Lesson Plan Day 1

Key Content Standards:

HS-PS1-8: Develop models to illustrate the changes in the composition of the nucleus of the atom and the energy released
during the processes of fission, fusion, and radioactive decay.
Key ELD Standards (Only need to include if you have English language learners in your class):
A. Collaborative: 1. Exchanging information and ideas with others through oral collaborative discussions on a
range of social and academic topics
C. Productive: 10. Writing literary and informational texts to present, describe, and explain ideas and information,
using appropriate technology
How does this lesson relate to the Big Ideas of the Unit?
A. Where is the lesson located in the Unit?
This lesson is located in the middle of Unit 3: Energy at the Intersection of Individuals and Society. The lesson preceding
this one is regarding the Standard Model and the elementary particles involved in all forces and interactions, especially
surrounding nuclear processes (the electron, neutrinos, neutrinos, photons, etc.) such as fission. The lesson after this one
would be a data analysis of the cloud chamber data and construction of a scientific argument of how lengths & widths of
tracks could help identify which particles decayed in the cloud chamber.
B. Essential Questions:
How does our understanding of particles involved in radioactive decay help us design appropriate gear to protect against
radiation? How can we actually tell the identity of decayed particles?
C. What is the overarching goal of the unit?
What role does energy play in the context of individuals, communities, and society as a whole?
How has modern civilization’s dependence on energy shaped society, the environment, and our understanding of ourselves
Learning Outcomes/Objective:
A. Lesson/Content Objective:
Using their knowledge regarding nuclear decay reactions and the various types of decay (DCI), students will create a
proposal to plan and collect data (SEP) from the Cloud Chamber lab to investigate how we can detect decay particles based
on the patterns in the trails they leave behind (CCC).
B. Understanding or Skill to be Enhanced: (What will students be able to do when class is over?)
In conducting the cloud chamber lab, students will understand that radioactive decay actually occurs in nature and we, as
scientists, can design experiments to reveal and study these decays. Then, after this class, students will be able to develop an
initial analysis of how various particles’ tracks data collected from the cloud chamber experiment can help us identify the
particles involved in decay processes.
C. Transfer Goal: (How will students use this in future lessons, units or everyday applications?)
Students will be able to apply their understanding of radioactive decay, the various tracks produced by decayed particles,
and energy involved in these processes to evaluate their everyday clothing, and more particularly the rationale behind lab
safety gear. In the next lesson, students also get to analyze and rank the energy involved in various decays (alpha, beta+/-,
gamma) in terms of momentum and the conservation of energy.

PART 2: Academic Language & Planned Assessments

Language Objective:
Students will be speaking and writing in a think-write-pair-share format both in small groups and as a whole-class
(discourse) to plan for data collection on how to identify (function) the various decay particles involved in the cloud
chamber lab (vocab) using guiding questions provided in the Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) proposal handout (syntax).
Describe additional strategies you will use in order to meet the needs of students with varying levels of language
proficiency.
● Emerging: Provide pictures and models printed on handouts, tables and graphic organizers, use of translation tool.

Part 3: Planned Formative and Summative Assessments

A. How will you uncover student thinking DURING the lesson, as they work towards the objective you clarified above?
How will this inform instructional decision making during the lesson?
What type of probing When: What will it tell you about Proposed Instructional
questions? student thinking? Moves:

Would it be safe to wear your CDT/Warmup: Think-pair-share and whole-class Allow students to share their
current outfit to a nuclear Launch of the share-out would help surface own experiences and ideas
power plant? phenomenon and students’ funds of knowledge prior to the lesson.
- To Hiroshima/Nagasaki? revisit of regarding their perception for how

1
 - To Chernobyl? Chernobyl incident safe their clothes are. Address preconceptions
- Are your clothes protecting about the protective power
you right now? of clothing and transition into
Why or why not? the goal of the lab.

