Synthesize all evidence
Safety gate · before any work
- Wear the required PPE, keep the bench clear, handle equipment only as directed, and know where the eyewash, sink, and spill kit are before you start.
- Human samples and data stay private: label with a code, never a name, and dispose of materials in the correct waste container, then wash your hands.
Do now
Organize scene, lab, suspect, and autopsy evidence and plan the PLTW open-investigation report.
- Hand in
- Evidence planning sheet: a four-column table listing each evidence stream, the specific evidence items you have from that stream, the reliability rating, and the key limitation.
- Where
- Turn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not.
You get two school days for every day you were absent, so this deadline moves with you.
For this case, how do you line up four very different kinds of evidence, scene photos, lab tests, a suspect's story, and the , and decide which ones you can lean on hardest as you plan your report?
Organize scene, lab, suspect, and evidence and plan the PLTW open-investigation report.
- • I can list the evidence streams a conclusion must integrate.
- • I can judge evidence reliability for synthesis.
- List the four evidence streams you have to pull together in this case.
- Name one thing that would make you trust a lab result more, and one thing that would make you trust it less.
- 1Take notes on how to weight different evidence types by reliability.
- 2List the four evidence streams you must integrate in this case.
- 3Review what a strong investigative report includes and omits.
- 4Complete the PLTW open-investigation online planning task.
- 5Identify which variables and limitations weaken each evidence stream.
What did this day actually feel like?
Synthesize all evidence
We have four evidence streams now: the scene, the lab work, the suspect information, and the autopsy. Today was about weighting them, because they are not equally reliable and pretending they are is how you get a wrong answer confidently.
I built a planning sheet with a column per stream, the specific items I have from each, and how much I trust it.
Writing down that my own trace evidence was weak because of our photo problem back in week three was annoying and correct.
Turned in: evidence planning sheet → recorded in Class Records
Fiction. There is no such student. The lessons, labs and dates are the real planned course; the student, the classmates and the conversations are invented.
The same day, drawn.
Four evidence streams: the scene, the lab, the suspect, the autopsy. They are not equally reliable and pretending they are is how you get a confident wrong answer.
Fiction. There is no such student. The lessons, labs and dates are the real planned course; the student, the classmates and the conversations are invented.
🛠 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: You weight each evidence stream by how it was collected, because a controlled test with an unbroken earns more trust than an uncontrolled or interested account, and your report is only as strong as that weighting.
- 0:00Review the four evidence streams; class brainstorm: which do you trust most and why?
- 0:12Teacher notes: evidence reliability weighting criteria (controls, , method)
- 0:25Students list all evidence items for each of the four streams from their unit work
- 0:40myPLTW: complete the open-investigation online planning task
- 1:00For each stream, identify the one variable or limitation that most weakens it
- 1:10Planning sheet complete; preview Wednesday evidence-board build
- • You have four streams of evidence from this case: what was found at the scene, what the lab tests showed, what we know about the suspect, and what the revealed. Today you organize them.
- • Not all evidence is equal. Physical evidence from a controlled lab test with documented controls is more reliable than witness testimony from a single source. We are going to rate each stream.
- • A strong report is not the one with the most evidence. It is the one that weighs the best evidence, addresses the conflicts, and states the conclusion clearly.
- • By the end of today you will have a planning sheet ready for Wednesday's evidence board. Think of today as your outline before the argument.
- • The four evidence streams in this case are scene documentation, laboratory tests (biomolecules and toxicology), suspect information, and / findings.
- • Evidence reliability is higher when the collection method was controlled, the is unbroken, and controls were used.
- • A strong investigative report states the conclusion first, then supports it with the strongest evidence and explicitly addresses contradicting findings.
Unit 1.3 Open Investigation: Virtual/open case investigation; synthesize scene, lab, suspect, and autopsy evidence. · Synthesize all evidence
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 Lesson 1.3 Open Investigation in myPLTW and complete the evidence-synthesis planning task for the report.
Mark the Lesson 1.3 planning task complete in myPLTW.
