Forensic evidence table
For the evidence in your scenario, can you build a table that would survive a defense attorney asking 'How do you know no one altered this between the scene and this room?'
Build a evidence table that maintains a proper .
- • Your table tracks each item's .
- • You flagged any break that would weaken the evidence.
- For one piece of evidence, list the three facts you must record the instant it is collected.
- Why does a single undocumented hour make a whole sample legally questionable, even if the sample is real?
- 1List each piece of evidence in your scenario.
- 2For each item, record who collected it, when, and where.
- 3Document every transfer of custody with date and handler.
- 4Note how each item was sealed and stored.
- 5Flag any gap that could compromise the evidence.
🛠 Get unstuck · pick your level
Lab day: Tier 1 is the whole class at the bench. No extension today.
🔑 Today's words · 5
Tap a word in the lesson for a plain meaning and one example. Recycled into next week's Do-Now.
Do the work · 80-minute blockfirst 5 min = hook▸
💡 Big idea: An unbroken makes evidence valid because the documented record of every handler and storage step is the only thing that lets you rule out tampering, so a single gap creates doubt no matter how genuine the sample is.
- 0-5 minWarm-up: why would a gap in a make evidence inadmissible?
- 5-20 minList all evidence items in your scenario
- 20-40 minRecord collector, date, location, and storage method for each item
- 40-55 minDocument all transfers with date and handler name
- 55-70 minFlag any gap or missing documentation in the custody record
- 70-80 minExit ticket: describe one gap and its effect on evidence reliability
- • evidence is only as reliable as its documentation.
- • Today you build the table that would make your evidence hold up in court or .
- • Every handoff, every seal, every storage condition gets recorded: no exceptions.
- • Flagging your own gaps now is far better than having them exposed later.
- • Each evidence transfer must be documented with a date, the name of the handler, and the reason for transfer.
- • Sealing and storage conditions are part of the custody record because degradation affects reliability.
- • Any gap in documentation creates reasonable doubt about whether the evidence was altered.
Forensic chain-of-custody basics, independent project claim, final portfolio audit; this is the last content week before WebXam review. · evidence table
Day 2 of this lesson. Open this exact section in myPLTW (find it in Clever, Microsoft sign-in), then do the work below.
Do this: Open Problem 7 or 8 in your myPLTW course shell and navigate to the evidence activity, then build a chain-of-custody table for your forensic scenario.
Attach your evidence table to the Problem 7 or 8 portfolio.
The research ethics debate is done; chain-of-custody documentation is an early project milestone, so submit today.
Completed evidence table with flagged documentation gaps submitted as evidence.
All PLTW activities are completed inside the PLTW course environment: this page only gives direction. Submit producibles on Schoology.
Check things off as you work, then submit. This tells Mr. Mendoza how you're doing so he can help the class. It does not replace turning in your producible on Schoology.
Use the code Mr. Mendoza gave you, not your name. Saved on this device.
Forensic chain-of-custody basics, independent project claim, final portfolio audit; this is the last content week before WebXam review. · Forensic evidence table
Open Problem 7 or 8 in your myPLTW course shell and navigate to the evidence activity, then build a chain-of-custody table for your forensic scenario.
The research ethics debate is done; chain-of-custody documentation is an early project milestone, so submit today.
This is how Mr. Mendoza sees the class keeping pace with PLTW. Be honest, it only helps if it is accurate.
🎯 Build a evidence table that maintains a proper .
- List each piece of evidence in your scenario.
- For each item, record who collected it, when, and where.
- Document every transfer of custody with date and handler.
- Note how each item was sealed and stored.
- Flag any gap that could compromise the evidence.
Data table: evidence table with each item, collector, date and location of collection, all custody transfers with dates and handlers, storage and sealing method, and flagged documentation gaps.
Turn it in on Schoology using the checklist just below. Upload by 11:29 PM for full credit.
| Task | Who |
|---|---|
| List each piece of evidence in your scenario. | _______ |
| For each item, record who collected it, when, and where. | _______ |
| Document every transfer of custody with date and handler. | _______ |
| Note how each item was sealed and stored. | _______ |
| Flag any gap that could compromise the evidence. | _______ |
Working solo? Put your own name in "Who" for every row.
- Your table tracks each item's .
- You flagged any break that would weaken the evidence.
- 1Do thisBuild a forensic evidence table that maintains a proper chain of custody.
- 2Use this resource
- 3Submit thisData table: Forensic evidence table with each item, collector, date and location of collection, all custody transfers with dates and handlers, storage and sealing method, and flagged documentation gaps.