Investigative Questions (IQs):
Is it possible to distinguish one
particle type from another by
observing their tracks in the
cloud chamber?
How can we design protective
gear against radiation(s)
resulting from nuclear
reactions?
After students This informal check for Revisit questions students
have an understanding will serve to assess may have regarding the
opportunity to read whether students have experimental setup and
the introduction of understood the lab directions, the investigative questions.
the cloud chamber investigations in this lab, and how
lab and their task it ties back to our phenomenon of Emphasize safety
in this lab. protective gear design. precautions and have
students include a list

What type of data would be During small group Students’ discussions for what to Go over as a class common
important to collect in order to discussions while include in proposals will help track features to look for in
answer the IQs? students are reveal: the cloud chamber: length,
- What do you see in the drafting proposals - whether they understand how width, speed, etc.
cloud chamber? a cloud chamber works (the
- What data can you collect procedures)
in this experiment? - whether they know what
- Why are you collecting types of data to collect about
these specific data? What the tracks in the cloud
scientific justifications chamber.
would make your data - whether they have
important (justification)? constructed a tool (table,
chart, diagram, etc.) to collect
data
B. Closure (think about what student samples you want to collect for analysis):
Students will use their findings and group’s data to craft a Claim-Evidence-Justification style scientific argument that
answers the Investigative Questions. This handout will be collected as students leave the classroom as an exit ticket. If
students do not finish, I will pass it back to them next class and they get to revise/finish up.
C. Artifacts of Student Understanding: What evidence of student thinking can you collect for analysis after the lesson
and to make instructional decisions for tomorrow?
Students’ collect data on their proposals: what specifically they gathered data about (widths, lengths, etc. of the tracks) and
whether students have collected enough data to conduct analysis the next day (did they actually see the tracks?
NGSS dimensions:
DCIs SEPs CCCs
(Disciplinary Core Ideas) (Science & Engineering Practices) (Crosscutting Concepts)
Nuclear fission Planning for and collecting data from a lab experiment Matter and Energy (conservation laws
apply in nuclear decay reactions)
Nuclear decay reactions Constructing explanations based on data and evidence
Patterns (trends in types of tracks)
Prerequisite Skills and Knowledge:
Describe common scientific preconceptions, errors or misunderstandings with your lesson and how you will address them.
What can you anticipate your students struggling with in terms of content?
In conducting the cloud chamber lab, students may see a series of tracks and immediately associate them with one type of
decay particle (particularly, the gamma particle). This preconception may be a result of our preceding lessons regarding the
electromagnetic spectrum, in particular, light as a form of electromagnetic radiation. I will address this preconception by
reminding students that we are studying nuclear decay and, though gamma rays can be treated as both a wave and a particle,
alpha and beta are strictly particles involved in nuclear decay. In terms of skills, students have already been accustomed to
the skills of working in their teams of 4 to generate lab proposals, scientific arguments (CEJs), and to read, create, and
interpret scientific discourse (lab manuals, models, etc.). For example, the classroom culture is that students exhibit
“conversational turn-taking” and continually improve upon their scientific models. As mentioned in the Context of Learning
piece, our class follows the ungraded format where students’ “grades” are determined by their efforts to actively engage (in
assignments, group work, etc.) and revise upon their works.

