Synthesize all evidence
This page has four parts, in the order you use them. Part 1 is what you need to know. Part 2 says what to do, in plain English. Part 3 shows the work done once on a case that is not yours. Part 4 is your own work and where to turn it in.
Open your materials, follow the steps, then turn in your work.
Organize scene, lab, suspect, and autopsy evidence and plan the PLTW open-investigation report.
Case background, evidence, and file details▸
How today connects to the case
Where: Statik Sound, a neighborhood recording studio. Who: Marcus Bell, 34, owner and producer of Statik Sound, found on the studio floor behind the mixing console on a Monday morning by his business partner.
The scene in our room is the scene in the case: tape at the door, the outline and torso behind the console, the lower body beneath a fallen speaker cabinet and an acoustic moving blanket. Responders left the scene as found, pending investigation.
Your job: By Day 18 your team names the manner and cause of death and backs each one with at least four exhibits across three different evidence types. Every claim stops where the evidence stops.
Today you will bring every thread to one table, close the last open questions with the records exhibits you already hold, resolve the logic tree, and draft your manner-and-cause claim.
Remember: Corroboration closes cases: independent evidence lines agreeing. One line persuades; three lines conclude.
- Project 1.2.6 Case Closed
This John Hay case practices skills connected to the PLTW activity above. Follow today's directions for the assigned work.
Missed class? Open today's worksheet and briefing. Use simulated data only if the worksheet or Mr. Mendoza provides it, and label it "Simulated data." If a required measurement or file is missing, ask Mr. Mendoza. Do not invent results.
Evidence released today
No new exhibits today. Work with what the case file already holds.
Exhibit means one numbered piece of evidence. Thread means the team lane it belongs to (Scene, Trace, Serology and DNA, Toxicology, Medical Examiner, Records). Exhibits are handed out on paper in class on the day they are released, and the same files are attached to that day's Schoology assignment.
Notebook reminders
- Investigation Day 16 pack (paper in class; the PDF is above and on the Schoology assignment)
- Investigative Notebook: Logic tree: final pruning inked
- Investigative Notebook: Suspect matrix: resolution row
- Investigative Notebook: Day 16 Cornell page
Daily Evidence Sheet, Day 16: the worksheet linked at the top of this page, every Part complete.
Submit one PDF of your Daily Evidence Sheet to Wk6 D16 · The Tree Resolves (PLTW 1.2.6).
Schoology assignment: Wk6 D16 · The Tree Resolves (PLTW 1.2.6)
What the evidence can and cannot prove
- Classroom evidence supports a classroom finding. It cannot convict a real person or diagnose a real patient.
- A hair consistent with a person proves a hair like theirs was present, not that the person was, and never when.
- A fingerprint proves touch, not when or why. A pattern class narrows a crowd; only minutiae can name one finger.
- A presumptive test says maybe. Only a confirmatory test says blood, and only DNA says whose.
- One value outside its reference range is a flag, not a verdict.
Make only the claims your evidence supports. Explain what you still cannot tell.
Optional: listen or watch a unit review▸
Part 1 of 4 · Background and definitions▸
💡 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.
- • 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.
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.
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.
- Observe or measure the relevant feature in synthesize all evidence.
- Organize the observation with a stable evidence ID.
- Apply this rule: Define variables, controls, sampling, units, and the analysis plan before interpreting a result; analysis cannot repair biased or inconsistent measurement.
- 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 to E3 and the figure 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.
- • : Combining findings from many separate sources into one organized conclusion, weighing how strong and consistent the evidence is overall.
- • : 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 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. This is thinking practice for the one turn-in named under Turn in, not a second submission.
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.
Define variables, controls, sampling, units, and the analysis plan before interpreting a result; analysis cannot repair biased or inconsistent measurement.
Limit: A well-organized classroom study can still be limited by , measurement quality, confounding, and the population represented.
You can list the evidence streams a conclusion must integrate.
Limit: E3 defines the classroom product or success criterion. It is not independent scientific evidence and cannot justify a clinical or causal claim.
Today's decision · Simulated classroom evidence scenario
Your role: biomedical investigator
Decision: Your team must decide what the evidence from synthesize all evidence supports before submitting the notebook record named on today's page.
- • Postpone the weighting until I check each stream's controls and custody record, because I cannot rank what I have not inspected.
- • Weight each stream by how it was collected, so the controlled lab test with an unbroken custody record carries the most.
- • Give the scene photos, lab tests, suspect story, and equal weight in my report, since all four are real evidence.
Response: State one choice, cite at least two evidence IDs, explain the rule that connects them, and add one limitation. Use it inside the one turn-in named under Turn in; it is not a separate submission.
Claim ceiling: Today's evidence supports a classroom claim about synthesize all evidence. 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 synthesize all evidence supports before submitting the notebook record named on today's 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 decide how much to rely on each type of evidence based on its 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 evidence planning sheet, the John Hay version of the PLTW open-investigation planning task; it counts the same.
- • T5: Identify which variables and limitations weaken each evidence stream.
- • E1: Biomedical evidence supports a conclusion only to the level allowed by the measurement, comparison, controls, source quality, and uncertainty in the investigation.
- • E2: Define variables, controls, sampling, units, and the analysis plan before interpreting a result; analysis cannot repair biased or inconsistent measurement.
- • E3: You 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: An empty evidence planning sheet with rows Scene, Lab, and Suspect and columns What it shows, How reliable and What would change my mind.
