Science Task Screener

Task Title: Puerto Rican Karst Topography: Water & Bedrock Interactions

Grade: High School

Date: 2023-10-25

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?

The task presents the real-world phenomenon of the Puerto Rican karst topography (mogotes, caves, sinkholes) and asks students to explain how water chemically weathers limestone over time.

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

Students must use the specific data collected from the simulation (varying rainfall, acidity, and fractures) to build an evidence-based explanation. The specific interaction of these variables requires information from the scenario to explain.

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] [ ] [ ] The scenario is grounded in the real-world observation of massive cave systems in Puerto Rico’s karst belt.
Scenarios are based around at least one specific instance, not a topic or generally observed occurrence [x] [ ] [ ] It focuses specifically on the Puerto Rican karst topography rather than just ‘chemical weathering’ generally.
Scenarios are presented as puzzling/intriguing [x] [ ] [ ] The contrast between a gentle liquid (water) and massive solid rock formations (caves) is presented as a puzzling phenomenon to explain.
Scenarios create a “need to know” [x] [ ] [ ] Students are asked to generate their own questions and figure out how the specific karst landforms are created.
Scenarios are explainable using grade-appropriate SEPs, CCCs, DCIs [x] [ ] [ ] The phenomenon is explainable using the HS-ESS2-5 target DCI, SEP, and CCC.
Scenarios effectively use at least 2 modalities (e.g., images, diagrams, video, simulations, textual descriptions) [x] [ ] [ ] The task relies on textual descriptions in the handout and an interactive computational simulation.
If data are used, scenarios present real/well-crafted data [x] [ ] [ ] The simulation generates well-crafted, scientifically realistic data points for pH and aquifer volume.
The local, global, or universal relevance of the scenario is made clear to students [x] [ ] [ ] The local relevance to Puerto Rico and universal relevance of water acting as a solvent are clear.
Scenarios are comprehensible to a wide range of students at grade-level [x] [ ] [ ] The visual representation helps make the abstract chemistry comprehensible.
Scenarios use as many words as needed, no more [x] [ ] [ ] The introductory phenomenon text is concise and direct.
Scenarios are sufficiently rich to drive the task [x] [ ] [ ] The scenario provides sufficient context to drive the subsequent variable testing and analysis.
Evidence of quality for Criterion A: [ ] No [ ] Inadequate [x] Adequate [ ] Extensive

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion A:

None. The phenomenon is well-structured and engaging.

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.

The task requires students to construct a scientific explanation (Part 4) using data from their investigation (Part 2) as evidence to explain how water and bedrock interact.

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?)

Students engage in Planning and Carrying Out Investigations by systematically altering variables and recording data in a controlled manner.

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

Students use the lens of Structure and Function to connect the physical structure of the rock (fractures) and chemical structure of water to the principles of chemical weathering.

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

Students apply the concept that water’s physical and chemical properties dissolve and transport materials (ESS2.C) to explain the formation of the karst topography.

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.

Students must integrate all three dimensions to successfully construct their final explanation: they use data from their investigation (SEP) to explain how the properties of water (DCI) interact with the structure of the bedrock (CCC).

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).

The task requires students to draft their explanation in writing, explicitly prompting them to connect their evidence to scientific principles, thus making their reasoning visible.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion B:

Ensure students explicitly reference all three variables (rainfall, acidity, fractures) in their final explanation.

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 explicitly connects the abstract concept of chemical weathering to a geographically and culturally relevant phenomenon in Puerto Rico.

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.

Students respond by recording quantitative data in a table, answering short analytical questions, and drafting a comprehensive scientific explanation.

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] [ ] [ ] The task uses a structured baseline investigation before testing variables.
Tasks are coherent from a student perspective [x] [ ] [ ] The parts naturally flow from engaging with the phenomenon to exploring it, and finally explaining it.
Tasks respect and advantage students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds [x] [ ] [ ] The task uses a culturally relevant geographical context.
Tasks provide both low- and high-achieving students with an opportunity to show what they know [x] [ ] [ ] The simulation allows for exploration at various depths, and the final prompt is open-ended enough to allow for differentiated responses.
Tasks use accessible language [x] [ ] [ ] The language in the handout is clear, direct, and avoids unnecessary jargon.

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 dramatic visual changes in the simulation and the connection to spectacular real-world landforms help cultivate student interest.

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.

The task aligns directly with the prior learning expectations for the targeted DCI and SEP.

vi. The task presents information that is scientifically accurate.

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

The representation of chemical weathering, the role of carbonic acid, and the formation of karst topography are scientifically accurate.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion C:

Consider providing a rubric for the final scientific explanation to clearly communicate expectations.

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:

Assessing student ability to use data from an investigation to construct an explanation of how water chemically weathers limestone.

  1. What is the purpose of the assessment? (check all that apply)
    • [x] 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?

The assessment target is entirely necessary to successfully complete the final explanation in Part 4.

  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 non-targeted ideas are required; the task focuses strictly on the intended dimensions.

  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)?

The elicited artifacts clearly support the formative assessment purpose.

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 data table, sensemaking questions, and final written explanation are artifacts that make student thinking visible.

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:

The Teacher Notes section explicitly outlines the expected observable features of student performance based on the NGSS evidence statements across dimensions.

  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 scaffolded questions in Part 3 allow teachers to interpret partial understanding before the final explanation.

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

The results can be used to inform future instruction on chemical weathering or Earth systems.

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 prompts are clear and direct students to use the specific data they collected as evidence.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion D:

Teachers could use the provided data table as a quick check for understanding before students move on to the final explanation.

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.

The Puerto Rican Karst Topography task is a highly effective, three-dimensional assessment that successfully integrates the DCI (ESS2.C), SEP (Planning and Carrying Out Investigations), and CCC (Structure and Function). By grounding the investigation in a culturally relevant and compelling phenomenon, the task requires deep sensemaking and provides robust evidence of student understanding for HS-ESS2-5.

Final recommendation (choose one):