Part 4: INSTRUCTIONAL SEQUENCE: ENGAGING STUDENTS IN THE LEARNING PROCESS

Wednesday Late Start Schedule: Period 6: 1:05 - 2:25 (80 minutes)
2
Lesson Resources/Materials: Day 1 Instructional materials, dry ice, cloud chamber equipments (outlined in lab handout)
Highlighted in green: Instruction and guided practice related to the selected language demand.
Describe step-by-step what the teacher and the students will be doing during the lesson. Include questions you will use to
help make thinking visible, and code assessing questions that help you understand how students see things (UQ) and
advancing questions that help you move student learning forward (AQ). Highlight student discourse strategies in blue
Introduction (10 minutes):
Time Teacher Actions and Questions
stamp
0 min CDT/Warmup:
Would it be safe to wear your current
outfit to a nuclear power plant?
- To Hiroshima/Nagasaki?
- To Chernobyl?
- Are your clothes protecting you
right now?
5-8 Brief overview of the Chernobyl
min incident
share - What do you notice? What do
you wonder?
- How can we help prevent this
from happening to our first
responders?
10 min Phenomenon: How could we design
protective gear that would protect us
from radiation(s) resulting from
nuclear reactions?
Review the various types of decay
we’ve covered.
- How can we make
observations of them? We’ve
learned that these occur. But
how can we actually see
them?
Body of the Lesson (50 minutes):
Time Teacher Actions and Questions
stamp
15 min Instruct students to read and
annotate lab instructions and “Your
Task” directly on the handouts
15-17 Facilitate think-pair-share of key
min takeaways and overall goal of the
cloud chamber lab. Re-emphasize:
- how and why it works
- safety precautions (quick
share out!)
Exaggerate hand gesture:
- Do NOT touch dry ice!
- Wear gloves when
handling isopropyl
\ alcohol!
17-20 Go over group assignment:
min - reiterate role responsibilities
- jot down students who are
spokespeople and make
Student Actions and Possible
Responses to Thinking
Students will engage in a
think-write-pair-share for this CDT
question, which will provide them an
opportunity to evaluate the safety
measures of their everyday clothing as
well as protective lab gear in various
settings we’ve covered.
As students respond to the CDT, they
may mention the following, which will
prompt me to ask:
- “No, because of radiation.” -> What
types of radiation? What are the
particles involved?
- “Yes, because it’s thick.” -> How
does ‘thickness’ play a role in
protection? What is it protecting
you against?
- “No, because it’s radioactive.” ->
What exactly is radioactive? How
does radioactive stuff harm you?
Student Actions and Possible Responses
to Thinking
Students will annotate on their lab
handouts and highlight how to conduct the
lab safely
Students will have an opportunity to turn
and talk to their table partner to:
- summarize the main goals of the lab.
- highlight important safety precautions
prior to the lab.
Students will get into groups of 4 (with
some 3) and assign themselves
appropriate roles: Facilitator,
Spokesperson, Quality Control, Process
Analyst (shared if group of 3)
Students will engage in role-appropriate
discussion with their peers for how to plan
for their data collection:
Universal Design for Learning;
Support or Accommodations for
Identified Students
Provide pictures and diagrams
as visual aids when students
are introduced to radiation
exposure and its health effects
alongside with texts. This
supports ELLs as well as
students with 504s/IEPs as
they are able to access content
in ways they feel most
comfortable and meaningful.
(UDL 1.3) - alternatives to pure
text.
Using a live-translation tool
such as translate.it to provide
ELLs with a live transcript of
in-class conversations and
discussions. This will help ELLs
follow along any verbal
directions given by me as well
as probing questions that I will
ask. Though I will limit the use
of this tool when my ELLs are
working with their classmates in
groups, as I want to empower
their translanguaging skills.
Universal Design for
Learning; Support or
Accommodations for
Identified Students
Annotation strategies
displayed on screen to guide
students’ annotations and
information processing (UDL
3.3: Providing steps for
annotation)
- Annotation strategies will
help support English
