Science Task Screener

Task Title: Macromolecule Biosynthesis Model

Grade: High School

Date: 2025-05-01

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 phenomenon of a tree growing its mass from photosynthesis, requiring students to explain how sugar becomes structural macromolecules.

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

Students must use the specific simulated data (atom counts, nitrogen sourcing) to answer the questions.

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] [ ] [ ] Trees growing without ‘eating’ solid food is a 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 a tree building new leaves and wood.
Scenarios are presented as puzzling/intriguing [x] [ ] [ ] The puzzle is how gas and water can form the complex proteins and fats in a tree.
Scenarios create a “need to know” [x] [ ] [ ] Students need to know where the atoms for proteins and lipids come from if the tree only makes sugar.
Scenarios are explainable using grade-appropriate SEPs, CCCs, DCIs [x] [ ] [ ] Directly mapped to HS-LS1-6 using the required 3D dimensions.
Scenarios effectively use at least 2 modalities (e.g., images, diagrams, video, simulations, textual descriptions) [x] [ ] [ ] Uses textual description of the phenomenon and an interactive simulation.
If data are used, scenarios present real/well-crafted data [x] [ ] [ ] The simulation presents accurate stoichiometric data for glucose breakdown and amino acid synthesis.
The local, global, or universal relevance of the scenario is made clear to students [x] [ ] [ ] Plant growth is a universal phenomenon.
Scenarios are comprehensible to a wide range of students at grade-level [x] [ ] [ ] The scenario is straightforward and uses common knowledge about trees.
Scenarios use as many words as needed, no more [x] [ ] [ ] The engage section is concise and focuses on generating questions.
Scenarios are sufficiently rich to drive the task [x] [ ] [ ] Provides enough context to motivate the entire 5E sequence.
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 matter conservation, tracking atoms from glucose to macromolecules.

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?)

Constructing Explanations: Students construct a final explanation using valid evidence from the simulation.

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

Energy and Matter: Students track the flow of matter (C, H, O, N atoms) into and within the plant system.

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

LS1.C: Students learn how the hydrocarbon backbones of sugar are used to make amino acids and lipids.

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 use their understanding of matter flow (CCC) and the specific chemical pathways (DCI) to construct their final explanation (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).

Students make their thinking visible through data tables, short answers, and a final written explanation.

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.

Connects the microscopic chemical processes to the macro-level, universal growth of plants.

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.

Includes reading, interactive simulation, data collection, and written 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 5E structure scaffolds the learning, starting with simple exploration before moving to complex explanations.
Tasks are coherent from a student perspective [x] [ ] [ ] The progression from wondering about tree growth to tracking atoms makes logical sense.
Tasks respect and advantage students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds [x] [ ] [ ] Uses a universal phenomenon accessible to all backgrounds.
Tasks provide both low- and high-achieving students with an opportunity to show what they know [x] [ ] [ ] The data collection is straightforward, while the final explanation allows for depth and complexity.
Tasks use accessible language [x] [ ] [ ] Instructions are clear and avoid unnecessary jargon until defined.

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 ‘building’ molecules from a pool of atoms engages 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.

Aligns perfectly with HS-LS1-6 and assumes prior knowledge of basic photosynthesis.

vi. The task presents information that is scientifically accurate.

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

The stoichiometry of glucose breakdown and amino acid/lipid synthesis is scientifically accurate.

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:

Assesses student understanding of how atoms from sugar combine with other elements to form complex carbon-based molecules.

  1. What is the purpose of the assessment? (check all that apply)
    • [x] Formative (including peer and self-reflection)
    • [x] 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 DCI and CCC is necessary to construct a valid explanation.

  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.

Basic understanding of photosynthesis is required as a prerequisite.

  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 written explanation directly supports the purpose of assessing the targeted PE.

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].

A completed data table and a written scientific explanation.

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 instructions explicitly prompt students to connect evidence (SEP) about atom flow (CCC) to the chemical pathways (DCI).

  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 students struggled with data collection versus explanation construction.

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

Provides a foundation for discussing DNA synthesis or ecosystem-level matter cycling.

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 step-by-step directions are provided in the Explore section.

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 an excellent, fully aligned resource for HS-LS1-6. It uses a compelling phenomenon, scaffolds learning effectively through the 5E model, and seamlessly integrates the three dimensions.

Final recommendation (choose one):