Science Task Screener
Task Title: The Great Erasure: Uncovering Earth’s Battered Past
Grade: High School (9-12)
Date: April 17, 2026
Instructions
- Before you begin: Complete the task as a student would. Then, consider any support materials provided to teachers or students, such as contextual information about the task and answer keys/scoring guidance.
- Using the Task Screener: Use this tool to evaluate tasks designed for three-dimensional standards. For each criterion, record your evidence for the presence or absence of the associated indicators. After you have decided to what degree the indicators are present within the task, revisit the purpose of your task and decide whether the evidence supports using it.
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?
- Is a phenomenon and/or problem present?
The task uses the puzzling discrepancy between the heavily cratered lunar surface and the relatively smooth surface of the Earth.
- Is information from the scenario necessary to respond successfully to the task?
Yes. Students must generate “need to know” questions and use the simulation to bridge the gap between their initial observations and the scientific explanation.
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] | [ ] | [ ] | Uses Moon/Earth comparisons familiar to students. |
| Scenarios are based around at least one specific instance, not a topic or generally observed occurrence | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Focused on the Earth-Moon system at 4.6 BYA. |
| Scenarios are presented as puzzling/intriguing | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Frames the lack of craters on Earth as a “missing history.” |
| Scenarios create a “need to know” | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Student-generated questions in Part 1 drive the inquiry. |
| Scenarios are explainable using grade-appropriate SEPs, CCCs, DCIs | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Aligns perfectly with HS-ESS1-6. |
| Scenarios effectively use at least 2 modalities (e.g., images, diagrams, video, simulations, textual descriptions) | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Uses textual scenario + interactive simulation. |
| If data are used, scenarios present real/well-crafted data | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Simulation uses established decay rates for bombardment. |
| The local, global, or universal relevance of the scenario is made clear to students | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Earth’s formation is the ultimate origin story. |
| Scenarios are comprehensible to a wide range of students at grade-level | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Language is clear and avoids jargon without context. |
| Scenarios use as many words as needed, no more | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Concise framing. |
| Scenarios are sufficiently rich to drive the task | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Leads naturally from observation to complex GEOP mechanics. |
| Evidence of quality for Criterion A: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [ ] Adequate | [x] Extensive |
Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion A:
None.
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 must reason why the “Oldest Surface Rock” data in the simulation reflects the recycling rate of the crust rather than the age of the planet. They must also use the “Moon as a mirror” concept to reconstruct bombardment history.
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: Students construct an account (Part 4) of Earth’s formation that incorporates multiple independent pieces of evidence (crater counts, radiometric ages).
Evidence of CCCs (which element[s], and how does the task require students to demonstrate this element in use?)
Stability and Change: Students explain how surface stability on the Moon preserves evidence while dynamic change on Earth destroys it.
Evidence of DCIs (which element[s], and how does the task require students to demonstrate this element in use?)
ESS1.C (History of Earth): Students explain that Earth formed 4.6 BYA and was bombarded, but processes have destroyed the record.
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 final synthesis question (Part 4, #10) requires students to integrate the CCC of Stability/Change with the DCI of geological processes to construct a scientific explanation (SEP).
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 3, Question 7 specifically asks students to distinguish between the age of the planet and the age of the rock, surfacing potential misconceptions about radiometric dating.
| Evidence of quality for Criterion B: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [ ] Adequate | [x] Extensive |
Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion B:
None.
Criterion C. Tasks are fair and equitable.
i. The task provides ways for students to make connections of local, global, or universal relevance.
The task makes a universal connection to our origins as a planet.
ii. The task includes multiple modes for students to respond to the task.
Students respond via writing, data table population, and interactive simulation manipulation.
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] | [ ] | [ ] | 5E structure provides a logical build-up. |
| Tasks are coherent from a student perspective | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Moves from “visible puzzle” to “hidden cause.” |
| Tasks respect and advantage students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Neutral, scientific context. |
| Tasks provide both low- and high-achieving students with an opportunity to show what they know | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Observation tasks (low floor) lead to reasoning tasks (high ceiling). |
| Tasks use accessible language | [x] | [ ] | [ ] | Clear instructions. |
iv. The task cultivates students’ interest in and confidence with science and engineering.
The simulation provides immediate visual feedback, allowing students to “test” Earth’s potential history by turning off reality-based constraints.
v. The task focuses on performances for which students’ learning experiences have prepared them (opportunity to learn considerations).
Standard high school earth science curricula cover the formation of the solar system; this task fulfills that requirement with high-quality evidence.
vi. The task presents information that is scientifically accurate.
The simulation’s exponential decay model for the LHB is consistent with scientific consensus.
| Evidence of quality for Criterion C: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [ ] Adequate | [x] Extensive |
Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion C:
None.
Criterion D. Tasks support their intended targets and purpose.
Before you begin:
- Describe what is being assessed. Include any targets provided, such as dimensions, elements, or PEs:
HS-ESS1-6: Applying reasoning and evidence to construct an account of Earth’s formation.
- 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): [Enter other purpose]
i. The task assesses what it is intended to assess and supports the purpose for which it is intended.
The task directly targets the core requirement of HS-ESS1-6: using comparative surface evidence.
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.
The final “Scientific Argument” is a clear artifact of integrated understanding.
iii. Supporting materials include clear answer keys, rubrics, and/or scoring guidelines that are connected to the three-dimensional target.
The Teacher Note at the bottom provides a summary of the alignment.
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.
The 5E structure is a standard, effective pedagogical framework.
| Evidence of quality for Criterion D: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [ ] Adequate | [x] Extensive |
Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion D:
None.
Overall Summary
The task “The Great Erasure” is a highly effective, three-dimensional assessment for HS-ESS1-6. It leverages the unique capabilities of the Cratering & Surface Age Explorer to provide students with a digital laboratory where they can manipulate the variables that have “hidden” Earth’s early history for billions of years. By comparing Earth to its inactive “twin,” the Moon, students engage in authentic scientific reasoning based on data and patterns.
Final recommendation (choose one):
- Use this task (all criteria had at least an “adequate” rating)
- Modify and use this task
- Do not use this task