language learners by
providing them a method
to make sense of
reading materials.
- Support students with
504 and IEP
accommodations with
guided close reading.
Verbal repetition of key
instructions from the lab
handout in addition to written
3
 changes to adhere to 504/IEP
accommodations if necessary.
- Instruct one member of the
team (1 of the 4 roles) to obtain
one pair of gloves for the
team
- Another member to retrieve
appropriate number of safety
goggles for the team.
Instruct students to complete ADI
20-30 proposals in their groups:
min - Hone in on experimental
groups, independent and
dependent variables, data
collection strategies for each
type of track (characteristics
like width and length)
After circulating, discuss as a class
30-35 good things to include in a data
min table. Instruct the spokesperson of
each group to share out.
Pass out dry ice and help students
35-60 conduct cloud chamber lab:
min - circulate using the 5 practices
(anticipate, monitor, select,
sequence, connect)
- troubleshoot why setup is not
working
- ask probing questions (next
column) to remind students
what data to collect
Closure (20 minutes): Summarize how you will bring the lesson to a close allowing students to reflect or summarize what
they learned in regards to the lesson objective. Highlight any student discourse strategies in blue. Include any end of lesson
assessment questions and activities.
Time Teacher Actions and Questions
stamp
60-75 Pass out CEJ handouts and
min Instruct students to start drafting
their individual CEJ based on data argument to address the Investigative
gathered as a group.
Circulate to encourage group
share-out for CEJs by enforcing
roles:
“Facilitator, what did your group talk
about for the claim?”
“Quality Control, how did your
group come to a consensus for
what evidence to include?”
“Process Analyst, is there anything
you would like to add? Any future
improvements?”
75-80 Instruct students to clean up lab
min stations and put materials back into -
the container. Carefully collect back
dry ice. Collect CEJs as exit tickets
as students leave the classroom.
- “What types of track will we be
looking for in the cloud chamber?”
- “How could we record and organize
the data to be analyzed later?”
- “What different characteristics may
the tracks have?”
The spokesperson from various groups
will share one characteristic their group
has indicated in their proposal. Other
teams may choose to adopt their peers’
suggestions.
Students will work as a team to conduct
the lab. Prompt students to adhere to their
roles:
- “Quality control, does every member
in your team understand the setup?”
- “Facilitator, what types of tracks
should your teammates look for?”
- “How can you predict the decay
particles based on the
characteristics of the tracks?”
- “How would you connect the
characteristics of the track in the
cloud chamber to the decay
particle?”
- “How could you analyze the data
that you’ve collected? What
patterns do you see across the
produced tracks?”
Student Actions and Possible Responses to
Thinking
Students will use the data of the tracks to
create their initial CEJ-style scientific
Question. Anticipated responses & questions particle tracks) to help aid
to pose for next class in CEJ exit tickets:
- Claim: “Yes because the tracks are
different.”, “No because the tracks look
the same.”, “Maybe. We didn’t see any
tracks.” -> Why not? What do you
think are some limitations? Why
didn’t the lab work out so well?
- Evidence: “Some tracks are
thicker/longer/curvier than others.” ->
What would these tracks tell you
about the particles that left them?
What do you know about the particles
that may inform you whether they left
longer or shorter tracks?
Justification: “Conversation of
energy/matter” -> How exactly is
matter and energy conserved here?
What do you know happened to these 504/IEPs. (UDL 5.2)
particles to leave behind tracks?
ones on handout (UDL 5.1:
Multimodality for
communication and
expression)
- Support English
language learners as
well as 504/IEP students
by emphasizing
instructions with
gestures and repetitions.
Explicit role assignments and
close monitoring to guide
intentional and productive
collaboration among students
(UDL 8.3: Creating
cooperative environments by
explicitly mentioning group
roles and expectations)
- Accommodate 504/IEP
students by establishing
