Media LiteracyCase StudyTeaching

Teach Investigative Methods with Podcasts: A Week‑Long Unit Built Around 'The Secret World of Roald Dahl'

UUnknown

2026-02-15

10 min read

Use the iHeartPodcasts Dahl doc to teach source evaluation, bias, archival research and multimedia reporting in a focused week-long unit.

Hook: Turn distracted students into sharp investigators — fast

Struggling with students who skim, accept media at face value, or can’t move from opinion to evidence? A tightly framed, week-long unit using the new iHeartPodcasts documentary doc podcast The Secret World of Roald Dahl gives teachers a high-engagement, skills-first path to teach source evaluation, narrative bias, archival research and multimedia reporting — all in five class periods.

Why this unit matters in 2026

The Aaron Tracy-hosted doc podcast The Secret World of Roald Dahl (iHeartPodcasts & Imagine Entertainment, Jan 2026) surfaces contradictions between public personas and archival records — a perfect case for lessons in verification and framing. (Source: Deadline exclusive, Jan 2026.)

In 2026 classrooms, educators must teach not just how to find sources but how to read media ecosystems: audio storytelling, archival metadata, and AI tools now mediate what students think of as “evidence.” This unit reflects three 2026 trends:

Audio-first reporting and narrative podcasts continue to be used by professional newsrooms and educators as research objects.
Classroom adoption of AI transcription and summarization tools has grown — they speed research but also create hallucination risks that students must learn to catch.
More archives (national and local) released digitized WWII-era materials and publisher records in 2024–25, improving primary-source access for classroom investigations.

Unit overview — what students will do

This is a five-day unit for grades 9–12 (can be adapted for college). Students will:

Listen critically to 2–3 episodes of the Dahl doc podcast.
Create a verified source portfolio (primary & secondary).
Write a short investigative memo analyzing narrative bias and gaps.
Produce a 3–5 minute multimedia report (audio or video) grounded in archival evidence.

Learning goals (measurable):

Apply a five-step source-evaluation checklist to audio and archival records.
Identify narrative bias and explain its effect on public understanding.
Use digital archives and citation tools to corroborate claims.
Publish a multimedia product using accessible editing tools and an ethical reporting statement.

Materials & tech (quick pack)

Podcast episodes & official transcripts (iHeartPodcasts release; provide local copies).
Transcription tool: Descript, Otter.ai or built-in LMS captioning.
Annotation tool: Hypothesis or Google Docs comments.
Archival databases: British Library, National Archives (UK), British Newspaper Archive (links provided in teacher packet).
Research management: Zotero or Google Drive folder templates.
Audio/video editing: Audacity, GarageBand, or online editors like WeVideo/Clipchamp.
Fact-checking references: reputable newspaper databases and historical records guides.

Day-by-day lesson plan: Teaching investigative methods with a podcast

Day 1 — Orientation & source evaluation (60–75 minutes)

Objective: Students learn and apply a practical source-evaluation checklist to the podcast and surrounding claims.

Warm-up (10 min): Play a 90-second clip from Episode 1 that introduces Dahl’s MI6 connection. Ask: what questions come to mind? Have students jot three immediate verification questions.

Mini-lesson (15 min): Teach the five-step checklist:

Who produced this content? (owner, host, funder)
What is the genre and stated purpose?
When were sources created and how does timing affect reliability?
Where does each claim originate — archival record, interview, hearsay?
How can we corroborate? (multiple, independent sources)

Activity (30–40 min): In pairs, students get the transcript of the clip, annotate three claims using Hypothesis or Google Docs, and flag evidence types (primary, secondary, oral history). Each pair submits one claim to a class evidence board.

Assessment: Quick exit ticket — list the claim you checked and two sources you would search to corroborate.

Day 2 — Narrative bias & listening for framing (60 minutes)

Objective: Identify framing devices and discuss how editing choices shape a listener’s impression.

Warm-up (5 min): Two-minute silent reading of a short paragraph about Dahl’s childhood. Compare emotional tenor to the audio clip from Day 1.

