Part I: Unit Title: North Carolina’s Water Quality - An Engineering Grand Challenge

Part II: Background on LMS and Science Teacher relationship: This unit was created by Library Media Specialist Lauren Schultz, Engineering teacher Kristen Ward and Biology teacher Keiauda Tennant. Lauren’s strengths were identified as text-based inquiry and the curation of resources.  She requested to see Keiauda and Kristen model what inquiry looks like in an engineering and science classroom. Kristen’s strengths were identified as the engineering design process, and Keiauda’s strengths were identified as science content knowledge.  Both requested to see Lauren model how students can use text-based inquiry in a STEM classroom.

Part III: Unit Description: This unit includes 9 lessons that culminate in the students using the engineering design process to address a solution to a specific clean water issue in North Carolina.

Using inquiry-based reading, students will explore an anchor text and then develop their own essential and supporting questions to guide theirresearch.

Over the course of the unit, students will explore a variety of texts and grow in their knowledge of clean water issues across North Carolina, and in their ability to use informational text to support their inquiry and research.

Part IV: Standards

• NGSS & North Carolina STEM Standards:

• HS-LS4-6: Create or revise a simulation to test a solution to mitigate adverse impacts of human activity on biodiversity.
• NC Bio.2.2 Understand the impact of human activities on the environment (one generation affects the next).

• NC Bio.2.2.1 Infer how human activities (including population growth, pollution, global warming, burning of fossil fuels, habitat destruction and introduction of nonnative species) may impact the environment.
• NC Bio.2.2.2 Explain how the use, protection and conservation of natural resources by humans impact the environment from one generation to the next

• NGSS Crosscutting Concept: Cause and Effect
• CCSS Science Literacy Standards

• CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RST.9-10.5:  Analyze the structure of the relationships among concepts in a text, including relationships among key terms (e.g., force, friction, reaction force, energy).
• CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RST.9-10.8:  Assess the extent to which the reasoning and evidence in a text support the author's claim or a recommendation for solving a scientific or technical problem.

Part V: Unit Essential Question

      How do humans impact water quality in North Carolina?

Part VI: Goals for Using Inquiry: The goal for using inquiry in this unit is to have students develop their own supporting research questions around clean water issues in North Carolina, examine provided text, select their own additional resources to use, and determine their own solution to the research question.The biology teacher, engineering teacher and the media library specialist have selected an anchor text about water contamination at Camp Lejeune, and provided support for students in a set of texts that guide research around clean water legislation, and how clean water relates to engineering challenges in the 21st Century.

The goal for using inquiry in this unit is to have students examine the anchor text as an open invitation to inquire about the human impact on clean water.  Using the anchor text “Public Health Assessment for Camp LeJeune Drinking Water” as the base and the supportive texts “Engineering Ethics: The Aberdeen Three”, “Engineering Grand Challenges: Provide Access to Clean Water” and “Understanding the Safe Water Act” about the human impact on clean water, students will develop their own set of inquiry questions (ex: “I wonder…”) for a culminating activity about how the engineering design process can address a particular clean water issue.  Students will narrow down their inquiry questions to one specific, targeted question that they seek to answer through the culminating activity.

Part VII: Summative Assessment Description and Rubric

Students will use research to create a scientific poster that uses the engineering design process to solve the problem posed by their text-based “I Wonder” question.  Each group will present its poster conference-style during a 90 minute class period, presenting their research and design process to a roving audience.

Score Key:

0 = No attempt

1 = Insufficient

2 = Sufficient

3 = Exemplary

1. Abstract

                a. Provides a clear overview of the entire study                                0              1              2              3                

2. Introduction

                a. Clearly stated questions or hypotheses being addressed                 0              1              2              3

                b. Well-explained rationale/justification for the study                       0              1              2              3

                c. Relevant previous work discussed                                                 0              1              2              3

                d. Succinct – not too wordy, flows well                                            0              1              2              3

                e. References cited                                                                            0              1              2              3

3. Methods

                a. Clear description of how the engineering design process          0              1              2              3

                      was applied to the problem

                b. Methods are appropriate to address the question/problem         0              1              2              3

4. Results

                a. Figures/Tables used appropriately and clearly represent the data   0              1              2              3

                b. Findings are presented clearly and accurately                                0              1              2              3

5. Conclusions

                a. Conclusions are sufficiently supported by the results                   0              1              2              3

                b. Importance of findings is addressed                                             0              1              2              3

                c. Future studies are identified                                                         0              1              2              3

