# The Evidence Room

Open `index.html` in a modern browser. No install, internet, account, server, API, or key is needed. Keep `index.html`, `styles.css`, `cases.js`, and `app.js` together. All materials and statistics are fictional teaching examples, not evidence about actual schools or scientific findings.

## 1. Learning objective

Seventh-grade students evaluate how strongly evidence supports a claim. They distinguish relevance, evidence strength, and trustworthiness; inspect methods and sample sizes; identify alternative explanations and missing information; compare sources; and justify a qualified conclusion.

The app is an investigation rather than a right-answer quiz. It has no source score, approved ranking, or preferred verdict. A small study can be directly relevant but limited; an expert can be trustworthy yet indirect. Card counts describe students’ placements, not the truth of the claim.

The default school-start case is intentionally ambiguous: a larger comparison study reports a modest reading gain but not a math gain, and tutoring complicates the result; a small local trial is positive but uncontrolled; a district report shows little change in learning; and a vivid anecdote has another plausible explanation. The fertilizer case examines the universal word “always” through dose, soil conditions, and counterexamples.

## 2. Suggested 30-minute classroom activity

- **0–3 minutes — Read the claim.** Ask students to withhold agreement or disagreement. Their job is to judge the support in these documents.
- **3–14 minutes — Inspect sources.** In pairs, read all six documents, rate the three dimensions, and explain the ratings using specific details. Discuss why reputation alone does not determine evidence strength.
- **14–19 minutes — Organize the board.** Place each source under supports, challenges, or uncertain. Use drag/drop or the labeled placement menus. If a source cuts both ways, students can put it under uncertain and explain why in its notes. Revisit and move sources as thinking changes.
- **19–25 minutes — Make a case.** Select a verdict; explain a conclusion; identify and compare two sources; describe a limitation; and answer the reflection question. All active sources need notes and a board placement before submission.
- **25–30 minutes — Debrief.** Open the optional prompts below the feedback. Ask which source changed their thinking, how they handled disagreement, and what information would help next.

The AI news brief is initially unsigned. Saving its first annotation reveals its AI origin and the deliberately invented statistic. Students must save a verification plan before submitting their verdict. They can revise ratings afterward. The lesson is to trace claims and check evidence from every source, not to reject AI by default.

Feedback uses source tags and simple wording checks to generate revision prompts. It is not AI assessment, a grade, or a reliable evaluation of semantic reasoning. Review explanations with students. A defensible explanation connects the exact claim to specific results, compares sources, considers alternative explanations, and explains limitations. Length checks encourage a short written explanation but cannot ensure thoughtfulness.

## 3. Create a completely new Evidence Room

### In the app

Expand **Teacher settings**. Choose an example and select **Load Example Case**, or expand **Edit case configuration (JSON)**. Replace any or all fields, then select **Apply configuration**. Invalid configurations leave the current case intact. Loading a case or toggling its AI source resets student work after confirmation when work exists.

The editor is for teacher setup, not a protected area. Students can open teacher notes. Hidden strengths and limitations are omitted from student documents but available in Teacher settings and source code. This is a teaching tool, not a secure assessment.

### In the files

Edit `cases.js` in a text editor. `window.EVIDENCE_CASES` is an array of configuration objects. The first object is the default case for a fresh browser. To make a new case permanent and portable, replace that first object. An already-open browser may restore its previous local case; use Load Example Case to load the edited file’s case.

Each case has:

| Field | Format and purpose |
|---|---|
| `id` | Nonempty case identifier string |
| `title` | Case-file title |
| `subject` | Subject label: English, science, social studies, health, etc. |
| `centralClaim` | Exact claim under investigation |
| `studentInstructions` | Student task and framing |
| `includeAI` | `true` or `false`; hides cards with `ai: true` when false |
| `finalReflection` | Final required open-ended question |
| `discussionQuestions` | Array of teacher debrief question strings |
| `evidence` | Array of 2–30 source objects, with at least two non-AI sources |

Every source includes:

| Field | Purpose |
|---|---|
| `id` | Unique string within the case, e.g. `"01"` |
| `type`, `title`, `preview` | Card label, document title and short preview |
| `source`, `date`, `author` | Visible source metadata; use “not supplied” when appropriate |
| `body` | Actual evidence/document text |
| `method` | Methods, sample, comparison and measurement details |
| `limitations` | Visible information gaps; reserve additional teaching interpretation for hidden notes |
| `strengths` | Array of teacher-only strength strings |
| `hiddenLimitations` | Array of teacher-only limitation strings |
| `tags` | Array of feedback tags, or `[]` for generic feedback |
| `ai` | Optional boolean; mark AI-generated evidence |
| `aiReveal` | Required string when `ai` is true; explain origin and what is unsupported |

Supported feedback tags: `anecdote`, `small`, `study`, `indirect`, `selective`, `unsupported`, `confound`. The first five tailor feedback when that source is selected as strongest. `unsupported` and `confound` describe instructional issues for teachers and future extensions; they do not assign scores. All imported text is rendered as text, not executable HTML.

To repurpose the tool for English, use a claim about a character’s motives and excerpts with context. In social studies, compare accounts of an event and gaps in records. In health, compare reports of a habit with controlled evidence. Preserve genuine tensions; do not make the source name an answer key. If a source labeled `study` does not involve sample-size reasoning, omit that tag and use generic feedback, or adapt `renderFeedback()` in `app.js`.

### Example source

```js
{
  id: "01", type: "Experiment log", title: "What changed?",
  source: "Class science notebook", date: "May 12, 2025", author: "Group B",
  preview: "Two groups produced different results.",
  body: "Describe actual observations here, including exceptions.",
  method: "Describe sample, comparison, controls and measurements.",
  limitations: "Explain what the document does not report.",
  strengths: ["A relevant comparison."],
  hiddenLimitations: ["A variable was not controlled."],
  tags: ["small", "confound"]
}
```

## Accessibility, storage and classroom use

Native buttons, radio groups, labels, modal focus handling and keyboard-accessible placement menus support keyboard and touch use. Dragging is optional. Layout adapts to tablets and phones and respects reduced-motion preferences. Browser zoom can enlarge the workspace for projection.

Saved annotations, placements, verification plans and verdict drafts stay in local browser storage when available. Nothing is sent to a server. Some browsers restrict storage for local files: keep the tab open in that case. Unsaved source notes are not retained until **Save source notes** is selected. Use **Reset student investigation** between groups on a shared device. There is one saved investigation per browser/origin; switching cases replaces it. Use the supplied ZIP to share the app, then extract it before opening `index.html`.