Science Task Screener

Task Title: Conservation of Mass: The Balancing Act Discipline: Physical Science – Chemistry Grade: 11th Grade Chemistry Date of Review: 2024-05-24 NGSS Performance Expectation(s): HS-PS1-7 (Use mathematical representations to support the claim that atoms, and therefore mass, are conserved during a chemical reaction.)

Instructions

Use this screener to evaluate how well the task “Conservation of Mass: The Balancing Act” aligns with criteria for high-quality, three-dimensional science tasks.

For each criterion and sub-criterion, review the task materials (stimulus, student directions, scoring guidance, etc.).
Use the rating scale below to select the level of evidence of quality.
Record brief rationales / notes citing specific features of the task.
Use the Indicators of quality tables as prompts; they are not checklists and do not need to be exhaustive.
In the Suggestions for improvement section, note concrete changes that could improve alignment or usability.
After rating all criteria, complete the Overall Summary and Recommendation section.

Rating scale

No: The feature is not present or is fundamentally misaligned.
Inadequate: The feature is present in a minimal or weak way; substantial revision is needed.
Adequate: The feature is present in a reasonable way; only minor refinement is needed.
Extensive: The feature is present in a strong, well-elaborated way and could serve as an exemplar.

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

A1. The task is anchored in an observable phenomenon or meaningful problem.

Evidence of quality for A1: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [x] Adequate | [ ] Extensive Rationale / notes: The simulation centers on a clear, observable contrast between unbalanced and balanced chemical reactions. Students see reactants and products represented visually and numerically, and the scenario creates a need to resolve the imbalance by adjusting coefficients, which grounds the mathematics in a concrete chemical phenomenon.

Indicators of quality for A1 (examples):

Indicator	Present?	Notes
Phenomenon or problem is clearly described in student-facing materials.	✅	Simulation labels and prompts highlight unbalanced vs. balanced equations.
Phenomenon is observable, relatable, or otherwise meaningful to students.	✅	The idea that “mass should be conserved” is familiar from prior coursework.
Scenario motivates students to figure something out (not just follow steps).	⚠️	Motivation is present but could be strengthened with a real-world hook.

Suggestions for improvement for A1:

Add a brief real-world context (e.g., combustion of fuels, rusting, or lab reaction) to make the conservation-of-mass scenario more connected to everyday experiences.
Include an introductory prompt asking students what they predict will happen to mass before interacting with the simulation.

A2. The task materials clearly communicate the scenario and expectations.

Evidence of quality for A2: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [x] Adequate | [ ] Extensive Rationale / notes: The directions and simulation interface make it clear that students must manipulate coefficients to balance equations and verify mass conservation. Expectations for Parts 1 and 2 (balancing and calculations) lead logically into the synthesis in Part 3.

Indicators of quality for A2 (examples):

Indicator	Present?	Notes
Scenario and goals are clearly stated in student directions.	✅	The task states that students will show that mass is conserved by balancing equations.
Key scientific quantities and representations are defined or exemplified.	⚠️	Conservation of mass is referenced; could be more explicitly defined in directions.
Task components (parts, steps) align and build toward a coherent outcome.	✅	Parts 1–3 progress from balancing → calculations → CER explanation.

Suggestions for improvement for A2:

Add a short definition or reminder of “conservation of mass” and “balanced equation” in the student directions.
Provide a worked example of one balanced equation and corresponding mass calculation, distinct from the items students must complete themselves.

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

B1. The task elicits and uses scientific and engineering practices (SEPs).

Evidence of quality for B1: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [ ] Adequate | [x] Extensive Rationale / notes: Students must use mathematical and computational thinking to balance chemical equations and calculate masses. In Part 3, they construct explanations through a Claim-Evidence-Reasoning (CER) response, explicitly connecting their mathematical evidence to the scientific claim of conservation of mass.