Mini-lesson (15 min): Present common framing techniques in podcasts: selective sourcing, music cues, voiceover placement, quote editing, chronology compression, and omission. Use short audio examples.

Activity (35 min): Groups map the podcast’s narrative arc for one episode. Identify two editing choices that strengthen a particular thesis about Dahl and propose one alternate framing that would change the listener’s conclusion.

Assessment: Each group uploads a 200–300 word reflective note explaining one bias they found and why it matters to a listener deciding how to interpret Dahl’s life.

Day 3 — Archival research & primary sources (75 minutes)

Objective: Students learn archival search strategies, evaluate primary documents and extract metadata for citation.

Mini-lesson (20 min): Demonstrate searching a digitized archive (teacher screenshare). Show how to read metadata, catalog entries, and find related records. Discuss provenance and chain-of-custody for documents (why provenance matters when verifying claims).

Activity (45 min): Students receive a research brief: corroborate or dispute one claim from the podcast (e.g., a claimed MI6 assignment or a published letter). Using provided archive links and news databases, each student builds a mini portfolio: the document image, transcript/excerpt, metadata, and a one-paragraph annotation describing reliability.

Differentiation: Provide scaffolded search queries for students who need support; advanced students try to find contradictory material or uncatalogued references.

Assessment: Submit the portfolio to the class shared drive; teacher spot-checks 3 portfolios for accuracy.

Day 4 — Multimedia reporting & ethics (75 minutes)

Objective: Plan and begin producing a 3–5 minute multimedia report that synthesizes findings with clear sourcing and ethical notes.

Mini-lesson (10 min): Explain structure: lead (15–30 seconds), evidence-backed body, voice-of-evidence (quotes & document excerpts), and an ethical disclosure (what you could not confirm).

Workshop (55 min): Students storyboard their piece (script outline + source list). They record a 60–90 second proof-of-concept segment and add one audio clip or archival image with a caption. Teacher circulates, giving feedback on sourcing language and editorial distance.

Tech tip: Use Descript for fast transcription and filler-word removal; export a polished audio file for Day 5.

Assessment: Submit storyboard and draft audio for peer review.

Day 5 — Publish, peer review, reflect (60–90 minutes)

Objective: Finalize multimedia pieces, present, and reflect on methods and ethics.

Activity (60 min): Students present their reports to small groups. Peers use a short rubric to evaluate:

Accuracy & sourcing (1–4)
Narrative clarity (1–4)
Use of archives (1–4)
Ethical disclosure (1–2)

Final step: Each student writes a 250–350 word reflection answering: What claim was hardest to verify? How did the podcast’s framing influence your initial impression? What would you change in the podcast if you were an editor?

Assessment rubrics & deliverables (templates you can copy)

Grade components (suggested):

Source portfolio — 30% (completeness, correct metadata, reliability assessment)
Investigative memo — 20% (clarity of argument, evidence use)
Multimedia report — 35% (accuracy, narrative, production quality)
Reflection & peer feedback — 15%

Source portfolio checklist (use as handout):

Document image or link
Metadata: title, date, repository, catalog number
Type of source (primary/secondary, oral history, letter, government file)
One-paragraph reliability assessment (refer to five-step checklist)
Two corroborating sources (if available)

Classroom case study — a composite success story

Context: A composite of three high-school media classes implemented this unit in fall 2025. Teachers reported higher engagement and demonstrable gains in student verification skills.

What worked: Starting with a narrative podcast hooked students who otherwise avoided dense archival tasks. Transcription tools reduced friction so students could mark timestamps and cross-check claims quickly. The “ethical disclosure” requirement lowered sensational claims and pushed students to report uncertainty.

Student output examples: one group found a contemporaneous newspaper report that placed Dahl in a different location than the podcast suggested; they used that item in their multimedia piece and included an audio clip comparing the two accounts. A journalism-studies teacher used the portfolios as artifacts for assessing objective research skills.

