Science Task Screener

Task Title: Bond Energy: The Hidden Energy in Chemical Bonds

Grade: High School

Date: 2024-05-20

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?

Students must use the Bond Energy simulation to make sense of how chemical bonds store and release energy, specifically addressing the phenomenon of where the energy in gasoline comes from when it burns.

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

Yes, students must extract specific bond energy data from the simulation (bond types, bond energies, net energy changes) for three reactions to perform the calculations and analysis needed to construct their visual model and scientific explanation.

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 phenomenon of gasoline burning in a car engine
Scenarios are based around at least one specific instance, not a topic or generally observed occurrence [x] [ ] [ ] Specific instance of a car engine burning gasoline (octane)
Scenarios are presented as puzzling/intriguing [x] [ ] [ ] The question of where energy is stored before burning creates a puzzle
Scenarios create a “need to know” [x] [ ] [ ] Students need to know how chemical bonds store and release energy
Scenarios are explainable using grade-appropriate SEPs, CCCs, DCIs [x] [ ] [ ] Aligns tightly with HS-PS1-4
Scenarios effectively use at least 2 modalities (e.g., images, diagrams, video, simulations, textual descriptions) [x] [ ] [ ] Text description and an interactive bond energy simulation with step-by-step bond manipulation
If data are used, scenarios present real/well-crafted data [x] [ ] [ ] Simulation provides accurate bond energy data for real chemical reactions
The local, global, or universal relevance of the scenario is made clear to students [x] [ ] [ ] Understanding bond energy is universally relevant to explaining combustion, electrolysis, and industrial chemical processes
Scenarios are comprehensible to a wide range of students at grade-level [x] [ ] [ ] The language is straightforward and relates to a familiar, relatable action (filling a car with gasoline)
Scenarios use as many words as needed, no more [x] [ ] [ ] The scenario is brief and gets straight to the core chemistry question
Scenarios are sufficiently rich to drive the task [x] [ ] [ ] The scenario naturally leads into investigating bond energies across multiple reaction types
Evidence of quality for Criterion A: [ ] No [ ] Inadequate [ ] Adequate [x] Extensive

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion A:

The phenomenon is well established. Further enhancement could include additional real-world applications of bond energy, such as explaining why cellular respiration releases energy in living organisms or how fuel cells work.

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 mathematically reason using net energy = total bond energy of bonds broken - total bond energy of bonds formed to verify that exothermic reactions have stronger bonds formed than broken (and vice versa for endothermic reactions), moving beyond superficial observation to causal reasoning about energy conservation.

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?)

Students develop a visual model (concept map, flow chart, or diagram) that explains energy transfer during chemical reactions, including claims, evidence from bond energy data, and reasoning about why bond breaking requires energy input while bond formation releases energy (Developing and Using Models).

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

Students trace the flow of energy through a chemical reaction system, tracking energy input (bond breaking) and energy output (bond formation) to determine the net energy change, demonstrating that energy is conserved in the reaction system (Energy and Matter).

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

Students apply their understanding that chemical bonds store energy (DCI: PS1.A) and that the net energy change of a reaction depends on the difference between the energy required to break bonds and the energy released when new bonds form (DCI: PS1.B).

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 prompt in Part 4 explicitly asks students to construct a visual model (SEP) that traces energy transfer through the chemical reaction system (CCC) while applying the principle that bond breaking requires energy input and bond formation releases energy (DCI). Students must cite specific bond energy data from their simulation investigations as evidence.

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 by recording bond energy data in structured tables, performing and showing their net energy calculations, answering analytical questions about why reactions are exothermic or endothermic, and creating a comprehensive visual model that maps claims, evidence, reasoning, components, and relationships.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion B:

The integration is strong. Ensure that students explicitly connect the molecular-level bond breaking/forming events to the macroscopic energy changes observed (e.g., why the engine gets hot).

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 concept of gasoline burning in an engine is universally familiar to anyone who has ridden in or seen a car. The Haber process connection to fertilizer production provides global relevance to food production and industrial chemistry.