Indicators of quality for B1 (examples):

Indicator	Present?	Notes
Students engage in using mathematical representations or models.	✅	They calculate total mass of reactants and products using balanced equations.
Students construct explanations or arguments using evidence.	✅	The CER prompt requires a claim supported by simulation data and calculations.
Students must communicate reasoning, not just final answers.	✅	Reasoning portion of CER asks them to connect evidence to the conservation principle.

Suggestions for improvement for B1:

Add a sentence in the CER directions reminding students to reference specific numerical evidence from their tables.
Consider a prompt asking students to revise an initial explanation after further interaction with the simulation to highlight practice of refining explanations.

B2. The task meaningfully integrates disciplinary core ideas (DCIs).

Evidence of quality for B2: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [ ] Adequate | [x] Extensive Rationale / notes: The task directly targets HS-PS1-7 by having students work with balanced chemical reactions where atoms are conserved. Students must apply their understanding of chemical reactions, stoichiometric relationships, and the particulate nature of matter to justify that total mass remains constant.

Indicators of quality for B2 (examples):

Indicator	Present?	Notes
Core idea of conservation of mass is central to the task.	✅	Every part of the task revolves around verifying that mass is conserved.
Task requires applying, not just recalling, core ideas.	✅	Students must use DCI knowledge to interpret their calculations and CER.
Misconceptions can surface and be addressed through the task.	⚠️	Students may still think mass “disappears”—task could more explicitly probe this.

Suggestions for improvement for B2:

Include at least one prompt that explicitly asks students to explain why mass does not “disappear” or “appear” in a reaction (surfacing common misconceptions).
Add a reflection question asking students how balanced equations represent atoms before and after the reaction.

B3. The task leverages crosscutting concepts (CCCs) to support sense-making.

Evidence of quality for B3: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [x] Adequate | [ ] Extensive Rationale / notes: The crosscutting concept of Energy and Matter: Flows, Cycles, and Conservation is embedded as students track mass before and after reactions and show that it is conserved. While the CCC is not always named explicitly for students, they are engaging with the underlying idea that matter is conserved in physical and chemical processes.

Indicators of quality for B3 (examples):

Indicator	Present?	Notes
At least one CCC is central to the sense-making students do.	✅	Energy and Matter (conservation of matter) guides the whole task.
Task provides opportunities to explicitly connect CCC to the phenomenon.	⚠️	Students engage with conservation but are not asked to name or reflect on the CCC.
Students use CCC language or ideas in explanations.	⚠️	CER rubric could emphasize use of “conserved,” “total mass,” etc.

Suggestions for improvement for B3:

Add CCC language (e.g., “matter is conserved”) to the CER prompt or scoring guidance.
Include a brief reflection question asking how this investigation illustrates the idea of conservation of matter as a crosscutting concept.

Criterion C. Tasks are fair and equitable.

C1. The task provides accessible entry points and multiple ways to show understanding.

Evidence of quality for C1: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [x] Adequate | [ ] Extensive Rationale / notes: The task offers multiple modalities—visual simulation, numeric tables, and written CER response. Step-by-step scaffolding in Parts 1 and 2 supports students in balancing equations and performing calculations before moving to the more complex written explanation in Part 3.

Indicators of quality for C1 (examples):

Indicator	Present?	Notes
Multiple representations (visual, numeric, verbal) are used.	✅	Simulation visuals, coefficients, and mass tables are all included.
Students can demonstrate understanding in more than one mode.	✅	Correct balancing and calculations plus written CER explanation.
Task avoids unnecessary language or mathematical barriers.	⚠️	Overall accessible, but some vocabulary (e.g., “stoichiometric”) could be clarified.

Suggestions for improvement for C1:

Provide a vocabulary box or glossary for key terms (e.g., “coefficient,” “balanced equation,” “conservation of mass”).
Offer sentence starters or a CER organizer to support students who need additional scaffolds for written explanations.

C2. The task minimizes bias and considers diverse learners.