6. References

a. Minimum of 4 references are cited                                                             0              1              2              3

                b. Formatted correctly                                                                    0              1              2              3

7. Presentation Overall

                a. Effective overall aesthetic/organization of poster                      0              1              2              3

                b. Flow of information is logical                                                  0              1              2              3

                c. Presenter summarized the study clearly                                   0              1              2                3

                d. Presenter answered questions well                                          0              1              2              3

                e. Presenter appearance is professional                                        0              1              2              3

                                                                                                                                        Total __________/60

Part VIII: Prior Knowledge Needed

Prior to completing this unit, students have practiced text-based inquiry in their Engineering class by developing sets of “I wonder…” inquiry questions based upon various informational texts.  In Biology class, all students have previously learned about the human impact on the environment, specifically water pollution and water quality, prior to the beginning of this inquiry unit.  90% of the students crossover between Ms. Tennant’s Biology class and Ms. Ward’s Engineering class; the remaining students have taken Biology in previous semesters.  All Engineering students will have gone on a field trip to a Charlotte Water sanitation facility two weeks prior to the implementation of the unit in order to develop prior knowledge of the process of sanitizing water.

Part IX: Student Learning Objectives

1. The student will be able to identify how humans impact the environment by reading and annotating articles about water pollution.
2. The student will be able to analyze the impact of water pollution on human health by extrapolating information from the articles about water pollution.
3. The student will be able to evaluate possible solutions collaboratively to prevent water pollutions by using evidence from research.
4. The student will be able to use design thinking collaboratively to address a water pollution issue by using textual evidence, research, data and precise details from the articles to create a scientific poster.

Part X: Text Set Description (used to analyze the purpose and goal of each text they provide to the students)

Part XI: Suggested Lesson Breakdown/Pacing

Part XII: Attachment of Student Work Examples

• Improving the Affordability of Desalination of Seawater to Meet Human Needs

• Rubric

• How Can the Harmful Effects of Hog Farms Be Reduced?

• Rubric

• Irrigation for Water

• Rubric

Part XIII: Teacher and Librarian Reflection on the Implementation of the Unit

LMS Reflection: This was the first time I had collaborated with STEM teachers in writing and co-teaching a unit.  I really enjoyed this process because I discovered how science and engineering work with literacy, while still being able to accomplish their standards.  Furthermore, I was really impressed with the outcomes of this project.  We challenged 9th grade students to do college-level work, and they succeeded.  We are going to continue to teach this project in the future.  As for future improvements, the project is really reading intensive, so students need to be prepared that they will be frontloaded with reading, but that the reading has a purpose.  The first time we did this lesson, we did not let the students know the outcome until after they had finished the reading.  The next time we teach this lesson, we would let students know from the beginning what the outcome of the project is so that they recognize that their is purpose to the reading.  Once students realized the overall purpose to the reading, they embraced the project.  Lastly, we would extend the timeline for actually creating the final product by 1-2 days.  Although students were able to create a final product in 3 days, the final products would have benefitted from more time being committed to the research process.  Overall, this is project I would gladly replicate and teach again, or use the model of this lesson as a basis for other collaborations with teachers.

Science Teacher Reflection:  I  thought our SLASL unit went really well for a first go-round. I loved being able to work together and I think we did a great job of utilizing our strengths and areas of expertise. I also think we did a good job of scaffolding inquiry for the students by building up to the anchor text, so that way it was old hat by the time we got to it and students knew what to do. I think there are some areas for improvement as well. The first would be to give the students more time, we were under a very strict time schedule and while the students were able to accomplish it, I think with an extra day or two, it would result in a much better final product. We could also be more clear on final product expectations, i.e. Poster requirements. I also think we could do a better job of explaining how a science poster session goes, so that the students felt better prepared and knew what was expected of them.

Engineering Teacher Reflection:  Overall I thought the SLASL unit was good.  I feel like the team of Schultz, Tennant, and Ward was a highly successful team and that we complimented each other really well. I thought that the project was just complicated enough for the students, they were able to successfully complete the tasks we asked but it stretched them and helped them grow.  I feel like the timing was a little tight and difficult, I think that in the future it might be interesting to scaffold some of the outcomes we asked of the students.  The poster was a large undertaking and portions of the poster could and should be broken down.  I am interested to see what and how we tackle this project again in the future.

Licensed by ISKME CC-BY 2016