Submit research notes
Open your materials, follow the steps, then turn in your work.
Submit a complete, annotated research notes packet that grounds your ER needs assessment in evidence.
1. Open your materials
Use the materials named in the first step below. Open lesson resources.
2. Start the work
Assemble your research questions, sources, annotations, and citations.
Show all 5 required steps
- Assemble your research questions, sources, annotations, and citations.
- Write a short needs-assessment summary of what the evidence shows.
- Identify one gap where you still lack evidence.
- Self-check against the research rubric.
- Submit the annotated ER research notes.
Lost your place? Lost your place? You should have your questions, sources, annotations, and citations assembled into one packet (step 1). Pick up by writing the needs-assessment summary of what the evidence shows (step 2), naming one evidence gap (step 3), and self-checking against the rubric (step 4) before you submit.
Check your work before submitting
- Your packet links each source to a research question.
- Your needs assessment is supported by cited evidence.
3. Turn in your work
DueCheck Schoology- Hand in
- Annotated ER research notes packet: research questions, credible sources with annotations and citations, needs-assessment summary, and one evidence gap.
How to submit and name your file
Use the submission route shown on today's page.
In Schoology, open your course and the assignment for this lesson. Attach your file, select Submit, and check that it appears in the submission.
PDF upload helpYou get two school days for every day you were absent, so this deadline moves with you.
How this lesson connects
Keep using what you learned last class: A useful source entry explains what the source says, why it matters to your design problem, and any potential bias. A citation lets the reader check the original. Today: Naming an evidence gap strengthens your needs assessment, because honestly marking where the proof runs out shows intellectual honesty and points to the exact research your project should do next.
Optional: listen or watch a unit review▸
Need help? Warm-up, timing, and directions▸
💡 Big idea: Naming an evidence gap strengthens your , because honestly marking where the proof runs out shows intellectual honesty and points to the exact research your project should do next.
- 0-10Review the research notes rubric: what does a complete packet include?
- 10-30Assemble the packet: research questions, sources, annotations, and citations in order
- 30-50Write the needs-assessment summary: synthesize what the evidence shows
- 50-60Identify one evidence gap and describe what you would need to close it
- 60-75Self-check against the rubric and submit the annotated ER research notes
- 75-80Exit reflection: what is the single most important thing your evidence tells you about your design problem?
- • All week you have been building the evidence base for your ER design problem.
- • Today you assemble everything into a complete research notes packet and write a needs-assessment summary.
- • A is not a list of facts -- it is a synthesis that says: here is what the evidence shows my design must address.
- • This is your Friday summative and the bridge from research into prototype design next week.
- • How to assemble research questions, sources, annotations, and citations into a coherent packet.
- • How to write a needs-assessment summary that synthesizes evidence rather than just listing sources.
- • What an evidence gap is and why naming one shows intellectual honesty and future research direction.
PLTW connection and today's work
Open Problem 1 in your myPLTW course shell and locate the needs-assessment or research-notes submission activity to review the packet format.
Today's stopping point: All research questions, credibility checks, and annotations are done; today you assemble them into a complete research notes packet with a needs-assessment summary.
PLTW activity titles identify the course connection. If your account will not open, use the posted materials for today and tell Mr. Mendoza. Do not mark an online activity complete unless you completed it.
Course connection
- Activity 1.1.2 Research and Documentation
Use the turn-in directions at the top of this page. Do not create a second submission unless your teacher asks for one.
Show another explanation or a smaller first step
Need help? Choose a starting point
Lesson resources: reading, slides, and vocabulary▸
The deck carries the prior idea forward, lets you inspect an analogy, maps the rule to biology, and ends with the same evidence decision and exit ticket used on this page.
Generated from this lesson's canonical data with a red-team citation check.
A useful source entry explains what the source says, why it matters to your design problem, and any potential bias. A citation lets the reader check the original.
Naming an evidence gap strengthens your , because honestly marking where the proof runs out shows intellectual honesty and points to the exact research your project should do next.
A detective board holds observations, possible explanations, and one next question.
- Which notes are direct observations?
- Which notes are explanations?
- What new evidence would separate the explanations?
Keep observations separate from explanations, then collect the evidence that can distinguish the options.
Biomedical investigations use controlled procedures and validated measurements, not intuition alone.
- • Board notes map to the signs, results and measurements you recorded.
- • Possible explanations map to the competing biological causes.
- • The next question maps to the test or observation that would separate them.
Driving question: Can you write a needs-assessment summary that says what your evidence, taken together, proves your ER solution must address, and name the one gap where you still lack proof?
What you already know: A useful source entry explains what the source says, why it matters to your design problem, and any potential bias. A citation lets the reader check the original.
New idea: Naming an evidence gap strengthens your , because honestly marking where the proof runs out shows intellectual honesty and points to the exact research your project should do next.
Visual or model: F1. F1. A lesson illustration or teaching diagram for Submit research notes. Use it with E1-E3; it is a model or context image, not experimental or patient data. What to notice: Trace the labeled system, test, or design relationship and identify which evidence should trigger revision.
