Science Task Screener

Task Title: Hierarchical Organization of Interacting Systems

Grade: High School

Date: 2024-05-18

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 phenomenon of human fainting from lack of oxygen, grounding the biological hierarchy in an observable event.

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

Students cannot complete the task without successfully investigating the different levels of hierarchy (cell to system) and their interactions via the simulation.

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] [ ] [ ] Fainting from lack of oxygen is a widely understood real-world observation.
Scenarios are based around at least one specific instance, not a topic or generally observed occurrence [x] [ ] [ ] Focuses on the specific instance of the respiratory system failing.
Scenarios are presented as puzzling/intriguing [x] [ ] [ ] It asks why stopping one process (breathing) causes distant parts (leg muscles) to shut down.
Scenarios create a “need to know” [x] [ ] [ ] The phenomenon immediately demands an explanation for the physiological failure.
Scenarios are explainable using grade-appropriate SEPs, CCCs, DCIs [x] [ ] [ ] Directly addressable by HS-LS1-2 dimensions.
Scenarios effectively use at least 2 modalities (e.g., images, diagrams, video, simulations, textual descriptions) [x] [ ] [ ] Uses text description and an interactive simulation.
If data are used, scenarios present real/well-crafted data [x] [ ] [ ] The simulation provides accurate structural/functional data at multiple scale levels.
The local, global, or universal relevance of the scenario is made clear to students [x] [ ] [ ] Breathing is universally relevant to human survival.
Scenarios are comprehensible to a wide range of students at grade-level [x] [ ] [ ] The concept of holding one’s breath is universally understood.
Scenarios use as many words as needed, no more [x] [ ] [ ] The introduction is brief and direct.
Scenarios are sufficiently rich to drive the task [x] [ ] [ ] The initial question drives the need to build the model of the entire hierarchy.
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 about how the failure of a micro-structure (cells) cascades to macro-structures (organism) via the “Elaborate” prompt.

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?)

Developing and Using Models: Students draw a diagram mapping the relationships and flows across the hierarchical levels.

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

Systems and System Models: Students analyze the interacting levels of systems at different scales.

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

LS1.A Structure and Function: Students record specific structural components and their functions from the simulation.

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 synthesize the DCI (structure/function) and CCC (system scales) to draw a coherent model (SEP) in the final Evaluate step.

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 table explicitly captures their data-gathering thinking, and the final diagram makes their mental model of interactions visible.

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.

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.

Universal relevance of oxygen transport and digestion to human health.

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.

Textual data recording, interactive simulation manipulation, and visual modeling.

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 data table breaks down the data collection before asking for the full model.
Tasks are coherent from a student perspective [x] [ ] [ ] The flow from Engage to Evaluate is logical and builds step-by-step.
Tasks respect and advantage students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds [x] [ ] [ ] The biological concepts are universal.
Tasks provide both low- and high-achieving students with an opportunity to show what they know [x] [ ] [ ] The guided Explore mode allows entry for all, while the open-ended Elaborate prompt allows deep reasoning.
Tasks use accessible language [x] [ ] [ ] Uses clear, grade-appropriate 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 ‘Build Mode’ in the simulation gamifies the learning, increasing 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.

Assumes basic middle-school knowledge of organs, building toward high-school level systemic interaction.

vi. The task presents information that is scientifically accurate.

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

The simulation uses accurate cell types (Enterocytes, Pneumocytes) and scales.

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:

  1. Describe what is being assessed. Include any targets provided, such as dimensions, elements, or PEs:

HS-LS1-2: Model the hierarchical organization of systems.

  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, understanding the hierarchy is required to successfully draw the final interaction diagram.

  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.

  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 final model diagram directly supports the purpose of evaluating system hierarchy understanding.

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 student produces a filled table and a drawn model/diagram.

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 detail exactly how the final model demonstrates the SEP, DCI, and CCC simultaneously.

  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 data table allows teachers to see if a student understood the parts even if they fail to draw the interactions in the final model.

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

Provides a foundation for subsequent units on homeostasis (HS-LS1-3).

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).

Clear instructions for using the simulation and completing the model.

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

This task is a strong, highly-aligned NGSS resource. It utilizes the simulation’s features effectively to guide students through an exploration of biological hierarchy, culminating in a three-dimensional modeling activity directly tied to HS-LS1-2.

Final recommendation (choose one):