Evidence of quality for C2: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [x] Adequate | [ ] Extensive Rationale / notes: The context is relatively neutral and not tied to culturally specific scenarios. Directions are generally clear and free from stereotypes. However, the task could more explicitly acknowledge diverse ways of reasoning or incorporate examples that connect to varied student experiences.

Indicators of quality for C2 (examples):

Indicator	Present?	Notes
Context and examples avoid stereotypes or biased assumptions.	✅	The simulation focuses on generic chemical reactions.
Language is clear and not needlessly complex.	✅	Most language is accessible for 11th-grade chemistry students.
Task design considers supports for English learners and students with disabilities.	⚠️	Some supports implied (visuals, scaffolding) but not explicitly designed for specific needs.

Suggestions for improvement for C2:

Add explicit directions for how teachers might adjust pacing, provide read-aloud support, or offer translations of key terms.
Include an optional extension where students connect conservation of mass to a familiar process or cultural context (e.g., cooking, environmental issues) chosen by the teacher or students.

Criterion D. Tasks support their intended targets and purpose.

D1. The task aligns with the intended learning targets and standards.

Evidence of quality for D1: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [x] Adequate | [ ] Extensive Rationale / notes: The assessment directly targets HS-PS1-7. Students use mathematical representations (balanced equations and mass calculations) to support the claim that mass is conserved. The CER response in Part 3 provides observable evidence of their ability to connect these representations to the conservation principle.

Indicators of quality for D1 (examples):

Indicator	Present?	Notes
Learning targets and standards are clearly identified.	✅	HS-PS1-7 is explicitly referenced in task documentation.
Task demands match the level of cognitive complexity in the standard.	✅	Requires explanation using mathematical representations, not just recall.
There is a clear line of sight from student work to the intended standard(s).	✅	Student artifacts (tables, CER) map directly onto the performance expectation.

Suggestions for improvement for D1:

Make the standard or learning target student-facing (e.g., “Today you will show that mass is conserved…”).
Add brief guidance on how teachers can use student work samples to interpret proficiency relative to HS-PS1-7.

D2. The task yields usable information about student thinking and supports instructional decisions.

Evidence of quality for D2: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [x] Adequate | [ ] Extensive Rationale / notes: The combination of balancing equations, mass calculations, and a CER explanation gives teachers multiple data points about student understanding of conservation of mass and related mathematics. With a clear rubric, these artifacts can inform next instructional steps, though the current materials could more explicitly articulate how to interpret different patterns of student responses.

Indicators of quality for D2 (examples):

Indicator	Present?	Notes
Task products (tables, explanations, etc.) reveal students’ reasoning.	✅	Errors in coefficients or CER reasoning make misconceptions visible.
Guidance or rubrics support consistent interpretation of student work.	⚠️	Some criteria implied; could be more explicit about levels of performance.
Information from the task can inform subsequent instruction.	✅	Results can guide reteaching of balancing, mass calculations, or explanation writing.

Suggestions for improvement for D2:

Develop or attach an analytic rubric for the CER portion, differentiating between use of correct claim, appropriate evidence, and clear reasoning.
Provide examples of common student errors and suggested instructional responses (e.g., small-group reteach on balancing versus clarification of conservation concept).

Overall Summary and Recommendation

Overall summary of strengths and areas for growth: The task is highly aligned to HS-PS1-7 and integrates the three dimensions in a coherent way. The interactive simulation provides a strong anchor for student sense-making and mathematical modeling, and the CER component yields rich evidence of student reasoning. Equity considerations are generally addressed through multiple representations and scaffolding, though additional supports for diverse learners and more explicit CCC language would strengthen the task further.

Final recommendation:

Use this task
Modify and use this task
Do not use this task

Notes on recommendation (optional): Recommended for use as-is, with consideration for minor enhancements (e.g., more explicit CCC framing, clearer supports for English learners, and a more detailed CER rubric) as time and context allow.