- Observe or measure the relevant feature in submit research notes.
- Organize the observation with a stable evidence ID.
- Apply this rule: Keep observations separate from explanations, then collect the evidence that can distinguish the options.
- Choose the option the evidence supports and state the limit of the conclusion.
Real biomedical example: Can you write a needs-assessment summary that says what your evidence, taken together, proves your ER solution must address, and name the one gap where you still lack proof?
What the evidence supports: E1-E3 and F1 support the daily take-home when the response meets the stated success criteria.
What it cannot prove: The package does not support claims beyond this lesson's or any real patient diagnosis.
- • credibility: The degree to which a source can be trusted, judged by the author's expertise, the evidence given, and whether claims are accurate and unbiased.
- • citation: A reference that credits the source of an idea, fact, or quotation so others can find and verify the original work.
- • : All the inventions, products, and publications that already exist before a new idea, used to judge whether that idea is truly novel and patentable.
- • : A structured study that gathers information about a group's problems and gaps to identify what a new solution or product should address.
- • : A slant in information that happens when a source favors one viewpoint, often due to its funding, purpose, or who created it.
Use it now: Choose one decision option. Cite E1 and E3, then explain how the rule connects the evidence to your choice.
Go further, optional: The source links below are optional enrichment. Every fact required for today's local evidence decision appears in this lesson package.
Biomedical evidence supports a conclusion only to the level allowed by the measurement, comparison, controls, source quality, and uncertainty in the investigation.
Limit: The classroom evidence supports the stated learning decision, not a real clinical diagnosis, causal conclusion, or treatment recommendation.
Keep observations separate from explanations, then collect the evidence that can distinguish the options.
Limit: Biomedical investigations use controlled procedures and validated measurements, not intuition alone.
Your packet links each source to a .
Limit: E3 defines the classroom product or success criterion. It is not independent scientific evidence and cannot justify a clinical or causal claim.
PLTW-BFH-2027-02-16 · Simulated classroom evidence scenario
Your role: biomedical design team member
Decision: Your team must decide what the evidence from submit research notes supports before submitting the notebook record named on today's page.
- • Delay the synthesis until each source is linked to a , since unlinked sources cannot add up yet.
- • Write one sentence saying what all your sources together prove your ER solution must do, then name your gap.
- • List what each source said in order, since covering source one, two, and three shows the research is complete.
Response: State one choice, cite at least two evidence IDs, explain the rule that connects them, and add one limitation. Submit it as the notebook record.
Claim ceiling: Today's evidence supports a classroom claim about submit research notes. It cannot prove causation, diagnose a real patient, or justify action outside this room.
Reason for review: Your team must decide what the evidence from submit research notes supports before submitting the notebook record named on today's page.
Context: A converts evidence into design direction, because synthesizing what the sources agree on (and honestly naming what they do not yet tell you) is what turns research into a defensible plan.
- • T1: Assemble your research questions, sources, annotations, and citations.
- • T2: Write a short needs-assessment summary of what the evidence shows.
- • T3: Identify one gap where you still lack evidence.
- • T4: Self-check against the research rubric.
- • T5: Submit the annotated ER research notes.
- • E1: Biomedical evidence supports a conclusion only to the level allowed by the measurement, comparison, controls, source quality, and uncertainty in the investigation.
- • E2: Keep observations separate from explanations, then collect the evidence that can distinguish the options.
- • E3: Your packet links each source to a .
Measurements: No patient measurement is supplied unless it appears explicitly in E1-E3 or F1. Do not invent a value.
Figure finding: Teaching diagram for Submit research notes. Trace the labeled system, test, or design relationship and identify which evidence should trigger revision. This is a teaching model, not patient or experimental data.
Uncertainty: This is a composite classroom scenario. Missing history, measurements, or confirmation tests remain unknown and limit the conclusion.
- • The solution must address the stated need in submit research notes.
- • The decision must be supported by E1-E3.
- • The final product must make the success criteria visible.
- • Complete the work inside the 80-minute block.
- • Use only supplied or teacher-approved materials and evidence.
- • Do not trade , accessibility, or privacy for speed.
- • and evidence quality: must pass before scoring other criteria.
- • User need and effectiveness: highest scored criterion.
- • Time, cost, and ease of use: compare only after and effectiveness pass.
Test evidence: For each option, record the E1-E3 result that supports or fails each criterion. Do not assign a score without a named observation.
- Version or option tested
- Criterion met or missed
- Evidence ID and result
- Revision made
- Reason for the revision
- Need and user
- Criteria and constraints
- Chosen option and evidence
- Test result
- Revision and reason
Students often think Students think a is a list: source one said this, source two said that, source three said this other thing.. The trap: A list is not a synthesis, because it never states what the sources add up to. A real says 'taken together, the evidence shows my ER solution must do X,' which is a claim you can design against, while a list just hands the reader the raw parts and makes them do the thinking.