roles and expectations
for group work.
Universal Design for
Learning; Support or
Accommodations for
Identified Students
Intentional designs of
tables (segmented into
Alpha, Beta, Gamma
students’ organization of
data (whether in drawing
or words) (UDL 3.3:
Providing options for
organizing and expressing
thoughts)
- Support ELLs as they
will be able to draw
out the tracks rather
than just describing
them.
Sentence starters and
guiding questions on
handout help support ELLs
and scaffold deeper
thinking for students with
4
 Lesson Day 2
Key Content Standards:
HS-PS1-8: Develop models to illustrate the changes in the composition of the nucleus of the atom and the energy released
during the processes of fission, fusion, and radioactive decay.
Key ELD Standards:
A. Collaborative: 1. Exchanging information and ideas with others through oral collaborative discussions on a
range of social and academic topics
C. Productive: 11. Justifying own arguments and evaluating others’ arguments in writing
How does this lesson relate to the Big Ideas of the Unit?
A. Where is the lesson located in the Unit?
This lesson is located after the initial launch of the phenomenon (designing better protective gear to shield against
radiation) and cloud chamber lab. Students will analyze the data from their lab to construct a group CEJ for which particles
they think could be identified from the tracks seen in the cloud chamber lab. This lesson precedes the final lesson of the
learning segment where students will be assessed on their knowledge of nuclear decay by designing a protective gear
against each type of radiation.
B. Essential Questions:
How can we use data collected from the cloud chamber experiment to support our scientific argument in response to the
Investigative Questions? (Investigative Questions below)
1) Is it possible to distinguish one particle type from another by observing their tracks in the cloud chamber?
2) How can we design protective gear against radiation(s) resulting from nuclear reactions?
C. What is the overarching goal of the unit? Same as Day 1.
D. What observable real world phenomena is being used to engage students curiosity and understanding related to
student’s funds of knowledge, lived experiences?
This lesson will tap into students’ interdisciplinary knowledge of the history of radiation effects (Chernobyl incident) and
their curiosity in what goes behind the design of lab/first-responder safety wear. How much shielding is needed to protect
yourself from decayed particles? This question aims to connect to students’ funds of knowledge regarding fashion and
whether their clothing does its job in protecting them from penetrating decayed alpha, beta, and gamma particles.
Learning Outcomes/Objective:
A. Lesson/Content Objective::
Using the data that students will have collected from Day 1 as well as their preliminary CEJ scientific arguments, they will
collaborate and construct a final group CEJ (SEP), incorporating their knowledge of nuclear decay and the various particles
involved (alpha, beta, gamma) (DCI) that cause patterned tracks in the cloud chamber lab (CCC). Students will also be able
to communicate their scientific arguments (SEP) by conducting a gallery walk and provide structured feedback to peers.
B. Understanding or Skill to be Enhanced: (What will students be able to do when class is over?)
Throughout class, students will be able to enhance their communication and argumentation skills by drafting their group
CEJ to answer Essential Questions, which involves communicating with teammates and collaborating to reach a consensus,
then providing feedback on their peers’ arguments as well using sentence starters during the gallery walk activity.
C. Transfer Goal: (How will students use this in future lessons, units or everyday applications?)
Students will not only be able to use their knowledge of nuclear decay and the characteristics of decay particles as seen in
the cloud chamber to inform their design of protective clothing in the next lesson, but they will also be able to create,
present, and revise their scientific arguments after peer feedback. The latter is a much more important and valuable skill as
students are enhancing their ability to collaborate with others, give as well as receive constructive feedback, and
communicate effectively as scientists.

