Science Task Screener
Task Title: The Egg Drop Challenge: Minimizing Collision Forces
Grade: High School
Date: April 19, 2026
Instructions
- Before you begin: Complete the task as a student would. Then, consider any support materials provided to teachers or students, such as contextual information about the task and answer keys/scoring guidance.
- Using the Task Screener: Use this tool to evaluate tasks designed for three-dimensional standards. For each criterion, record your evidence for the presence or absence of the associated indicators. After you have decided to what degree the indicators are present within the task, revisit the purpose of your task and decide whether the evidence supports using it.
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.
- Is a phenomenon and/or problem present?
Yes, the task is grounded in the engineering problem of protecting a fragile payload (egg-like instrument) from a high-velocity impact.
- Is information from the scenario necessary to respond successfully to the task?
Yes, the specific constraints (mass, height, force threshold) and the data generated by the simulation (peak force, compression) are essential for completing the analysis and the final design challenge.
ii. The task scenario is engaging, relevant, and accessible to a wide range of students.
| Features of scenarios | Yes | Somewhat | No | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scenario presents real-world observations | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | Relates to probes and instrument protection. |
| Scenarios are based around at least one specific instance, not a topic or generally observed occurrence | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | Focuses on a specific 10m drop challenge. |
| Scenarios are presented as puzzling/intriguing | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | The “bottoming out” phenomenon creates interest. |
| Scenarios create a “need to know” | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | Students need to know how to balance thickness and stiffness. |
| Scenarios are explainable using grade-appropriate SEPs, CCCs, DCIs | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | Uses impulse-momentum and engineering design. |
| Scenarios effectively use at least 2 modalities | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | Uses text and interactive simulation. |
| If data are used, scenarios present real/well-crafted data | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | Simulation uses real physics equations (spring stiffness). |
| The local, global, or universal relevance of the scenario is made clear to students | [ ] | [X] | [ ] | Could be strengthened with more explicit car crash connections. |
| Scenarios are comprehensible to a wide range of students at grade-level | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | Language is accessible for 9-12. |
| Scenarios use as many words as needed, no more | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | Concise instructions. |
| Scenarios are sufficiently rich to drive the task | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | Encourages iterative testing and refinement. |
| Evidence of quality for Criterion A: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [X] Adequate | [ ] Extensive |
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.
Students must reason that increasing the time/distance of impact (via softer materials) reduces the peak force, but only if they don’t exceed the physical thickness of the cushion.
ii. The task requires students to demonstrate grade-appropriate dimensions:
Evidence of SEPs: Designing Solutions: Students iterate on their cushion design to meet a survival threshold under extreme conditions (10m, 1kg).
Evidence of CCCs: Cause and Effect: Altering the mass or material (cause) results in measurable changes in peak force (effect).
Evidence of DCIs: PS2.A: Understanding that forces on an object depend on the time interval of the collision.
iii. The task requires students to integrate multiple dimensions in service of sense-making and/or problem-solving.
The task concludes with a CER where students provide evidence (data from simulation) and reasoning (DCIs like impulse) to explain their engineering choice (SEP).
iv. The task requires students to make their thinking visible.
The CER section and the specific observation questions in Part 2 and 3 require students to explain their mental models.
| Evidence of quality for Criterion B: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [X] Adequate | [ ] Extensive |
Criterion C. Tasks are fair and equitable.
i. The task provides ways for students to make connections of local, global, or universal relevance.
Protections of fragile items is a universal concept (package shipping, helmets, car safety).
ii. The task includes multiple modes for students to respond to the task.
Data tables, short answers, and a final CER paragraph.
iii. The task is accessible, appropriate, and cognitively demanding for all learners.
| Features | Yes | Somewhat | No | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Task includes appropriate scaffolds | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | 5E model guides them step-by-step. |
| Tasks are coherent from a student perspective | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | Clear start and end. |
| Tasks respect and advantage students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds | [ ] | [X] | [ ] | Neutral context. |
| Tasks provide both low- and high-achieving students with an opportunity to show what they know | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | Open design challenge allows for varied success. |
| Tasks use accessible language | [X] | [ ] | [ ] | Standard high school vocabulary. |
| Evidence of quality for Criterion C: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [X] Adequate | [ ] Extensive |
Criterion D. Tasks support their intended targets and purpose.
Before you begin:
-
Describe what is being assessed. HS-PS2-3: Engineering a device to minimize collision forces.
-
What is the purpose of the assessment?
- Summative (as a lab/activity)
- Determining whether students can apply what they have learned to a similar but new context
| Evidence of quality for Criterion D: [ ] No | [ ] Inadequate | [X] Adequate | [ ] Extensive |
Overall Summary
The task is a robust investigation that leverages the simulation’s features to drive three-dimensional learning. It moves beyond simple observation into a true engineering design challenge.
Final recommendation (choose one):
- Use this task (all criteria had at least an “adequate” rating)