Science Task Screener

Task Title: Garden of the Giants Genetics - Giant Pumpkin Breeding

Grade: High School

Date: 2026-04-25

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 explicitly requires students to use the simulation to generate and interpret statistical data about the mean and shape of the bell curve for pumpkin weights (Analyzing and Interpreting Data). They apply algebraic thinking to predict the probability of traits under changing variables (Scale, Proportion, and Quantity). They use this to explain how both genetics and environment affect the variation and distribution of the trait (LS3.B).

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

The anchoring phenomenon (a farmer trying to breed giant pumpkins while dealing with environmental stressors) is realistic and drives the entire investigation. Students must collect baseline data and then explore how environmental variables disrupt the genetic potential.

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] [ ] [ ] Grounded in the real-world agricultural challenge of breeding giant pumpkins.
Scenarios are based around at least one specific instance, not a topic or generally observed occurrence [x] [ ] [ ] Focuses on a specific farmer attempting to maximize weight over generations.
Scenarios are presented as puzzling/intriguing [x] [ ] [ ] Challenges the assumption that planting big seeds guarantees big pumpkins by introducing environmental chaos.
Scenarios create a “need to know” [x] [ ] [ ] The evidence supports this indicator.
Scenarios are explainable using grade-appropriate SEPs, CCCs, DCIs [x] [ ] [ ] The outcome is directly explainable via the targeted dimensions.
Scenarios effectively use at least 2 modalities (e.g., images, diagrams, video, simulations, textual descriptions) [x] [ ] [ ] Uses text descriptions and a dynamic interactive simulation with graphical outputs.
If data are used, scenarios present real/well-crafted data [x] [ ] [ ] The simulation generates robust, statistically accurate population data based on inputs.
The local, global, or universal relevance of the scenario is made clear to students [x] [ ] [ ] Agricultural yield and selective breeding have universal societal relevance.
Scenarios are comprehensible to a wide range of students at grade-level [x] [ ] [ ] The concept of a farmer growing crops is widely accessible.
Scenarios use as many words as needed, no more [x] [ ] [ ] The introductory text is concise and direct.
Scenarios are sufficiently rich to drive the task [x] [ ] [ ] The scenario provides enough complexity to carry through all 5E stages.
Evidence of quality for Criterion A: [ ] No [ ] Inadequate [ ] Adequate [x] Extensive

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion A:

Ensure the final argument explicitly prompts students to reference the shape of the bell curves.

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 includes clear data tables for students to organize the frequency, distribution, and variation of pumpkin weights across generations. Students perform statistical analysis by comparing the means and observing the distribution curves under different environmental conditions, meeting the HS-LS3-3 evidence statements.

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?)

The task requires students to construct a final evidence-based argument predicting which farm strategy is more likely to yield a 200 lb pumpkin. This requires them to synthesize their understanding of genetics, environmental impact, and statistical distribution, making their reasoning and three-dimensional learning visible and assessable.

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

The task provides a compelling, real-world context for HS-LS3-3 and thoroughly integrates the required SEPs and CCCs.

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

The phenomenon drives a ‘need to know’ and is returned to consistently.

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 student prompts directly elicit the specific observable features outlined in the HS-LS3-3 evidence statements.

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 provides a clear progression with accessible language and scaffolds.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion B:

None. The phenomenon is well-integrated.

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 phenomenon of giant pumpkin breeding to universal agricultural challenges of crop yield and selective breeding.

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 are prompted to generate response modes such as data tables and written arguments to explain the outcomes.

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] [ ] [ ] Instructions are broken into step-by-step 5E sections.
Tasks are coherent from a student perspective [x] [ ] [ ] The progression from baseline to experimental conditions is logical.
Tasks respect and advantage students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds [x] [ ] [ ] The agricultural context is broadly understandable and doesn’t rely on niche cultural knowledge.
Tasks provide both low- and high-achieving students with an opportunity to show what they know [x] [ ] [ ] The open-ended argumentation at the end allows for varying depths of analysis.
Tasks use accessible language [x] [ ] [ ] Complex terms like ‘distribution curve’ are defined contextually.

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 task provides clear instructions and scaffolds for using the simulation to record and analyze specific frequency data.

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 Explore section explicitly asks students to adjust variables and record data, satisfying the requirement for SEP integration.

vi. The task presents information that is scientifically accurate.

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

The Explain section prompts students to connect the distribution of pumpkin weights back to the environmental stressors, addressing the DCI.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion C:

Teachers might prompt students to calculate standard deviation if advanced statistical analysis is desired.

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 is a high-quality, fully aligned NGSS 3D learning experience using the Garden of the Giants Genetics simulation.

  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): Evaluating NGSS alignment of the Giant Pumpkin simulation task.

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 Elaborate section asks students to predict outcomes using algebraic thinking, targeting the CCC of Scale, Proportion, and Quantity.

  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.

The scoring rubric for the final argument provides specific guidance on evaluating student use of statistical data to support claims.

  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 task’s use of data tables directly supports the ‘Organizing data’ evidence statement.

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 final written argument supports the ‘Interpreting data’ evidence statement by requiring students to explain causative relationships.

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 overall 5E structure provides a coherent and scaffolded learning progression.

  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 real-world agricultural context makes the science accessible and relevant.

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

The student task explicitly requires engagement with this dimension as described in the evaluation.

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 student task explicitly requires engagement with this dimension as described in the evaluation.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion D:

Provide a rubric for the final argument that explicitly evaluates their use of statistical data as evidence.

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 task is a high-quality, fully aligned NGSS 3D learning experience. It effectively uses the Garden of the Giants Genetics simulation to explore the complex interactions between genetics and environment on population traits, perfectly addressing HS-LS3-3.

Final recommendation (choose one):