PART 2: Academic Language & Planned Assessments

Language Objective:
Students will be writing (function) a Claim-Evidence-Justification scientific argument on whiteboards based on
the Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) style of argumentation session (syntax), followed by a gallery-walk feedback cycle
(discourse) in order to argue (function) whether particles involved in nuclear decay reactions (vocab) can be identified by
the tracks seen in the cloud chamber lab.
Describe additional strategies you will use in order to meet the needs of students with varying levels of language
proficiency.
● Emerging: Permit the student to use their device for Microsoft translation tool, intentional grouping of the student
with group members of various English proficiency levels (one struggling reader, 2 other more fluent readers/speakers)
when they work in groups to construct CEJ scientific arguments. Encourage usage of graphics and models as a team.

Part 3: Planned Formative and Summative Assessments

5
 A. How will you uncover student thinking DURING the lesson, as they work towards the objective you clarified above?
How will this inform instructional decision making during the lesson?
What type of probing When: What will it tell you about Proposed Instructional
questions? student thinking? Moves:

Describe what the graphic is
showing you.
- How can we tell each
decay?
- What scientific principles
or laws can we use to
justify?
CDT/Warmup: Think-pair-share and whole-class Revisit as a class the
Revisit nuclear share-out (using laser pointer) various scientific principles,
decay and would help reveal whether theories, and concepts
conservation of students can connect the data (nuclear decay, conservation
matter (nucleons) seen in the lab back to the of matter and energy, etc.)
seen in decay scientific principles we’ve covered that would help strengthen
reactions. in the past. their CEJ scientific
argument.

What patterns do you see
across your teammates’ CEJ?
During Small-group discussions among Ask probing questions to
construction of students will help reveal whether help students construct
group CEJ with they have come to a consensus stronger scientific
teammates for scientific argument. arguments: why they chose
some evidence/justification
over others.

What types of feedback do you
have for this team’s scientific
argument?
- Grows (Areas of strength)
- Glows (Areas of
improvement)
Gallery Walk Students’ feedback to other teams
would reveal whether they agree
or respectfully disagree with their
peers’ claim, evidence, and
justification. Also whether they
perceive their own argument to be
strong/weak.
Allow students more time to
give and receive feedback
from their peers depending.
Provide students an
opportunity to revise their
group CEJ after gallery
walk.

What have you learned from
other teams’ scientific
arguments that you’d like to
add to your own team’s? Why?
Post Students’ discussions with their
argumentation teammates regarding how to
session revise their scientific argument
discussions based on peer feedback and
observations. This will reveal
whether students’ understanding
of the lab has changed based on
their scientific argument revisions.
Facilitate a short class share
out of a scientific arguments
(asking two groups to
present their revised CEJ
scientific arguments and
host a compare/contrast
session)

B. Closure (think about what student samples you want to collect for analysis):
Though not a formal assessment, as a final closure activity (exit slip), students will respond to a prompt on index
cards reflecting on what they learned and revised in the CEJ scientific argument, as well as some limitations in the cloud
chamber lab they believe may have influenced their data, and thus limited their scientific argument as well.

C. Artifacts of Student Understanding: What evidence of student thinking can you collect for analysis after the lesson
and to make instructional decisions for tomorrow?
As students revise their CEJ arguments after the gallery walk, I will take pictures of their argumentations on
whiteboards. Along with the exit slip mentioned above, these two artifacts will help reveal whether students can use
evidence to support their claim that decay particles (alpha, beta, gamma) can be identified based on the cloud chamber
tracks. I will then be able to use these artifacts to determine whether I would need to revisit radioactive decay next class.

NGSS dimensions:
DCIs SEPs CCCs
(Disciplinary Core Ideas) (Science & Engineering Practices) (Crosscutting Concepts)
Nuclear decay reactions and particles Argue and Justify from Evidence Matter and Energy (conservation laws
involved in nuclear decay: apply in nuclear decay reactions)
- Alpha, Beta, Gamma Justify evidence by relating how evidence
connects to the claim using scientific Patterns (patterns in tracks)
Conservation of Matter and Energy principles, concepts, and/or theories
Cause and Effect (what causes the tracks?)
Prerequisite Skills and Knowledge:
Describe common scientific preconceptions, errors or misunderstandings with your lesson and how you will address them.
What can you anticipate your students struggling with in terms of content?
6
In constructing their CEJ scientific arguments, I anticipate that students may confuse data with evidence. For example,
students may simply copy their data table from the cloud chamber lab (from Day 1) and insert it into the “Evidence” section
of their CEJ scientific argument. While cloud chamber lab data (the characteristics of the tracks — shape, length, thickness,
etc.) are certainly important to consider, students are to analyze these data and connect them back to radioactive decay and
the particles involved (alpha, beta, gamma). In terms of content, I anticipate that students may incorrectly identify thin, long
tracks as those left behind by gamma particles and argue that because gamma particles have high energy, they will then
leave behind the longest tracks. However, gamma particles have high penetrating power but low ionizing power, which
explains why they are not visible in a cloud chamber apparatus, whose trails are produced by charged particles ionizing
alcohol vapor. I plan to address these preconceptions at the end of the lesson by revisiting the table of the various decay
particles and highlighting important takeaways from it.

