Science Task Screener

Task Title: Antibiotic Resistance: A Growing Threat

Grade: 10th Grade Biology

Date: 2024-05-20

Instructions

Criterion A. Tasks are driven by high-quality scenarios that are grounded in phenomena or problems.

i. Making sense of a phenomenon or addressing a problem is necessary to accomplish the task.

What was in the task, where was it, and why is this evidence?

  1. Is a phenomenon and/or problem present?

Yes, the task is driven by the phenomenon of a bacterial infection returning and failing to respond to a second round of the same antibiotic.

  1. Is information from the scenario necessary to respond successfully to the task?

Yes, students must use the context of the antibiotic failure described in the phenomenon to form their initial hypothesis and later explain it using the simulation data.

ii. The task scenario is engaging, relevant, and accessible to a wide range of students.

Features of engaging, relevant, and accessible tasks:

Features of scenarios Yes Somewhat No Rationale
Scenario presents real-world observations [x] [ ] [ ] Relates directly to modern medical challenges with antibiotics.
Scenarios are based around at least one specific instance, not a topic or generally observed occurrence [x] [ ] [ ] Uses a specific instance of a patient’s 10-day antibiotic course.
Scenarios are presented as puzzling/intriguing [x] [ ] [ ] The sudden failure of the medicine creates a “why did this happen?” hook.
Scenarios create a “need to know” [x] [ ] [ ] Students need to understand the underlying mechanism to answer the prompt.
Scenarios are explainable using grade-appropriate SEPs, CCCs, DCIs [x] [ ] [ ] Explanable using HS-level natural selection and adaptation DCIs.
Scenarios effectively use at least 2 modalities (e.g., images, diagrams, video, simulations, textual descriptions) [x] [ ] [ ] Uses textual description combined with an interactive simulation.
If data are used, scenarios present real/well-crafted data [x] [ ] [ ] The simulation provides realistic, dynamically generated population resistance data.
The local, global, or universal relevance of the scenario is made clear to students [x] [ ] [ ] Antibiotic resistance is a globally relevant human health issue.
Scenarios are comprehensible to a wide range of students at grade-level [x] [ ] [ ] The language describing the patient’s experience is accessible and non-jargon heavy.
Scenarios use as many words as needed, no more [x] [ ] [ ] The phenomenon is concise and direct.
Scenarios are sufficiently rich to drive the task [x] [ ] [ ] Provides enough context to drive the entire simulation investigation.
Evidence of quality for Criterion A: [ ] No [ ] Inadequate [x] Adequate [ ] Extensive

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion A:

None at this time. The phenomenon is clear, relatable, and effectively sets up the simulation.

Criterion B. Tasks require sense-making using the three dimensions.

i. Completing the task requires students to use reasoning to sense-make about phenomena or problems.

Consider in what ways the task requires students to use reasoning to engage in sense-making and/or problem solving.

Students cannot simply regurgitate a definition of natural selection. They must use reasoning in Part 3 to connect the data they gathered from manipulating mutation rates in the simulation to explain the specific failure of the antibiotic in the patient scenario.

ii. The task requires students to demonstrate grade-appropriate dimensions:

Evidence of SEPs (which element[s], and how does the task require students to demonstrate this element in use?)

Constructing Explanations: The final prompt explicitly requires students to construct an explanation based on the evidence gathered from the simulation trials.

Evidence of CCCs (which element[s], and how does the task require students to demonstrate this element in use?)

Cause and Effect: Students are asked to differentiate between the antibiotic causing the mutation versus acting on existing variation (Question 11), directly targeting cause and effect relationships in complex systems.

Evidence of DCIs (which element[s], and how does the task require students to demonstrate this element in use?)

LS4.C Adaptation: Students must explicitly connect the four factors of natural selection (reproduction, variation, survival, proliferation) to the adaptation of the bacterial population.

iii. The task requires students to integrate multiple dimensions in service of sense-making and/or problem-solving.

Consider in what ways the task requires students to use multiple dimensions together.