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 respond via data table entry, mathematical calculations, written analytical responses, and creating a visual model (concept map, flow chart, or diagram). The simulation provides interactive visual and numeric feedback.

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 task builds from guided data collection to independent analysis and model creation, scaffolding the complexity
Tasks are coherent from a student perspective [x] [ ] [ ] The 5E structure provides a natural narrative flow from phenomenon to investigation to model development
Tasks respect and advantage students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds [x] [ ] [ ] Context is kept universally accessible without niche cultural references
Tasks provide both low- and high-achieving students with an opportunity to show what they know [x] [ ] [ ] Accessible data collection paired with rigorous model development allows multiple entry points
Tasks use accessible language [x] [ ] [ ] Technical vocabulary (exothermic, endothermic, bond energy) is introduced in context

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.

By empowering students to act as chemists investigating a tangible and personally relevant phenomenon (car fuel efficiency, fertilizer production) via an interactive simulation, the task fosters engagement and confidence in molecular-level scientific reasoning.

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 assumes basic knowledge of chemical formulas and chemical equations (CH₄, CO₂, H₂O, N₂, NH₃) but scaffolds the bond energy concept directly within the simulation experience. The step-by-step approach (Break Bonds → Count Atoms → Form Bonds) provides strong support.

vi. The task presents information that is scientifically accurate.

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

All bond energy values and chemical equations accurately reflect established thermochemical principles. The net energy calculation method (Net Energy = Energy In - Energy Out) correctly models the relationship between bond breaking and bond formation.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion C:

Provide scaffolding options for the mathematical calculations (net energy = bonds broken - bonds formed) for students who struggle with arithmetic. Consider adding a glossary of key terms.

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 students’ ability to develop a model that illustrates how the release or absorption of energy from a chemical reaction system depends upon the changes in total bond energy (HS-PS1-4).

  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): N/A

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 how bond energy changes determine whether a reaction is exothermic or endothermic is essential to correctly answering the sensemaking questions and constructing the visual model in Part 4.

  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 arithmetic (subtraction) is required to calculate net energy changes, which might act as a barrier if not scaffolded. Familiarity with chemical formulas is assumed.

  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 net energy calculations and the visual model directly support assessing whether students understand the causal relationship between bond breaking/formation energies and the net energy change of a reaction.

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 visual model explicitly ties the empirical bond energy data (SEP) from the energy transfer in the reaction system (CCC) to the core principle that bond breaking requires energy input and bond formation releases energy (DCI), providing an observable artifact of three-dimensional learning.

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 clearly break down how student responses map to the SEPs, DCIs, CCCs, and the exact NGSS evidence statements for HS-PS1-4.

  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):

Multiple response modalities (data table, calculations, written analysis, visual model) allow teachers to pinpoint exactly where a student’s understanding might be breaking down.

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

The elaboration section connects bond energy analysis to real-world industrial applications (ammonia production via the Haber process), linking the learning to broader chemistry concepts.

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 5E layout and precise step-by-step simulation instructions guide students through the investigation without providing the answers, ensuring high cognitive demand is maintained in the analysis and model development phases.

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

Suggestions for improvement of the task for Criterion D:

Ensure teachers have access to a fully solved answer key showing the correct bond energy values, net energy calculations, and a sample visual model for all three reactions studied.

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 “Bond Energy: The Hidden Energy in Chemical Bonds” task is highly aligned with the NGSS. It effectively engages students with an anchoring phenomenon (where does gasoline’s energy come from?) and guides them through an authentic investigation using the Bond Energy simulation. Students must synthesize their understanding of bond breaking requiring energy input and bond formation releasing energy (DCI), trace energy transfer through a chemical reaction system (CCC), and develop a model to explain the net energy change (SEP). The task scores extensive across all criteria due to its robust integration of three-dimensional learning and sensemaking.

Final recommendation (choose one):