The activity
The activity described in this case was the culmination of a week-long project on Forensic Science.
Lesson Development
Pre-Lesson:
Before beginning the lesson with her students, Mrs. Suttle designed a Google Site (Including the following links: Introduction, Task, Process, Evaluation/Conclusion, Analysis Resources, and Suspects) to house all of her students needed materials for the unit on forensic science. She also recruited other teachers and her principle to record teacher suspect alibis and a principal’s message. With the help of her ITRT, Mrs. Suttle created QR codes, microscope slides for various materials her students needed to observe and interpret, fake blood that her students would find at the crime scene, and fingerprints that her students would find at the crime scene using Pocket Prints from the school resource officer. Mrs. Suttle also made sure to communicate with parents/guardians by sending a technology notice home, notifying parents that cell phones and iPads were needed for a scientific investigation.
Lesson:
The lesson starts with Mrs. Suttle introducing the concepts behind the unit and directing students to the Forensic website to explore the links and materials. The students were required to explore the site over the weekend prior to beginning the lesson in class. Upon returning to class, students formed forensic teams and created their own Googledoc to record evidence and analysis that they shared with Mrs. Suttle at the end of the unit. Students then went to the Forensic Lab (multiple empty classrooms Mrs. Suttle used to set up stations for analyzing collected evidence) and began working on different pieces of evidence.
Students took pictures of fingerprints found at the crime scene using their cell phones or iPads. Then they scanned QR codes to gain access to DNA sequences, which they sent to their Googledoc. Once students finished with fingerprints and DNA, they sketched and recorded microscope samples of hair and other fibers found at the crime scene. After recording the microscope station data in their Googledoc, they went to the blood typing station to analyze and record blood typing results. The final evidence were footprints found at the crime scene. Students used the length of the footprint to determine height calculations and record their data. Once students gathered all information in the Forensic Lab, they used their gathered data to figure out who committed the crime.
Post-Lesson:
After the lesson, the students turned in the Googledoc to the teacher for grading and moved on to the product portion of the unit. Students had a choice of how they reported their findings (video, Xbox avatar, green screen, song, Podcast, ActivInspire, etc.). Once finished with their product, students presented their findings to Mrs. Suttle and the rest of the class.
Evaluation Procedure:
TIPC Assessment:
(click on the link to see the explanation of Henrico County's Technology Innovation/Integration Progression Chart [TIPC] based on Partnership for 21st Century Skills, the Nets*T, the Nets*S, and TPACK)
Research and Information Fluency: IDEAL/TARGET – Students used various search techniques to answer their developed questions (including Google advanced search). Their information was cited, organized, and displayed in a shared Googledoc. This information was later used in the students’ final report.
Communication and Collaboration: IDEAL/TARGET – Students worked collaboratively and communicated in a variety of different ways. Googledocs was used effectively for both. Roles and responsibilities with norms were established as they address their task.
Critical Thinking and Problem Solving: APPROACHING – Students had to solve the mystery. During this process of researching and analysis of data, the student groups had to problem solve and justify their decisions. This was evident in the final report presented by the groups.
Creativity and Innovation: IDEAL/TARGET – Students created a final report (their choice of tool) containing their detailed steps on how they analyzed the evidence, eliminated suspects, and a final recommendation of who should be charged with the crime and why.
TPACK Commentary:
Mrs. Suttle is an expert in her content knowledge, thoroughly understanding scientific method and inquiry and able to excite her students when exploring science. She uses her content knowledge and makes successful pedagogical choices when teaching her students. She wants her students to explore and question using tools of science and go through a true scientific process, instead of sitting and taking notes in a lecture. Mrs. Suttle understands her students will learn more if they engage in experiences. She pairs her content knowledge and her pedagogical choices with her choices in technology; however, she had a lot of assistance from her ITRT. Mrs. Suttle enjoys using technology, but needed help in implementing the best tools for this particular unit. So while her content knowledge and her pedagogy are outstanding, she is still struggling with making the right technological choices for her classroom on her own. She balances this struggle by making good choices in collaborative relationships with her ITRT and other technologically-savvy educators.