Part 4: INSTRUCTIONAL SEQUENCE: ENGAGING STUDENTS IN THE LEARNING PROCESS

Friday schedule: Period 6: 12:45 - 2:15 (90 minutes)
Lesson Resources/Materials: Day 2 Instructional Materials, whiteboards, markers, index cards, proposals from Day 1.

Highlighted in green: Instruction and guided practice related to the selected language demand.
Describe step-by-step what the teacher and the students will be doing during the lesson. Include questions you will use to
help make thinking visible, and code assessing questions that help you understand how students see things (UQ) and
advancing questions that help you move student learning forward (AQ). Highlight student discourse strategies in blue

Introduction (20 minutes):

Time Teacher Actions and Questions
stamp
0-15 CDT/Warmup: How can we tell
min each decay based on the
graphic? What scientific principles
or laws can we use to justify?
After think-pair-share, review
concepts of radioactive decay,
conservation of mass and energy
- Provide students the laser
pointer to show the rest of
the class how they would
describe the graphic.
Actively accept all responses
given by students and give them
opportunities to build on one
another’s responses
(discretionary space).
Facilitate sense-making
discussions for the graphic.
Cover up the decay then ask
probing questions to guide
students to understand that we
can determine what decay
reactions occurred by knowing
the starting and ending elements
using conservation of matter.
15-20 Select one group’s video to
min display to the class. Ask class to
record data into the same table
they have from last class.
- “Check your neighbor. What
do you notice from this
group’s video? Differences
and similarities?”
For the group that uploaded the
video: What could be improved in
Student Actions and Possible Responses to Universal Design for
Thinking Learning; Support or
Accommodations for
Identified Students
Students will examine the graphic of Providing an opportunity
Thorium-232 decay series displayed on screen for students to review skills
and jot down observations in their spiral (interpreting and
notebook: describing a graphic) and
- What are the two types of decay seen scientific concepts (nuclear
here? What do you notice about the mass decay, specifically alpha
number? and beta, and the principle
of conservation of energy
Students will use the laser pointer to describe and matter). This
the decay series, highlighting important opportunity to review,
scientific principles in nuclear decay. Anticipated share out noticings helps
responses: maximize information
- “It decays into other elements.” -> Which transfer and
elements specifically? What’s different generalization. (UDL 3.4) -
about this new element? opportunities for students
- “Alpha decay is to the left and beta decay is to review and practice.
diagonally to right and down.” -> Great
observation! What specifically makes these Graphic display of
two decays different? Can you use the Thorium-232 decay chain
mass and atomic numbers to support this? that actually aligns with the
- “There are more alpha decays than beta.” lab students would have
-> What’s the difference between alpha and performed on Day 1,
beta decay? Do you “lose” the same allowing students to
amount of mass? How do you know? engage with materials in a
In between share-outs, students will have an different modality rather
opportunity to discuss with their table partner, jot than reading texts. (UDL
down their thoughts onto the spiral, and share 1.3) - graphics and visuals
out response to the class. rather than pure texts.
Students will make observations of their peers’ (UDL 3.4) - explicitly
cloud chamber lab videos (view at least one but providing students an
if time permits, show more) using the same opportunity to review what
table they have from Day 1. they would have done on
Day 1.
Students will turn and talk to their table partner
(verbal cue “Check your neighbor”) to discuss Facilitating a fishbowl
similarities and differences between what discussion by providing
they’ve observed from the video and the types students an opportunity to
of tracks they saw from their own group. While view their peers’ cloud
circulating: “What might account for these chamber lab video, give
7
 this setup? What are some tracks
that might not have been visible
due to the setup of our lab?
