Science Task Screener

Task Title: Secondary Succession in El Yunque

Grade: High School

Date: 2025-04-25

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 is driven by the real-world observable phenomenon of secondary succession in El Yunque National Forest following a destructive hurricane, specifically the transition from fast-growing Yagrumo trees to slow-growing Tabonuco trees.

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

Students cannot complete the task without interacting with the simulation to gather specific data on the population dynamics of the Yagrumo and Tabonuco trees over time.

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 ecology of Puerto Rico, specifically observing the aftermath of hurricanes in El Yunque.
Scenarios are based around at least one specific instance, not a topic or generally observed occurrence [x] [ ] [ ] The task uses the specific instance of secondary succession in El Yunque following a hurricane, rather than a generic discussion of succession.
Scenarios are presented as puzzling/intriguing [x] [ ] [ ] The sudden destruction of the mature canopy and the rapid, unexpected explosion of the pioneer Yagrumo population creates a puzzling dynamic.
Scenarios create a “need to know” [x] [ ] [ ] Students are driven to figure out why the Yagrumo initially dominates and how the slow-growing Tabonuco eventually reclaims the canopy.
Scenarios are explainable using grade-appropriate SEPs, CCCs, DCIs [x] [ ] [ ] The scenario is fully explainable using HS-level ecosystem dynamics (LS2.C), stability and change (CCC), and argument from evidence (SEP).
Scenarios effectively use at least 2 modalities (e.g., images, diagrams, video, simulations, textual descriptions) [x] [ ] [ ] The task integrates an interactive visual simulation and a dynamically generated line graph.
If data are used, scenarios present real/well-crafted data [x] [ ] [ ] The simulation generates ecologically accurate population data reflecting the growth rates and lifespans of the two species.
The local, global, or universal relevance of the scenario is made clear to students [x] [ ] [ ] The relevance is clear through the specific geographic context and the universal theme of ecosystem resilience following natural disasters.
Scenarios are comprehensible to a wide range of students at grade-level [x] [ ] [ ] The core conflict—fast vs. slow growth, shade vs. sun—is intuitive and easily grasped by high school students.
Scenarios use as many words as needed, no more [x] [ ] [ ] The scenario text is concise, focusing heavily on interactive simulation exploration rather than lengthy reading.
Scenarios are sufficiently rich to drive the task [x] [ ] [ ] The simulation’s mechanics provide enough depth for students to construct complex, multi-variable explanations of the succession process.
Evidence of quality for Criterion A: [ ] No [ ] Inadequate [x] Adequate [ ] Extensive

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion A:

Consider providing real historical data or photos of El Yunque before and after a hurricane to further contextualize 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 must use reasoning to evaluate the claim that Yagrumo trees are better adapted, requiring them to synthesize data on lifespan, growth rate, and shade tolerance rather than just citing a single fact.

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?)

Engaging in Argument from Evidence: Students evaluate claims and construct explanations based on the simulation data.

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

Stability and Change: Students analyze how the ecosystem responds to a disturbance (hurricane) and eventually returns to a stable state (Tabonuco climax forest).

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

LS2.C Ecosystem Dynamics: Students explore how the ecosystem maintains relatively consistent numbers and types of organisms, and how it responds to and recovers from extreme fluctuations in conditions.

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 integrate their understanding of ecosystem dynamics (DCI) and stability (CCC) to evaluate a specific claim using evidence from the simulation (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).

Thinking is made visible through the data collection table, the evaluation of the peer’s claim, and the final constructed explanation regarding ecosystem resilience.

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

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 uses a specific, real-world location (El Yunque National Forest in Puerto Rico) which provides local relevance to students in that region and a concrete example of a global phenomenon (tropical rainforest succession) for others.

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 engage with the simulation visually and interactively, collect quantitative data in a table, and express their understanding through written explanations and arguments.

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 the 5E structure to carefully step students from an initial prediction through directed exploration and data collection before asking them to construct complex explanations.
Tasks are coherent from a student perspective [x] [ ] [ ] The progression from observing the hurricane, to measuring tree populations, to evaluating the pioneer species makes logical sense from the student’s point of view.
Tasks respect and advantage students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds [x] [ ] [ ] By featuring a prominent Puerto Rican ecosystem (El Yunque) and utilizing native tree species names (Yagrumo and Tabonuco), the task validates and advantages the knowledge of students with ties to the region.
Tasks provide both low- and high-achieving students with an opportunity to show what they know [x] [ ] [ ] The data collection table provides a concrete entry point for all students, while the ‘Extension’ question regarding hurricane frequency offers a higher-ceiling opportunity for advanced reasoning.
Tasks use accessible language [x] [ ] [ ] The text avoids overly dense academic jargon, clearly defining ‘pioneer’ and ‘climax’ through context, and utilizes clear, step-by-step instructional language.

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 interactive nature of the simulation and the dramatic framing of a hurricane disturbance cultivate interest and engagement.

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 well with high school biology curricula and provides a clear opportunity to apply prior knowledge of plant growth to a new, dynamic scenario.

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 accurately represent the specific roles and traits of pioneer (Yagrumo) and climax (Tabonuco) species in this ecosystem.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion C:

None.

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 students’ ability to evaluate claims using evidence regarding ecosystem dynamics, resilience, and stability (HS-LS2-6).

  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?

Yes, successfully completing the task requires students to demonstrate their understanding of the targeted SEP, DCI, and CCC.

  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 focus remains strictly on ecosystem dynamics and succession.

  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 responses directly support the formative assessment purpose by revealing student reasoning.

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 completed inquiry handout, including the data table and written responses, serves as the artifact making 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 task prompts are designed to require integrated responses, naturally leading to rubrics that assess the combined use of the three 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 5E structure allows teachers to identify where a student’s understanding might be partial (e.g., they can collect data but struggle to evaluate the claim).

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

The results can guide future instruction on ecosystem resilience and responses to climate change.

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 directions are clear, explicit, and guide students step-by-step through the simulation.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion D:

None.

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 Secondary Succession in El Yunque task is a well-designed, three-dimensional formative assessment. It effectively uses an interactive simulation to ground student learning in a real-world phenomenon, requiring them to engage in argument from evidence and construct explanations utilizing core ideas about ecosystem dynamics and crosscutting concepts of stability and change.

Final recommendation (choose one):