Teacher takeaway: A focused, evidence-driven task that includes audio storytelling + archives bridges humanities and STEM-style investigation — students learn to treat narrative as a claim to be tested, not a finished truth.

Advanced strategies & 2026-ready practices

1) Use AI tools strategically. In 2026 classrooms, AI for fast transcripts and summarization are standard. Teach students to:

Use AI for fast transcripts and initial keyword extraction.
Always verify AI-generated claims against original sources to avoid hallucinations.
Document AI use in a transparency note (what was generated vs. human-checked).

2) Add an audio forensics mini-module. With audio deepfakes rising, show students how to spot manipulation — inconsistent background noise, abrupt edits, and mismatched metadata. Use freely available waveform viewers and metadata readers to inspect files.

3) Leverage open-archive metadata. Teach students to harvest metadata fields (creator, date, repository) and add them to Zotero. Encourage discovery of related materials through catalog crosswalks and reference links.

4) Build cross-platform portfolios. Have students publish a short write-up, a podcast file, and a source portfolio together in a single shareable folder. This supports college and job-ready digital literacy.

Practical templates & prompts (ready to copy)

Investigative memo prompt (250–400 words):

Using two primary sources and one secondary source, evaluate the podcast’s claim that [insert claim]. Summarize the evidence and conclude whether the claim is fully supported, partially supported, or unsupported. Include an ethical disclosure listing what you could not verify.

Interview question set (for contacting local archives or family historians):

Can you confirm the existence/holding of [document] and its catalog ID?
What is the provenance of this record? Has it been digitized?
Are there restrictions or context admissions we should know about?

Accessibility, equity, and remote adaptations

Not all students can access high-bandwidth audio. Offer transcripts as primary access points and permit text-only deliverables where necessary. For remote learners, use asynchronous discussion boards for peer review and schedule small-group Zoom rooms for oral presentations. Provide time-credit adjustments for students who require extended time to access archives off school networks.

Common pitfalls & how to avoid them

Relying solely on the podcast transcript — require at least one independently retrieved archive item per student.
Overusing AI without verification — require a verification log for AI-assisted claims.
Turning the unit into pure production — keep the investigative memo and portfolio as graded evidence of research, not just production polish.

Why this unit works — pedagogical notes

Podcasts like The Secret World of Roald Dahl present complex, humanized narratives that naturally raise verification questions. Students are motivated by story, which lowers the barrier to deep source work. By requiring students to build evidence portfolios, the unit reinforces the academic practice of treating narrative as a hypothesis to be tested.

Next steps & extensions

Scale up: Turn this into a 2–3 week capstone where students choose a public figure and repeat the investigative workflow from Day 1–5, producing a longer podcast episode or a multimedia dossier.

Local partnerships: Contact local historical societies, university libraries, or public radio stations for guest speakers or primary-source access sessions. Newsrooms increasingly partner with schools for reporting projects — reach out to local outlets that have audio desks.

Final quick checklist for teachers (copyable)

Preload podcast episodes and transcripts in LMS.
Create a shared Zotero library with starter archive links.
Prepare the source-evaluation checklist handout.
Set up Hypothesis or Google Docs for annotations.
Build a simple rubric and share it before Day 1.

Closing — bring investigative methods to life this week

If your students struggle to move from opinion to evidence, this week-long unit uses a high-interest, professionally produced doc podcast to teach repeatable investigative habits. They’ll finish with a verified portfolio, a multimedia artifact and — most importantly — a practiced workflow for checking claims in any medium.

Ready to pilot this unit? Download the free teacher packet (lesson templates, rubrics, sample transcripts and archive links) and start your week-long unit the day the podcast drops. Equip your students to ask better questions, evaluate sources like pros, and produce reporting that stands up to scrutiny.

Call to action: Grab the free packet, adapt the rubrics for your class, and share student work with our community for feedback and spotlight opportunities.

Unknown

Contributor

Senior editor and content strategist. Writing about technology, design, and the future of digital media. Follow along for deep dives into the industry's moving parts.