Annotated ER research notes packet
- Research questions linked to sources: Q1 (typical turnover time) is answered by Source 1; Q3 (infection-control standards) is answered by Source 3; Q2 (staffing models) is partly answered by Source 1 and the vendor brochure.
- Needs-assessment summary: The evidence shows that treatment-room turnover, not room count, is the limiting step in ERs like ours, and that a dedicated turnover role or protocol can cut downtime substantially while still meeting infection-control standards. My design should therefore focus on a fast, standards-compliant turnover process rather than on adding rooms.
- Evidence gap I still have: I do not yet have data on how turnover staffing affects nurse workload, so I cannot fully predict the staffing cost. Naming this gap shows where my next research has to go.
This model shows the level of evidence and organization needed to complete: A complete packet linking each source to a research question, with a needs-assessment summary that synthesizes the evidence and names one remaining evidence gap.
- Date and label the entry.
- Record the procedure, observation, or design decision clearly.
- End with what the evidence means and the next step.
Keep the structure. Replace the question, facts, measurements, and evidence. Then recheck units, vocabulary, and whether the conclusion goes beyond the evidence.
Also due today: Submit the annotated ER research notes on Schoology.
- CER:
- Claim, Evidence, Reasoning: make a claim, back it with evidence, explain your reasoning.
- SOP:
- Standard Operating Procedure, the exact steps to follow (especially in a lab).
- Tracker:
- Your PLTW progress log where you record completed evidence.
- myPLTW:
- The PLTW course site where you do the online activities. Find it in Clever with your Microsoft sign-in, right next to Schoology.
Tap the speaker to hear a term. Add two of these to your notebook glossary with a definition and an example in your own words.
Pick just 2 or 3 words from today and make them yours: write what each one means in your own words, name the context clue or evidence that helped, then give one example from what you actually did in Submit research notes. Try your own words first; the glossary is there if you get stuck. This is voluntary and counts as extra credit, so keep it short.
Saved on this device. Show Mr. Mendoza or add these to your notebook glossary to claim the extra credit.
Classroom documents for this lesson are posted in Schoology. Open Clever, then Schoology, and find each one by the name shown on its card.
Open this when the class reaches this activity and use it to complete the required lesson artifact.
Placement rationale
Matched Research documentation and source credibility by path:Biomedical-Innovations/Problem-1_Emergency-Room/1.1_Emergency-Room; keywords:research, documentation, credibility, scavenger, website. Score 162. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
Open this when the class reaches this activity and use it to complete the required lesson artifact.
Placement rationale
Matched Research documentation and source credibility by path:Biomedical-Innovations/Problem-1_Emergency-Room/1.1_Emergency-Room; keywords:research, documentation, scavenger. Score 146. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
Open this when the class reaches this activity and use it to complete the required lesson artifact.
Placement rationale
Matched Research documentation and source credibility by path:Biomedical-Innovations/Problem-1_Emergency-Room/1.1_Emergency-Room; keywords:research, documentation, scavenger. Score 146. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
Sign in to Clever with your district Microsoft account to open Schoology or myPLTW. Follow today's posted steps. If myPLTW will not open, use the posted alternative and tell Mr. Mendoza. Turn in your completed work through the Schoology assignment.
Practice: try a question, then check your answer▸
Claim ceiling for this check: Today's evidence supports a classroom claim about submit research notes. It cannot prove causation, diagnose a real patient, or justify action outside this room.
A needs-assessment summary reads: 'Source A discussed triage. Source B discussed staffing. Source C discussed fast-track lanes.' Why is this not yet a needs assessment, and what would fix it?
Write an answer and pick a confidence to unlock the key.
Fast retrieval with instant answers, not the commit-then-reveal check above. Try each from memory first: write what you remember about the earlier units, then check yourself here.
Missed class or ready for more?▸
What today's skills lead to. These are real health-science careers this course builds toward. Tap one to see, on the US Department of Labor's O*NET site, what the job actually involves, what it pays, and how fast it is growing.
Compile an annotated source packet: gather your credible sources, write annotations and citations, and submit a written needs-assessment summary based on the evidence.
MedlinePlus Evaluating Health InformationUse the submission route shown on today's page.
Class still runs. Complete the online activity above (it's self-guided). Need the concept taught without a teacher? Use this authoritative explainer:
MedlinePlus Evaluating Health Information- CompleteEvery required part of the artifact is present, nothing left blank.
- AccurateThe science and the data are correct and match the evidence.
- Scientific reasoningYou explain your claim with evidence and reasoning (CER), not just an answer.
- Professional communicationClear, organized, labeled, and written the way a clinician or scientist would.
- SubmittedGo to Schoology to turn this in. Submit one PDF. Put your first and last name in the document header. Name the file: FirstName LastName - Assignment Title - YYYY-MM-DD.pdf. If you cannot get in, see Mr. Mendoza. Do not skip the work.
This week
My Progress dashboard