You read the Lesson 1.3 overview Monday. By the end of today the planning task and your four-stream evidence list should be done.
Screenshot of myPLTW showing the Lesson 1.3 planning task complete, plus your four-stream evidence list in your notebook.
The official PLTW activity stays inside myPLTW. If myPLTW will not open, use F1 and E1-E3 on this page to complete today's local evidence decision, then make up the official activity when access returns. Turn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not.
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 through the submission route shown below.
Use the code Mr. Mendoza gave you, not your name. Saved on this device.
Unit 1.3 Open Investigation: Virtual/open case investigation; synthesize scene, lab, suspect, and autopsy evidence. · Synthesize all evidence
Open Lesson 1.3 Open Investigation in myPLTW and complete the evidence-synthesis planning task for the report.
You read the Lesson 1.3 overview Monday. By the end of today the planning task and your four-stream evidence list should be done.
This is how Mr. Mendoza sees the class keeping pace with PLTW. Be honest, it only helps if it is accurate.
🎯 Organize scene, lab, suspect, and evidence and plan the PLTW open-investigation report.
- Take notes on how to weight different evidence types by reliability.
- List the four evidence streams you must integrate in this case.
- Review what a strong investigative report includes and omits.
- Complete the PLTW open-investigation online planning task.
- Identify which variables and limitations weaken each evidence stream.
Pre-lab: Evidence planning sheet: a four-column table listing each evidence stream, the specific evidence items you have from that stream, the reliability rating, and the key limitation.
Turn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not. Use the checklist just below and upload by 11:29 PM for full credit. Absent with an excused absence? You get two school days for every day you were absent, so this deadline moves with you.
| Task | Who |
|---|---|
| Take notes on how to weight different evidence types by reliability. | _______ |
| List the four evidence streams you must integrate in this case. | _______ |
| Review what a strong investigative report includes and omits. | _______ |
| Complete the PLTW open-investigation online planning task. | _______ |
| Identify which variables and limitations weaken each evidence stream. | _______ |
Working solo? Put your own name in "Who" for every row.
- I can list the evidence streams a conclusion must integrate.
- I can judge evidence reliability for synthesis.
- 1Do thisOrganize scene, lab, suspect, and autopsy evidence and plan the PLTW open-investigation report.
- 2Use this resource
- 3Submit thisPre-lab: Evidence planning sheet: a four-column table listing each evidence stream, the specific evidence items you have from that stream, the reliability rating, and the key limitation.
- 4Submit it here
- 1Open the drop folder.
- 2Sign in with your district Microsoft account, not a personal one.
- 3Upload the file, named Lastname_Firstname__Assignment Title.
- 4Your own upload panel says Uploaded with a green check: that is your receipt.
Turn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not. Principles of Biomedical Technology (Principles of Biomedical Science) › Unit 1.3 Open Investigation: Virtual/open case investigation; synthesize scene, lab, suspect, and autopsy evidence. › Pre-labOpen the drop folder
Learn it · deck, reading, 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.
and biomedical conclusions demand a threshold of , several independent tests that agree, because any single finding can be wrong and a wrong carries real human cost.
You weight each evidence stream by how it was collected, because a controlled test with an unbroken earns more trust than an uncontrolled or interested account, and your report is only as strong as that weighting.
A smoke alarm detects signs of fire but can also react to burnt toast.
- What does the alarm detect?
- What creates a false alarm?
- What evidence is needed before declaring a fire?
A screening signal changes what to investigate next; it does not automatically prove the cause.
Biomedical tests have measured performance and biological sampling limits that a household alarm does not capture.
- • Alarm signal maps to a test result.
- • Burnt toast maps to a .
- • Inspection maps to confirmation or the next test.
Driving question: For this case, how do you line up four very different kinds of evidence, scene photos, lab tests, a suspect's story, and the , and decide which ones you can lean on hardest as you plan your report?
What you already know: and biomedical conclusions demand a threshold of , several independent tests that agree, because any single finding can be wrong and a wrong carries real human cost.