Uncertainty: This is a composite classroom scenario. Missing history, measurements, or confirmation tests remain unknown and limit the conclusion.
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: 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.
- 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.
Part 2 of 4 · Directions in plain English▸
2.1 Open your materials
2.2 Start the work
Take notes on how to decide how much to rely on each type of evidence based on its reliability.
Show all 5 required steps
- Take notes on how to decide how much to rely on each type of evidence based on its reliability.
- List the four evidence streams you must integrate in this case.
- Review what a strong investigative report includes and omits.
- Complete the evidence planning sheet, the John Hay version of the PLTW open-investigation planning task; it counts the same.
- Identify which variables and limitations weaken each evidence stream.
Lost your place? Check whether you have listed the four evidence streams (step 2) and finished the PLTW online planning task (step 4). If the four streams are listed but planning is not done, open the planning task now; if you cannot name the four streams, reread your reliability notes from step 1.
- 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
- 0:40Evidence planning sheet: the John Hay version of the PLTW planning task
- 1:00For each stream, identify the one variable or limitation that most weakens it
- 1:10Planning sheet complete; preview next class's 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 next class's evidence board. Think of today as your outline before the argument.
PLTW connection and today's work
Project 1.2.6 Case Closed in myPLTW holds the PLTW planning task; the evidence planning sheet on this page is the John Hay version and counts the same.
Today's stopping point: By the end of today the planning sheet and your four-stream evidence list should be done.
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.
Use the turn-in directions in Part 4 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
Part 3 of 4 · Worked example▸
This is a parallel case, not your own. Read it for the order of the work, then do your own in Part 4.
Evidence planning (Investigator A-12), practice case (a fall on a wet stairwell, not Case A or Case B):
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 statement.
Your sheet uses your own case's exhibits; copy the shape, not the words.
| Stream | Items I have | Reliability | Key limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scene | Stairwell photos, broken handrail, wet-floor sketch | High | Photos taken after the scene had been walked through |
| Lab | Toxicology screen (negative) | High | Covers only the substances tested |
| Autopsy | Skull fracture with bleeding under it | High | Cannot tell a fall from a push |
| Suspect | One statement | 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.
- 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 one PDF of your Daily Evidence Sheet, Day 16 to Wk6 D16 · The Tree Resolves (PLTW 1.2.6).
A research team lays out its question, variables, controls, sampling plan, measurement record, and analysis before deciding what the data support.
- Which variable is changed or compared?
- Which conditions and measurements must stay consistent?
- Which conclusion is inside the study's evidence boundary?
Define variables, controls, sampling, units, and the analysis plan before interpreting a result; analysis cannot repair biased or inconsistent measurement.
A well-organized classroom study can still be limited by , measurement quality, confounding, and the population represented.
- • Question and variable cards map to the study design.
- • Control and measurement cards map to fair, reproducible data collection.
- • The conclusion card maps to a bounded claim supported by the analysis.
Part 4 of 4 · Your work▸
Check your work before submitting
- I can list the evidence streams a conclusion must integrate.
- I can judge evidence reliability for synthesis.
4.1 Turn in your work
DueCheck the Schoology assignment for this day- Hand in
- Daily Evidence Sheet, Day 16: the worksheet linked at the top of this page, every Part complete.
How to submit and name your file
Submit one PDF of your Daily Evidence Sheet to Wk6 D16 · The Tree Resolves (PLTW 1.2.6).
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.
Find this lesson's Schoology assignments
These are existing assignments for your section. Follow the directions in the assignment you are working on; this list does not add new work. A PLTW Work row repeats on every day of its lesson; submit it once. Check Schoology for each deadline.
- Wk6 D16 · The Tree Resolves (PLTW 1.2.6)(today's case-day record)
Link will not open? Open Schoology, choose your course and section, and find the title shown above.
- 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. Schoology attaches your name to your upload; on the page itself, write your period and code. Name the file: FirstName LastName - Assignment Title - YYYY-MM-DD.pdf. If you cannot get in, see Mr. Mendoza. Do not skip the work.
How this lesson connects
Keep using what you learned last class: Forensic and biomedical conclusions demand a threshold of convergent evidence, several independent tests that agree, because any single finding can be wrong and a wrong cause of death carries real human cost. Today: You weight each evidence stream by how it was collected, because a controlled test with an unbroken chain of custody earns more trust than an uncontrolled or interested account, and your report is only as strong as that weighting.
Practice: try a question, then check your answer▸
Claim ceiling for this check: Today's evidence supports a classroom claim about synthesize all evidence. It cannot prove causation, diagnose a real patient, or justify action outside this room.
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.
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.
Today is individual work you can do from home: complete the same target above, then submit your Notebook check.
Go to Schoology to turn this in. Submit one PDF. Schoology attaches your name to your upload; on the page itself, write your period and code. Name the file: FirstName LastName - Assignment Title - YYYY-MM-DD.pdf. If you cannot get in, see Mr. Mendoza. Do not skip the work.
Class still runs. Complete today's work as this page describes (it is self-guided). Need the concept taught without a teacher? Use this authoritative explainer:
Khan Academy Biology LibrarySources: slides, readings, and resources▸
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.
Hand-picked readings and interactives for this lesson, from authoritative open organizations and PLTW's own public course outline.
This week
My Progress dashboard