk become visible. | |
| 2.10 | The weak-response pattern that drifts into "yield went up" without addressing risk, biodiversity or stakeholders. |
3. True or false — with correction
For each statement, circle T or F. If the statement is false, write the corrected version. 8 marks (1 for T/F, 1 for the correction where needed)
3.1 A high-band biotechnology synthesis answer is essentially a long list of relevant facts. T / F
3.2 When the question asks about biodiversity effects, explaining that the crop gives a higher yield is by itself sufficient. T / F
3.3 A qualified judgement still reaches a conclusion — but uses conditional language and states the limits of that conclusion. T / F
3.4 Different biotechnology cases (medical, agricultural, animal) usually produce the same balance of benefit and risk. T / F
4. Function recall
Answer each in 1–2 sentences using precise terms from the lesson. 10 marks (2 each)
4.1 What is the function of step 1 of the framework (state the benefit) inside a synthesis answer?
4.2 What is the function of step 3 (identify stakeholders) — i.e. what does it stop a student from doing?
4.3 What is the function of step 4 (include biodiversity) when the question is specifically about biodiversity?
4.4 What is the function of qualified language ("to a large extent", "provided that") in the final judgement?
4.5 What is the function of comparing more than one case (rather than relying on a single example)?
5. Case category sort
Card 2 of the lesson identifies three categories of biotechnology case (medical, agricultural, animal), each with its own characteristic evaluation issues. Tag each issue below with the category it is most associated with. Write M (medical), A (agricultural) or An (animal). 8 marks
| # | Issue or trade-off | Category (M / A / An) |
|---|---|---|
| 5.1 | Access and cost of a biological medicine | |
| 5.2 | Welfare and ethical justification of intervention on a living organism | |
| 5.3 | Monoculture risk and farmer dependence on a seed supplier | |
| 5.4 | Patient consent and safety in a clinical setting | |
| 5.5 | Whether intervention is necessary or whether a less harmful alternative exists | |
| 5.6 | Reduced genetic diversity in a high-yielding cultivar | |
| 5.7 | Ownership of a genetic resource (e.g. patented seed) | |
| 5.8 | Distribution of a diagnostic test — who can afford it, who cannot |
Q1 — Labelled framework
A: benefit. B: risk / limitation (welfare, environmental, ownership, access or uncertainty). C: stakeholders (who benefits, who carries risk). D: biodiversity (genetic, species or ecosystem). E: qualified / conditional judgement. F: conditional phrase such as "to a large extent", "in some contexts", "provided that". G: any one valid biodiversity level — genetic, species or ecosystem. H: whether the distribution of benefit and risk is fair / equitable across stakeholders.
Marking criteria. 1 mark per correctly identified label, max 8.
Q2 — Term–definition matches
2.1 evidence-based evaluation • 2.2 synthesis • 2.3 stakeholder impact • 2.4 qualified judgement • 2.5 trade-off • 2.6 biodiversity effect • 2.7 conditional language • 2.8 monoculture • 2.9 case comparison • 2.10 productivity-only response.
Marking criteria. 1 mark per correct match, max 10.
Q3 — True / false with correction
3.1 False. Correction: a high-band synthesis response analyses evidence, identifies trade-offs and stakeholder impacts, and reaches a qualified judgement — it does not just list facts.
3.2 False. Correction: when the question is about biodiversity, the student must explain whether genetic, species or ecosystem diversity is preserved, reduced or altered — yield alone does not answer the biodiversity dimension.
3.3 True.
3.4 False. Correction: different biotechnology cases typically produce different balances of benefit and risk (e.g. medical biotech raises access/cost issues, agricultural raises monoculture/ownership issues, animal raises welfare issues), which is why synthesis answers must compare cases rather than force a single universal conclusion.
Marking criteria. 1 mark for correct T/F + 1 mark for the correction where needed (max 8).
Q4.1 — Function of "state the benefit"
Stating the benefit anchors the response in a concrete biological or social problem the technology may help solve, so the evaluation has something specific to weigh trade-offs against. Without it the response becomes generic opinion language.
Q4.2 — Function of "identify stakeholders"
The stakeholder step stops the student from treating "benefit" as universal: it forces explicit attention to who actually benefits and who carries the risk, and whether the distribution is fair. This is how the answer earns evaluation marks rather than recall marks.
Q4.3 — Function of "include biodiversity"
When the question is about biodiversity, this step keeps the answer on track — the student must specify whether genetic, species or ecosystem diversity is supported, reduced or altered in mixed ways. It is the step that prevents the productivity-only drift described in Card 3.
Q4.4 — Function of qualified language
Conditional phrases ("to a large extent", "provided that") signal a reasoned conclusion that is supported but not absolute. They convert evidence into judgement and explicitly name the conditions under which the conclusion holds — exactly what Band 5–6 markers reward.
Q4.5 — Function of comparing more than one case
Different cases reveal different balances of benefit, risk and biodiversity impact (medical ≠ agricultural ≠ animal). Comparing cases makes the evaluation evidence-based instead of one-sided and prevents a single example from being over-generalised.
Q5 — Case category sort
5.1 M • 5.2 An • 5.3 A • 5.4 M • 5.5 An • 5.6 A • 5.7 A • 5.8 M.
Marking criteria. 1 mark per correct category tag, max 8.