New idea: You weight each evidence stream by how it was collected, because a controlled test with an unbroken earns more trust than an uncontrolled or interested account, and your report is only as strong as that weighting.
Visual or model: F1. F1. A lesson illustration or teaching diagram for Synthesize all evidence. Use it with E1-E3; it is a model or context image, not experimental or patient data. What to notice: Trace the labeled observation or evidence sequence before choosing an explanation.
- Observe or measure the relevant feature in Synthesize all evidence.
- Organize the observation with a stable evidence ID.
- Apply this rule: A screening signal changes what to investigate next; it does not automatically prove the cause.
- Choose the option the evidence supports and state the limit of the conclusion.
Real biomedical example: For this case, how do you line up four very different kinds of evidence, scene photos, lab tests, a suspect's story, and the , and decide which ones you can lean on hardest as you plan your report?
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.
- • synthesis: Building a molecule in the cell, as in synthesis (making a protein from mRNA).
- • : A formal written document presenting the evidence, methods, and conclusions of a scientific investigation, often used to support legal cases.
- • limitation: A weakness or boundary of a study, design, or method that restricts how far its results can be trusted or applied.
- • reliability: The degree to which a measurement, method, or person produces the same dependable result each time under the same conditions.
- • : Evidence given in court by a qualified specialist who explains technical findings, such as DNA or results, to help the jury understand.
- • conclusion: The closing part of an investigation where you state whether the evidence supported your hypothesis and explain what the results mean.
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.
The four evidence streams in this case are scene documentation, laboratory tests (biomolecules and toxicology), suspect information, and / findings.
Limit: E1 supplies context or an observation; it does not by itself establish the explanation.
You weight each evidence stream by how it was collected, because a controlled test with an unbroken earns more trust than an uncontrolled or interested account, and your report is only as strong as that weighting.
Limit: E2 is a teaching statement or comparison and must be checked against the task evidence.
I can list the evidence streams a conclusion must integrate.
Limit: E3 supports only the result or product criterion named here; it cannot justify a broader clinical or causal claim.
PLTW-PBT-2026-09-30 · Simulated classroom evidence scenario
Your role: biomedical investigator
Decision: Your team must decide what the evidence from Synthesize all evidence supports before submitting the pre-lab readiness record named on the lesson page.
- • Choose the strongest supported explanation.
- • Choose the next evidence to collect.
- • Hold the decision because the evidence is insufficient.
Response: State one choice, cite at least two evidence IDs, explain the rule that connects them, and add one limitation. Submit it as the pre-lab readiness record.
Claim ceiling: The supplied lesson evidence can support an observation, pattern, classroom mechanism, or next-step decision about Synthesize all evidence. It cannot by itself prove causation, establish a real clinical diagnosis, or justify action outside this classroom task.
Reason for review: Your team must decide what the evidence from Synthesize all evidence supports before submitting the pre-lab readiness record named on the lesson page.
Context: Weighing evidence means judging both what each stream tells you and how far you can trust it, because a result from a sloppy or uncontrolled method deserves less weight than the same result from a controlled one.
- • T1: Take notes on how to weight different evidence types by reliability.
- • T2: List the four evidence streams you must integrate in this case.
- • T3: Review what a strong investigative report includes and omits.
- • T4: Complete the PLTW open-investigation online planning task.
- • T5: Identify which variables and limitations weaken each evidence stream.
- • E1: The four evidence streams in this case are scene documentation, laboratory tests (biomolecules and toxicology), suspect information, and / findings.
- • E2: You weight each evidence stream by how it was collected, because a controlled test with an unbroken earns more trust than an uncontrolled or interested account, and your report is only as strong as that weighting.
- • E3: I can list the evidence streams a conclusion must integrate.
Measurements: Use only the measurements, units, graph, or counts supplied in today's task. No additional patient measurement is implied.
Figure finding: Teaching diagram for Synthesize all evidence. Trace the labeled observation or evidence sequence before choosing an explanation. 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.
Mean = sum of values / number of values. Median = middle ordered value. Range = maximum - minimum.
For 2, 4, 4, and 10: mean = 20 / 4 = 5, median = 4, and range = 10 - 2 = 8.
