Need more information? Click on this icon throughout the page for more details!
In the final stage, students argue for their ideas in writing to convince their peers and the teacher that their explanation of the anchoring phenomenon is scientifically valid. They do this through peer review and revision. Students engage in conversations with peers about the strengths and weaknesses of their arguments as they work to improve their final products. In this way, the revisions provide another opportunity for students to learn from one another as they consider and critique their peers’ explanations.
As you explore the different sections below, examples are provided from two different units: Lyme disease (high school) and The Colorado Plateau (middle school). You can use the arrows to move between the two examples.
As the summative assessment of the unit, students write individual evidence-based explanations of the phenomenon using the public records available (including the Gotta Have Checklist and Summary Table).
Describe how you will facilitate and scaffold the writing of the evidence-based explanations. See below for an example.
Provide a final evidence-based explanation at a level you would expect from your students at the end of the unit. The evidence-based explanation builds on the target explanation by including specific evidence from the tasks. See below for examples.
Students provide feedback to their peers’ written explanations based on specific criteria.
Describe how you will facilitate and scaffold the peer review process. See below for an example.
Students consider the feedback they received during peer review to finalize their evidence-based explanation.
Describe how you will facilitate the students’ reflection on the peer review feedback and the revision of their written explanations. See below for an example.
Provide an evaluation rubric for your final evidence-based explanation. See below for an example.