The task requires students to construct an explanation (SEP) for how the bacterial population adapted (DCI) by analyzing the cause and effect (CCC) relationship between the antibiotic application and the survival of varied traits.

iv. The task requires students to make their thinking visible.

Consider in what ways the task explicitly prompts students to make their thinking visible (surfaces current understanding, abilities, gaps, problematic ideas).

Part 1 asks for their initial hypothesis before the simulation, making prior conceptions visible. Question 11 explicitly asks them to explain their reasoning regarding whether the antibiotic caused the mutation, surfacing a common misconception.

Evidence of quality for Criterion B: [ ] No [ ] Inadequate [ ] Adequate [x] Extensive

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion B:

None. The task integrates the three dimensions seamlessly.

Criterion C. Tasks are fair and equitable.

i. The task provides ways for students to make connections of local, global, or universal relevance.

Consider specific features of the task that enable students to make local, global, or universal connections to the phenomenon/problem and task at hand. Note: This criterion emphasizes ways for students to find meaning in the task; this does not mean “interest.” Consider whether the task is a meaningful, valuable endeavor that has real-world relevance–that some stakeholder group locally, globally, or universally would be invested in.

The task centers on antibiotic resistance, a critical global health crisis that students or their family members may have experienced firsthand through medical treatments.

ii. The task includes multiple modes for students to respond to the task.

Describe what modes (written, oral, video, simulation, direct observation, peer discussion, etc.) are expected/possible.

The task involves written responses and direct interaction/observation with a digital simulation.

iii. The task is accessible, appropriate, and cognitively demanding for all learners (including English learners or students working below/above grade level).

Features Yes Somewhat No Rationale
Task includes appropriate scaffolds [x] [ ] [ ] Breaks the investigation into baseline, application, and absence of mutation steps.
Tasks are coherent from a student perspective [x] [ ] [ ] Follows a logical flow from ideas to investigation to explanation.
Tasks respect and advantage students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds [ ] [x] [ ] Accessible context, but relies heavily on written English prompts.
Tasks provide both low- and high-achieving students with an opportunity to show what they know [x] [ ] [ ] Low floor (recording basic simulation observations) and high ceiling (constructing complex integrated explanations).
Tasks use accessible language [x] [ ] [ ] Avoids overly complex academic jargon outside of necessary scientific terms.

iv. The task cultivates students’ interest in and confidence with science and engineering.

Consider how the task cultivates students interest in and confidence with science and engineering, including opportunities for students to reflect their own ideas as a meaningful part of the task; make decisions about how to approach a task; engage in peer/self-reflection; and engage with tasks that matter to students.

The simulation allows students to play with variables and see immediate visual feedback, building confidence in data collection. Part 1 validates their initial ideas before testing.

v. The task focuses on performances for which students’ learning experiences have prepared them (opportunity to learn considerations).

Consider the ways in which provided information about students’ prior learning (e.g., instructional materials, storylines, assumed instructional experiences) enables or prevents students’ engagement with the task and educator interpretation of student responses.

This task is designed to be paired with the specific Antibiotic Resistance simulation provided, ensuring students have the exact tool needed to gather the required evidence.

vi. The task presents information that is scientifically accurate.

Describe evidence of scientific inaccuracies explicitly or implicitly promoted by the task.

The simulation and task correctly model that mutation is random and preexisting, and the antibiotic acts as a selective pressure, rather than a mutagen.

Evidence of quality for Criterion C: [ ] No [ ] Inadequate [x] Adequate [ ] Extensive

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion C:

Teachers implementing this task may want to provide sentence starters or peer discussion opportunities for English learners before they write their final explanations.

Criterion D. Tasks support their intended targets and purpose.

Before you begin:

  1. Describe what is being assessed. Include any targets provided, such as dimensions, elements, or PEs:

The task assesses HS-LS4-4: Construct an explanation based on evidence for how natural selection leads to adaptation of populations.

