Use these targets, vocabulary, rubrics, examples, and score sheet with the instructor's approved lesson and procedure. This is an assessment companion, not a complete lesson or safety authorization.
Student lessons, data, and worked answers: Unit 08 learning pathway.
The student demonstrates the following:
Five science criteria plus separately reported integration (Page 3).
Assemble a case file from the year’s evidence; defend it as testimony.
The student stops at the evidence and leaves guilt to the court (Page 4).
Fact, inference, and the limits of each kept distinct.
You are making a decision, not adding up points. For each criterion, decide whether the work is Developing, Proficient, or Mastery — the column language tells you which. A criterion counts as mastered only when the student can both build the case and keep the verdict with the court. Each student has three tokens per term; each token retries one rubric criterion. Approved accommodations, equipment failures, and approved absences are handled separately and do not consume these tokens.
Accept listed synonyms; use the distinction column to resolve near-matches.
| Canonical answer | Accepted synonyms | Common confusion / discriminator |
|---|---|---|
| Evidence & report | ||
| Converging evidence | corroborating findings | Independent results pointing the same way; stronger together than any one alone |
| Fact vs inference | observation vs interpretation | What was observed vs what it suggests; a report must separate them |
| Chain of custody | evidence log | The documented path from scene to court; a break can threaten admissibility |
| Admissibility | Daubert / Frye standard | Whether a court will accept the evidence; depends on method and handling |
| Testimony & safeguards | ||
| Expert testimony | expert witness report | Reports the evidence and its limits; the analyst does not testify to guilt |
| Cognitive bias | context / confirmation bias | Expectation shaping a reading; guarded against with blind review and documentation |
| Single silver bullet | over-reliance on one result | The danger of one finding carrying a case; converging evidence guards against it |
| Wrongful conviction | miscarriage of justice | The outcome safeguards exist to prevent; false confessions are a known cause |
The split between Proficient and Mastery is where the report stops: require contrary findings and an explicit dependency model, not a count of supportive tests. Ask what a matching digest establishes, what a timestamp records, and what remains for the court.
| Criterion | Developing | Proficient | Mastery |
|---|---|---|---|
| Assembling converging evidence | Selects only supportive findings. | Combines findings without specifying alternatives or dependence. | States source hypotheses; computes joint likelihoods and conditioned combinations, retains contrary findings, and rejects unsupported independence or prior assumptions. |
| Case-file & report writing | Blurs facts, inferences, and verdicts. | Reports positives but omits controls or inconclusives. | Writes a sourced question-led report with custody, methods, controls, all outcomes, uncertainty, and source-versus-activity limitations. |
| Expert testimony & its boundaries | Calls a likelihood ratio a guilt probability. | Uses cautious language without explaining the model. | Defends evidence, model assumptions, and limits under questioning; leaves guilt, legal standards, and admissibility decisions to the court. |
| Ethics, cognitive bias & wrongful conviction | Lets a narrative replace the evidence. | Names bias but omits a practical safeguard. | Explains risks of bias and false confessions; retains independent initial review and corrections without narrative pressure or selective reporting. |
| Chain of custody & admissibility | Treats a checksum as proof of a story. | Checks custody or timestamps but ignores their limits. | Audits paper/digital custody, digest comparisons, and timezone-labeled timestamps; distinguishes byte integrity from authorship, event time, truth, and admissibility. |
| Integration (cross-domain) | Makes no supported connection between the source and the science. | Uses the source but needs help connecting evidence, writing, or limitations to the science. | Independently connects History, Reading, and Writing using a cited source, appropriate evidence, a limitation, and a scientific explanation. |
Read these before you grade. They show what Mastery and Developing actually sound like, plus the edge cases where you should coach rather than decide on the spot.
Student: ______________________________________ Date: _______________ Guide: _________________________
| # | Criterion | Decision | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Assembling converging evidence | Dev / Prof / Mast | |
| 2 | Case-file & report writing | Dev / Prof / Mast | |
| 3 | Expert testimony & its boundaries | Dev / Prof / Mast | |
| 4 | Ethics, cognitive bias & wrongful conviction | Dev / Prof / Mast | |
| 5 | Chain of custody & admissibility | Dev / Prof / Mast | |
| 6 | Integration (cross-domain) | Dev / Prof / Mast |
☐ No ☐ Yes — for criterion: __________
Tokens left this term after this session (choose one): ☐ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ None left
Dev = Developing · Prof = Proficient · Mast = Mastery · Unsure between two levels? Circle the lower one and note what a re-do would need.