The goal of the third stage is to support the students' on-going changes in thinking by providing learning experiences that help coordinate their ideas with powerful ideas in science to build a scientific explanation of the anchoring phenomenon. This involves designing or adapting a number of purposeful tasks, coordinated with the important science ideas identified earlier, and the construction and use of public records such as a Summary Table to help keep track of ideas over time. Important in this stage is the revision and testing of the students' models. This stage makes up the majority of the unit as the class works to develop their explanations of the phenomenon through engagement in the practices of science.
Equity Approach #1: As students engage in tasks that introduce new science ideas and evidence, it’s critical to structure participation so that all students have consistent and meaningful opportunities to contribute. Use group roles, norms, and facilitation strategies that prevent domination by a few voices and encourage collaborative sensemaking. Provide scaffolds—such as partially completed models, sentence starters, visual aids, or multilingual supports—to help all students participate in constructing explanations and revising models. Encourage multiple modalities of engagement (e.g., drawing, gesturing, verbalizing) to broaden access and affirm diverse ways of showing understanding.
Equity Approach #2: To increase achievement, representation, and identification with science and engineering in this stage of the unit, students are afforded multiple opportunities to recognize and be recognized for the contributions they make in helping the class make sense of an idea or investigation in tasks and consider how what they are learning helps explain something about the anchoring phenomenon. Seek opportunities to explicitly and publicly provide space for other students or you to recognize their contributions. Also, consider how you can position students to reflect on their own contribution so they can recognize themselves as capable contributors to resolve their own or the class's questions. This is part of helping students develop narratives about themselves as a person who can contribute to science and engineering in ways that matter to them.
Equity Approach #3: To expand what constitutes science and engineering, commit to being flexible in how students are able to engage in tasks. Consider whether preferred student ways of communicating, through diverse communication practices like storytelling, digital media production, and perspective taking, can be encouraged as part of engaging in and completing tasks within this stage. Also, continue to seek to understand the connections students are trying to make, not as an assessment about whether their ideas are right or wrong, but instead as a potentially useful connection they are trying to make between something they previously experienced or recognized and the sensemaking in which they are currently engaged.
Equity Approach #4: Stage 3 provides a powerful opening to link scientific reasoning with students’ emerging ideas about social or environmental justice. As students analyze evidence, surface patterns, and refine models, look for ways to connect those understandings to community or societal issues. Select tasks that illuminate disparities or injustices (e.g., who is impacted, who has access to resources, what historical factors are at play) and allow students to ask, “What does this mean for our community?” or “How could science help improve this situation?” Scaffold opportunities for students to brainstorm or design actions—even if preliminary—so they begin to see science as a tool for change, not just understanding.
Provide the outline of each purposeful task that includes the introduction or highlighting of science ideas to reason with, the task launch, the procedures for the main task, and how the summary table will be updated. Each task may take one or more days. For each task, identify target Disciplinary Core Ideas (DCIs), Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs), and Crosscutting Concepts (CCCs) that will guide student sensemaking in that task. Also include an outline of how you will facilitate the mid-unit model revision. The followings are examples:
Construct a draft Summary Table that includes each task, the intended understandings from the task, and how the task helps develop an explanation for the anchoring phenomenon. We suggest that responses are written as full sentences and no more than two sentences are included in each box. Adapt the table based on the number of tasks in the unit. While the goal is for students to come to consensus statements to be included on the table, having already thought through possible responses will make facilitating the discussion easier. The following are examples:
This concludes Stage 3 of planning your MBI Unit.
Let's move on to Stage 4: Building Consensus.