  1. What is the purpose of the assessment? (check all that apply)
    • Formative (including peer and self-reflection)
    • Summative
    • Determining whether students learned what they just experienced
    • Determining whether students can apply what they have learned to a similar but new context
    • Determining whether students can generalize their learning to a different context
    • Other (please specify):

i. The task assesses what it is intended to assess and supports the purpose for which it is intended.

Consider the following:

  1. Is the assessment target necessary to successfully complete the task?

Yes, students must construct the explanation of natural selection to complete Part 3.

  1. Are any ideas, practices, or experiences not targeted by the assessment necessary to respond to the task? Consider the impact this has on students’ ability to complete the task and interpretation of student responses.

No extraneous concepts (like detailed molecular biology of how antibiotics work) are required, keeping the focus strictly on population-level adaptation.

  1. Do the student responses elicited support the purpose of the task (e.g., if a task is intended to help teachers determine if students understand the distinction between cause and correlation, does the task support this inference)?

Yes, the responses will clearly show if a student incorrectly believes the antibiotic causes the mutations or correctly understands it selects for existing variations.

ii. The task elicits artifacts from students as direct, observable evidence of how well students can use the targeted dimensions together to make sense of phenomena and design solutions to problems.

Consider what student artifacts are produced and how these provide students the opportunity to make visible their 1) sense-making processes, 2) thinking across all three dimensions, and 3) ability to use multiple dimensions together [note: these artifacts should connect back to the evidence described for Criterion B].

The final written explanation serves as the core artifact, demonstrating the integration of evidence (SEP), adaptation mechanisms (DCI), and cause/effect reasoning (CCC).

iii. Supporting materials include clear answer keys, rubrics, and/or scoring guidelines that are connected to the three-dimensional target. They provide the necessary and sufficient guidance for interpreting student responses relative to the purpose of the assessment, all targeted dimensions, and the three-dimensional target.

Consider how well the materials support teachers and students in making sense of student responses and planning for follow up (grading, instructional moves), consistent with the purpose of and targets for the assessment. Consider in what ways rubrics include:

  1. Guidance for interpreting student thinking using an integrated approach, considering all three dimensions together as well as calling out specific supports for individual dimensions, if appropriate:

(Note: Answer keys/rubrics are assumed to be generated by the teacher based on this task handout, but the prompt structure explicitly guides the required elements).

  1. Support for interpreting a range of student responses, including those that might reflect partial scientific understanding or mask/misrepresent students’ actual science understanding (e.g., because of language barriers, lack of prompting or disconnect between the intent and student interpretation of the task, variety in communication approaches):

The explicit bullet points in Question 12 help ensure students don’t miss key concepts due to vague prompting.

  1. Ways to connect student responses to prior experiences and future planned instruction by teachers and participation by students:

The initial hypothesis in Part 1 can be directly compared to the final explanation in Part 3.

iv. The task’s prompts and directions provide sufficient guidance for the teacher to administer it effectively and for the students to complete it successfully while maintaining high levels of students’ analytical thinking as appropriate.

Consider any confusing prompts or directions, and evidence for too much or too little scaffolding/supports for students (relative to the target of the assessment—e.g., a task is intended to elicit student understanding of a DCI, but their response is so heavily scripted that it prevents students from actually showing their ability to apply the DCI).

The step-by-step instructions for manipulating the simulation ensure students gather the right data without doing the thinking for them.

Evidence of quality for Criterion D: [ ] No [ ] Inadequate [x] Adequate [ ] Extensive

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion D:

None. The task provides excellent formative data on student understanding of natural selection.

Overall Summary

Consider the task purpose and the evidence you gathered for each criterion. Carefully consider the purpose and intended use of the task, your evidence, reasoning, and ratings to make a summary recommendation about using this task. While general guidance is provided below, it is important to remember that the intended use of the task plays a big role in determining whether the task is worth students’ and teachers’ time.

This task provides a highly effective, engaging, and NGSS-aligned formative assessment experience. It successfully leverages a dynamic simulation to allow students to gather evidence and construct an explanation for a real-world phenomenon. The tight integration of the SEP, DCI, and CCC ensures deep sense-making rather than rote memorization.

Final recommendation (choose one):