Science Task Screener

Task Title: Natural Selection and Adaptation Simulation Task

Grade: High School

Date: 2025-01-01

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 centers on an observable anchoring phenomenon: A population of organisms living in varying climates exhibits significant changes in average fur thickness over generations, and these changes accelerate when predators are introduced.

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

Students must actively use the interactive simulation to change abiotic and biotic parameters to collect frequency data. The task cannot be completed without the simulation outputs.

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 presents realistic ecosystem variables like temperature and predator presence affecting adaptation.
Scenarios are based around at least one specific instance, not a topic or generally observed occurrence [x] [ ] [ ] The scenario focuses specifically on fur thickness as a survival trait in varying climates.
Scenarios are presented as puzzling/intriguing [x] [ ] [ ] The accelerated change in fur thickness frequency when predators are introduced provides an intriguing dynamic to explore.
Scenarios create a “need to know” [x] [ ] [ ] Students need to understand how the climate and predators alter survival to explain the data.
Scenarios are explainable using grade-appropriate SEPs, CCCs, DCIs [x] [ ] [ ] The scenario is fully explainable using HS-LS4-4 DCI (Adaptation), SEP (Explanation), and CCC (Cause and Effect).
Scenarios effectively use at least 2 modalities (e.g., images, diagrams, video, simulations, textual descriptions) [x] [ ] [ ] The task utilizes both textual descriptions and an interactive simulation with real-time data graphing.
If data are used, scenarios present real/well-crafted data [x] [ ] [ ] The simulation generates real-time, well-crafted population tracking data based on the student’s variable inputs.
The local, global, or universal relevance of the scenario is made clear to students [x] [ ] [ ] Climate change and predator-prey dynamics are universally relevant ecological concepts.
Scenarios are comprehensible to a wide range of students at grade-level [x] [ ] [ ] The interface is visual and intuitive, reducing language barriers while conveying complex concepts.
Scenarios use as many words as needed, no more [x] [ ] [ ] The scenario prompt is brief, leaving the heavy lifting to the interactive exploration.
Scenarios are sufficiently rich to drive the task [x] [ ] [ ] The variables provided are sufficient to test multiple hypotheses about natural selection.
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 synthesize simulation data to construct an evidence-based explanation. Rote vocabulary is insufficient; they must actively reason about competitive advantage.

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 and Designing Solutions: Students construct an explanation of how specific factors cause adaptation, using valid and reliable evidence gathered from the simulation.

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

Cause and Effect: Students distinguish between the cause (temperature and predators) and the effect (change in gene frequency of the fur trait).

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

LS4.C Adaptation: Students observe differential survival and reproduction resulting in populations dominated by advantageous traits.

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 explain the cause-and-effect relationship (CCC) of adaptation (DCI) using data from the simulation (SEP) to construct a final explanation.

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 ‘Explain’ section requires a written explanation incorporating specific data points and reasoning, and the ‘Elaborate’ section requires a hypothesis with justification.

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.

The task connects to global ecological phenomena such as climate shifts.

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 visual simulation, read text, record numerical data, and write explanations.

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 Engage section sets the stage, Explore guides data collection step-by-step, and Explain scaffolds the components of the required explanation.
Tasks are coherent from a student perspective [x] [ ] [ ] The progression from observing a phenomenon to manipulating a model, collecting data, and explaining it follows a logical 5E sequence.
Tasks respect and advantage students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds [x] [ ] [ ] The interactive nature of the simulation relies less on dense text and more on direct observation.
Tasks provide both low- and high-achieving students with an opportunity to show what they know [x] [ ] [ ] The Extension question allows for higher-order prediction, while the core explanation is well-scaffolded for all.
Tasks use accessible language [x] [ ] [ ] The vocabulary is grade-appropriate and clearly defined through interaction.

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 dynamic predator and climate factors make the simulation engaging and gamified, cultivating 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.

The task aligns perfectly with the HS-LS4-4 expectations and assumes no prior outside knowledge of the specific scenario.

vi. The task presents information that is scientifically accurate.

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

The simulation accurately models basic principles of natural selection, gene frequency changes, and competitive advantage.

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:

The task assesses the student’s ability to construct an explanation (SEP) for how environmental changes cause (CCC) adaptation (DCI) in populations.

  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 differential survival and competitive advantage is necessary to correctly answer the ‘Explain’ prompt.

  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 written explanations and data tables directly elicit evidence of the targeted three-dimensional learning.

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].

Students produce a completed data table and two written explanations, clearly making their reasoning process 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 Teacher Notes explicitly map the task deliverables to the SEP, DCI, and CCC evidence statements.

  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 scaffolded nature (data table separate from explanation) allows teachers to pinpoint where understanding breaks down.

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

The concepts of adaptation and environmental pressures can bridge into future units on speciation or biodiversity.

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-facing handout provides explicit, step-by-step instructions for interacting with the simulation.

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.

The Natural Selection and Adaptation Simulation Task strongly addresses all criteria. It provides a rich, interactive phenomenon, requires genuine three-dimensional sense-making, and produces clear artifacts for assessment.

Final recommendation (choose one):