Students investigate how scientists recognize environmental problems by tracing early signs of PFAS or mercury contamination and asking, “How do we know there is a problem?” After launching with a PFAS news article, they work with UCONN Avery Point Mercury Lab and URI PFAS Lab to plan investigations, compare biological, chemical, physical, and historical evidence, and separate observations, inferences, and claims with precision. Over three weeks, they evaluate how changing environmental conditions affect species and human activity, then create a community science briefing board that presents findings, identifies limits in the evidence, and names what still needs further investigation.

Students will investigate how PFAS or mercury can signal environmental change by collecting, comparing, and evaluating biological, chemical, physical, and historical evidence, with guidance from UCONN Avery Point Mercury Lab and the URI PFAS Lab. They will distinguish observations, inferences, and claims; plan and refine investigations that account for variables, data quality, precision, and limits; and use evidence to explain how changing environmental conditions affect species and human activity. Students will communicate their findings in a community science briefing board that identifies patterns, supports claims with documented evidence, and names unanswered questions that require further investigation.

Students will create an investigation portfolio that includes annotated field observations, sampling plans, controlled data tables, source notes from the PFAS news article, and evidence logs that distinguish observations, inferences, and claims. In teams, they will produce interim evidence displays such as water-testing visuals, species/population trend graphs, and comparison charts showing biological, chemical, physical, and historical evidence related to PFAS or mercury. With input from UCONN Avery Point Mercury Lab and URI PFAS Lab, students will refine their findings into a community science briefing board that explains what the evidence shows, how environmental change may affect species and human activity, and what questions still require further investigation. The project will culminate in a public presentation and brief oral defense of the board to classmates, partners, and community guests.

Begin with a structured “notice, wonder, infer” protocol using a recent PFAS news article and local waterway maps, where students annotate what is directly observed, what is inferred, and what evidence is still missing. Follow with a rapid evidence gallery featuring sample data displays from the UCONN Avery Point Mercury Lab and URI PFAS Lab so students compare biological, chemical, physical, and historical clues about environmental change. In teams, students generate initial claims about whether there is a problem, identify confounding variables and data limitations, and record questions they would need to investigate to verify those claims. Close with a whole-group discussion around “How do we know there is a problem?” and introduce the community science briefing board as the public-facing product they will build over the next three weeks.

Host a public “Water Evidence Briefing” where teams present their community science briefing boards to families, peers, and invited scientists from the UCONN Avery Point Mercury Lab and URI PFAS Lab. Students should explain how the PFAS news article sparked their investigation, walk visitors through biological, chemical, physical, and historical evidence, and clearly distinguish observations, inferences, and claims while naming uncertainties and next steps. Include a feedback protocol in which community partners and visitors ask questions about data quality, confounding variables, and reliability of conclusions. End with a gallery walk and short reflection station where students record how their evidence supports claims about environmental change and why careful documentation matters for environmental accountability.