Mean, median, and range keep the measurement unit. Order the values before finding the median.
Calculate the requested summary for today's supplied values, then write what it reveals and what it hides.
- • The solution must address the stated need in Synthesize all evidence.
- • 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 tend to treat every piece of evidence as equally reliable, as if a controlled lab and an unverified suspect statement should count the same.. The trap: That is a trap, because evidence reliability depends on how it was collected: a test run with controls and an unbroken deserves more weight than a memory-based statement or a sample that could have been contaminated, so weighing must come before concluding.
Evidence planning (Maria, Period 2):
I rated reliability higher where the collection was controlled, the chain of custody was unbroken, and controls were used. The autopsy and lab streams rated high; the suspect-information stream rated lower because it relied on a single interview.
| Stream | Items I have | Reliability | Key limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scene | Photos, sketch, fiber | High | One transfer logged late |
| Lab | Biomolecule and tox data | High | Pigment interference on one unknown |
| Autopsy | Histology, heart findings | High | Microscopy alone not conclusive |
| Suspect | One interview | Low | Single, unverified source |
This model shows the level of evidence and organization needed to complete: A four-column planning sheet listing each evidence stream, the specific items in it, a reliability rating, and the key limitation, used to plan the investigation report.
- Identify the purpose, hazards, and required controls.
- Write the procedure in a usable order.
- Confirm materials, measurements, and waste handling before starting.
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: Hand in your planning sheet before leaving. Also complete the online open-investigation planning task.
- 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 Synthesize all evidence. 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.
Hand-picked readings and interactives for this lesson, from authoritative open organizations and PLTW's own public course outline.
Check yourself · commit, then reveal▸
Claim ceiling for this check: The supplied lesson evidence can support an observation, pattern, classroom mechanism, or next-step decision about Synthesize all evidence. It cannot by itself prove causation, establish a real clinical diagnosis, or justify action outside this classroom task.
Two streams give you the same time of death: an autopsy body-temperature estimate and a suspect who says he last saw the victim at that hour. Which do you weight more heavily as you plan, and why?
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▸
I can name the procedure's purpose and the evidence I will record. I can identify each named hazard and the control that reduces it: Wear the required PPE, keep the bench clear, handle equipment only as directed, and know where the eyewash, sink, and spill kit are before you start. My data table is ready before materials are handled.
Finish the checklist before you handle any material.
- • Wear the required PPE, keep the bench clear, handle equipment only as directed, and know where the eyewash, sink, and spill kit are before you start.
- • Human samples and data stay private: label with a code, never a name, and dispose of materials in the correct waste container, then wash your hands.
- 1Before materials are handled, identify the purpose, variables or comparison, controls, measurement units, and stop-work condition.
- 2Take notes on how to weight different evidence types by reliability.
- 3List the four evidence streams you must integrate in this case.
- 4Review what a strong investigative report includes and omits.
- 5Complete the PLTW open-investigation online planning task.
- 6Identify which variables and limitations weaken each evidence stream.
- 7Record each result in the prepared table before interpreting it. Mark missing, repeated, or invalid results truthfully.
- 8Complete the named cleanup and waste route, remove PPE safely, wash hands when required, and confirm the station is ready for the next group.
| Trial or sample ID | Independent condition | Measured result with units | Observation before interpretation | Quality-control note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Before the procedure, predict the result and cite the rule behind the prediction.
After the procedure, compare the result with the prediction and name one limitation or source of uncertainty.
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 work you can do from home: complete the same target above, then submit your Pre-lab.
Open the drop folderTurn this in at the drop folder with your district Microsoft sign-in, or hand it to Mr. Mendoza in class. Both count as submitted. Doing the activity in myPLTW does not.
Class still runs. Complete the online activity above (it's self-guided). Need the concept taught without a teacher? Use this authoritative explainer:
Khan Academy Biology Library- 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, on the class site or handed to Mr. Mendoza in class, and confirmed. Not in Schoology: that is where the report-card grade appears later.
- 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.