Lesson Development
Pre-Lesson:
Before beginning the lesson with her students, Mrs. Suttle designed a Google Site (Including the following links: Introduction, Task, Process, Evaluation/Conclusion, Analysis Resources, and Suspects) to house all of her students needed materials for the unit on forensic science. She also recruited other teachers and her principle to record teacher suspect alibis and a principal’s message. With the help of her ITRT, Mrs. Suttle created QR codes, microscope slides for various materials her students needed to observe and interpret, fake blood that her students would find at the crime scene, and fingerprints that her students would find at the crime scene using Pocket Prints from the school resource officer. Mrs. Suttle also made sure to communicate with parents/guardians by sending a technology notice home, notifying parents that cell phones and iPads were needed for a scientific investigation.
Lesson:
The lesson starts with Mrs. Suttle introducing the concepts behind the unit and directing students to the Forensic website to explore the links and materials. The students were required to explore the site over the weekend prior to beginning the lesson in class. Upon returning to class, students formed forensic teams and created their own Googledoc to record evidence and analysis that they shared with Mrs. Suttle at the end of the unit. Students then went to the Forensic Lab (multiple empty classrooms Mrs. Suttle used to set up stations for analyzing collected evidence) and began working on different pieces of evidence.
Students took pictures of fingerprints found at the crime scene using their cell phones or iPads. Then they scanned QR codes to gain access to DNA sequences, which they sent to their Googledoc. Once students finished with fingerprints and DNA, they sketched and recorded microscope samples of hair and other fibers found at the crime scene. After recording the microscope station data in their Googledoc, they went to the blood typing station to analyze and record blood typing results. The final evidence were footprints found at the crime scene. Students used the length of the footprint to determine height calculations and record their data. Once students gathered all information in the Forensic Lab, they used their gathered data to figure out who committed the crime.
Post-Lesson:
After the lesson, the students turned in the Googledoc to the teacher for grading and moved on to the product portion of the unit. Students had a choice of how they reported their findings (video, Xbox avatar, green screen, song, Podcast, ActivInspire, etc.). Once finished with their product, students presented their findings to Mrs. Suttle and the rest of the class.
Evaluation Procedure:
- Document with evidence collected and analyzed
- Multimedia report of group findings
- Rubric
- Teacher feedback throughout the lesson
TIPC Assessment:
(click on the link to see the explanation of Henrico County's Technology Innovation/Integration Progression Chart [TIPC] based on Partnership for 21st Century Skills, the Nets*T, the Nets*S, and TPACK)
Research and Information Fluency: IDEAL/TARGET – Students used various search techniques to answer their developed questions (including Google advanced search). Their information was cited, organized, and displayed in a shared Googledoc. This information was later used in the students’ final report.
Communication and Collaboration: IDEAL/TARGET – Students worked collaboratively and communicated in a variety of different ways. Googledocs was used effectively for both. Roles and responsibilities with norms were established as they address their task.
Critical Thinking and Problem Solving: APPROACHING – Students had to solve the mystery. During this process of researching and analysis of data, the student groups had to problem solve and justify their decisions. This was evident in the final report presented by the groups.
Creativity and Innovation: IDEAL/TARGET – Students created a final report (their choice of tool) containing their detailed steps on how they analyzed the evidence, eliminated suspects, and a final recommendation of who should be charged with the crime and why.
TPACK Commentary:
Mrs. Suttle is an expert in her content knowledge, thoroughly understanding scientific method and inquiry and able to excite her students when exploring science. She uses her content knowledge and makes successful pedagogical choices when teaching her students. She wants her students to explore and question using tools of science and go through a true scientific process, instead of sitting and taking notes in a lecture. Mrs. Suttle understands her students will learn more if they engage in experiences. She pairs her content knowledge and her pedagogical choices with her choices in technology; however, she had a lot of assistance from her ITRT. Mrs. Suttle enjoys using technology, but needed help in implementing the best tools for this particular unit. So while her content knowledge and her pedagogy are outstanding, she is still struggling with making the right technological choices for her classroom on her own. She balances this struggle by making good choices in collaborative relationships with her ITRT and other technologically-savvy educators.
