Science Task Screener

Task Title: Saharan Dust Transport (Polvo del Sahara)

Grade: High School

Date: Current

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 real-world phenomenon of the Saharan Air Layer traversing the Atlantic Ocean and its dual impacts on Caribbean air quality and hurricane suppression.

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

Students compare data across different simulation tests (e.g., comparing Test 2 and Test 3) to identify the specific relationship between wind speed and dust transport.

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 simulation accurately reflects the real-world phenomenon of the Saharan Air Layer traversing the Atlantic.
Scenarios are based around at least one specific instance, not a topic or generally observed occurrence [x] [ ] [ ] Focuses specifically on the transport of dust from the Sahara to Puerto Rico and its impact on the Caribbean basin.
Scenarios are presented as puzzling/intriguing [x] [ ] [ ] Highlights the paradox that poor air quality (dust) provides a positive benefit by suppressing destructive hurricanes.
Scenarios create a “need to know” [x] [ ] [ ] Students must figure out the specific relationships between wind speed, precipitation, dust volume, and climate outcomes.
Scenarios are explainable using grade-appropriate SEPs, CCCs, DCIs [x] [ ] [ ] Completely explainable using data analysis (SEP), system feedbacks (DCI), and stability/change (CCC) appropriate for high school.
Scenarios effectively use at least 2 modalities (e.g., images, diagrams, video, simulations, textual descriptions) [x] [ ] [ ] Uses both an interactive geographic simulation model and real-time quantitative data graphs (AQI, Hurricane Prob).
If data are used, scenarios present real/well-crafted data [x] [ ] [ ] Simulation outputs accurate, realistic trends for AQI and hurricane probability based on actual atmospheric physics.
The local, global, or universal relevance of the scenario is made clear to students [x] [ ] [ ] The global connection between Africa and the Americas is the core focus of the task.
Scenarios are comprehensible to a wide range of students at grade-level [x] [ ] [ ] Sliders simplify complex meteorological variables into accessible concepts (wind speed, rain, dust amount).
Scenarios use as many words as needed, no more [x] [ ] [ ] The Engage section is brief, directly outlining the phenomenon without overwhelming students.
Scenarios are sufficiently rich to drive the task [x] [ ] [ ] The multi-variable nature of the simulation allows for extensive exploration and argumentation.
Evidence of quality for Criterion A: [ ] No [ ] Inadequate [ ] Adequate [x] Extensive

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion A:

No suggestions.

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 analyze the data to determine the mathematical or logical relationship between dust concentration and hurricane probability (negative correlation).

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 must construct a formal argument explaining why blocking the dust is a bad idea, relying strictly on the data collected in the simulation rather than opinion.

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

Students evaluate the competing claims regarding air quality vs. hurricane protection, using their simulation data as evidence for the tradeoffs.

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

Students explicitly link the evidence (hurricane probability drops when dust is present) to their final recommendation.

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 explain how a change in the atmosphere (dust emission) causes changes in the biosphere (air quality) and hydrosphere/weather (hurricane formation).

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).

Students explicitly identify the presence of the dust layer as a feedback mechanism that alters the climate system.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion B:

No suggestions.

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 focuses on the trans-Atlantic transport of dust from Africa to the Americas, making a strong global connection. It is highly relevant to Puerto Rican and Caribbean communities impacted by both poor air quality and hurricanes.

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 interact with a simulation, record quantitative observations in a data table, and synthesize their understanding in a written argumentative essay.

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] [ ] [ ] Provides a clear data table and specific test conditions before asking for an open-ended student choice.
Tasks are coherent from a student perspective [x] [ ] [ ] Follows a logical 5E progression from observation to data collection to argumentation.
Tasks respect and advantage students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds [x] [ ] [ ] Explicitly connects to Puerto Rico and the Caribbean, advantageous for students with ties to those regions.
Tasks provide both low- and high-achieving students with an opportunity to show what they know [x] [ ] [ ] Data collection is accessible to all, while the final argumentation task allows high achievers to demonstrate deep reasoning.
Tasks use accessible language [x] [ ] [ ] Defines technical terms like ‘Saharan Air Layer’ clearly in the introduction.

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.

Students take on the role of an environmental scientist advising the government on a consequential policy decision, which increases engagement and confidence in applying scientific concepts.

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 assumes basic knowledge of how to read data tables and graphs. It provides all necessary simulation data to construct the final argument without requiring outside rote memorization.

vi. The task presents information that is scientifically accurate.

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

No scientific inaccuracies were identified. The Saharan Air Layer’s role in transporting dust across the Atlantic, its negative impact on Caribbean air quality, and its suppression of tropical cyclone formation via dry air intrusion and wind shear are well-established mechanisms in atmospheric science.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion C:

No suggestions.

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:

Task evaluates student ability to analyze data on Earth system feedbacks.

  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): N/A

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 Teacher Notes provide clear alignment to the HS-ESS2-2 evidence statements, showing exactly what constitutes a correct response for each part of the standard.

  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. All required knowledge to form an argument regarding hurricane suppression and air quality is provided within the simulation sliders, data outputs, and introductory text.

  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 final argumentation section specifically requires students to support their claims about system feedbacks using the data they generated and collected themselves in the simulation.

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 task produces a completed data table and an evidence-based argument. These artifacts make visible the students’ ability to identify trends (SEP) regarding Earth system interactions (DCI) and specifically identify them as a stabilizing feedback loop (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:

The Teacher Notes break down the exact expectations for HS-ESS2-2, noting how the data collection maps to ‘Organizing Data’ (SEP), identifying the dust/hurricane link maps to ‘Identifying relationships’ (DCI), and the final argument maps to ‘Interpreting data’ for feedbacks (CCC).

  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 structured 5E format allows teachers to pinpoint where understanding breaks down (e.g., Did they collect the data incorrectly in Part 2, or did they fail to synthesize it into an argument in Part 4?).

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

The Engage section directly connects the phenomenon to real-world respiratory issues and hurricane forecasting, allowing teachers to build upon student experiences with weather events.

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 clearly guide the students to adjust sliders and record data without scripting their final argumentative synthesis, ensuring they must independently apply the DCI and CCC.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion D:

No suggestions.

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 an excellent, structured approach to evaluating HS-ESS2-2. It leverages a highly interactive simulation of Saharan dust to help students visualize complex climate feedbacks. The inclusion of clear data collection tables, scaffolded sensemaking questions, and a final argumentation section ensures strong alignment with the target SEP, DCI, and CCC.

Final recommendation (choose one):