- 4Submit it here
- 1Open Clever.
- 2Microsoft (district) sign-in.
- 3Schoology and myPLTW are both in Clever.
Look for this assignment in Schoology: Biotechnology for Health (Biomedical Innovations) › Forensic chain-of-custody basics, independent project claim, final portfolio audit; this is the last content week before WebXam review. › Data tableOpen Schoology
Learn it · deck, reading, and vocabulary▸
Tier 1 is the time-boxed teacher set for the block; Tier 2 adds scaffolded vocabulary, examples, and a reading routine; Tier 3 extends into careers and current biomedical applications.
Generated from this lesson's canonical data with a red-team citation check.
Students often think Students think is just proof the evidence is real, so as long as the item is genuine the paperwork is a formality.. The trap: That is a trap because the record proves the evidence was not altered, not just that it existed. A real sample with a documentation gap is legally as weak as a fake one, because the gap is where tampering could have happened undetected.
My scenario: a swab and a labeled tube collected from a mock scene.
For each item I tracked who collected it, when and where, every transfer, and how it was stored. I flagged one gap where a handler signature was missing.
Reading the table below: Item 1 has a complete record. Item 2 has a flagged gap (no handler recorded for the lab transfer), which I would fix before relying on it.
| Item | Collected by, date, place | Transfers (date, handler) | Storage and seal | Gap flagged |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Swab A | Tech 1, 5/2, Room 3 | 5/2 to Lab (Tech 2) | Sealed bag, fridge 4 C | None |
| Tube B | Tech 1, 5/2, Room 3 | 5/3 to Lab (no handler logged) | Capped tube, freezer | Yes, missing handler |
Also due today: Submit your forensic evidence table in the course LMS today.
- 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, then give one example from what you actually did in Forensic evidence table. 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 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 project by path:Biomedical-Innovations/Problem-7_Forensic-Autopsy/7.1_Forensic-Autopsy; keywords:forensic, autopsy, fetal pig, organ. Score 158. 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 project by path:Biomedical-Innovations/Problem-7_Forensic-Autopsy/7.1_Forensic-Autopsy; keywords:forensic, autopsy, fetal pig, organ. Score 158. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
Use this as the classroom resource for project.
Placement rationale
Matched project by path:Biomedical-Innovations/Problem-7_Forensic-Autopsy/7.1_Forensic-Autopsy; keywords:forensic, autopsy, fetal pig, organ. Score 158. Visibility: student-schoology (student-facing resource; link through Schoology rather than local path).
How to get there: open Clever and sign in with your Microsoft (district) account. You will find both Schoology and myPLTW right there in Clever. Turn in your work on Schoology; do the online activities in myPLTW.
Check yourself · commit, then reveal▸
Your table shows a swab collected Monday and analyzed Thursday, but no entry for Tuesday or Wednesday. Is this evidence still usable, and what exactly is the problem?
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.
Go further and get help▸
Finish the checklist before you handle any material.
- • No biological materials handled today; this is a documentation session.
- • Keep scenario materials organized and do not share scenario details outside class if they involve simulated sensitive data.
- • If any scenario involves simulated human biological material descriptions, treat all information with the same discretion as real patient data.
- 1Frame the guiding question and name your independent and dependent variables.
- 2Plan a method that would actually answer it, then get the plan checked before you start.
- 3Collect data carefully and record exactly what you observe before you interpret it.
- 4Build a tentative argument on a whiteboard: claim, evidence, reasoning.
- 5Argumentation session: present your board, question another group, and revise your claim.
- 6Write the final CER with your strongest evidence and one named limitation of the method.
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.
Today is individual PLTW work, so do exactly what we did in class, from home: complete the same PLTW target above, then submit your Data table.
Open Schoology (CMSD) and keep goingHow to get there: open Clever and sign in with your Microsoft (district) account. You will find both Schoology and myPLTW right there in Clever. Turn in your work on Schoology; do the online activities in myPLTW.
Class still runs. Complete the online activity above (it's self-guided). Need the concept taught without a teacher? Use this authoritative explainer:
NIST Forensic ScienceYou've passed Unit 2, so the optional extra-credit track is open. Complete reserved-unit work from home (virtual labs included) for extra credit, submitted on Schoology.
Open the extra-credit track- 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.
- SubmittedTurned in the right way (Schoology for routine work) and confirmed.
- Error analysis and method · counts doubleName a specific limit of the method and how it moved your result, and compare what you predicted to what happened. "Human error" does not count; say what about the procedure or instrument caused it.