Body of the Lesson (55 minutes):
Time Teacher Actions and Questions
stamp
20-25 Show students a video of better
min cloud chamber setup on display
screen: Cloud Chamber
25-30 Provide students with a data
min table template to record the
various tracks seen in the video.
30-40 Pass back and instruct students
min to revise their individual CEJs
based on new data
40-60 Create group CEJ with
min teammates.
- Remind students to carefully
examine the table that
details radiation types from
the lab handout (Day 1)
60-75 Facilitate gallery walk and
min circulate to encourage
constructive feedback among
students.
Revise Group CEJ after gallery
walk based on feedback and
observations
Closure (15 minutes):
Time Teacher Actions and Questions
stamp
75-85 Fishbowl discussion:
min Spokesperson to present their
team’s CEJ with an emphasis on
data vs evidence while other
classmates actively listen:
- Evidence as analysis of data
-> Why did you choose to
include particles in your
Evidence? What is the
difference between Evidence
and Data? How does your
Evidence support your Claim?
85-90 Return to seats and notemake
min (reflect) on the potential
limitations of lab on index cards
(individually) -> collect at end.
Instruct students to complete the
backside of their individual CEJs
as an out-of-class activity (OCA).
differences? What about similarities, how would praise, and build a
that tell us whether the same particle left these collective learning
tracks?” environment. (UDL 7.1) -
optimize student autonomy
Student Actions and Possible Responses to Universal Design for
Thinking Learning; Support or
Accommodations for
Identified Students
Students will note down and use new Table template displayed
observations from a better cloud chamber lab on screen to guide
video to construct their CEJ (just so all students students how to collect
are on the same “page” and have similar data). data (UDL 5.2)
- Helps ELLs and
Students will be able to revise their individual CEJ students with 504/IEP
handout from Day 1 to include better evidence. to have an organized
way to record their
Then, similar to Day 1, students will get into observations -> assist
groups of 4 (or 3) to share out their revised their processing of
individual CEJ and collaborate with teammates to visual information.
co-construct a team CEJ on whiteboards. Ask
them probing questions (similar to Day 1). Structured gallery walk
where students get to
Spokesperson from each team will stay while view models FIRST
other members will rotate counterclockwise from before they ask questions
one lab table to the next and make observations and share glows and
for the first minute (in silence) then ask grows. (UDL 3.3) -
clarifying questions for the rest of the time. chunking information and
Glow: “I like how you included __because __.” instructions.
Grow: “I appreciate how you showed _____,
but I think a better way to present (evidence “Glows” and “grows”
/justification) is ________ because___.” sentence frames to guide
respectful and productive
Students will return to their own teams and share conversations during
what they’ve learned from other teams as well as gallery walk. (UDL 5.2) -
revise based on feedback received by the sentence structures to
spokesperson that stayed behind. guide composition.
Student Actions and Possible Responses to Universal Design for
Thinking Learning; Support or
Accommodations for
Identified Students
Students will carefully listen to their peers’ Carefully facilitating
presentations (at least 2) of CEJ scientific fishbowl discussions that
arguments, applaud their peers, and discuss allow students to
with their own teammates the following: respectfully give feedback
- How does (Team 1’s) CEJ differ from your to their peers’ works help
team’s CEJ? How did they present their foster a safer, more
evidence differently than your team? Why is positive learning
yours more or less effective as a scientific environment. (UDL 8.3) -
argument? fishbowl discussions allow
- Do you agree with (Team 2) that their students to compare and
CEJ is stronger/weaker than Team 1’s? contrast their own works
Why or why not? What are some things with others without
both team could include to make their judgment.
CEJ stronger? - This helps build
Students should point out that Evidence is confidence in students
analysis of Data (how alpha, beta, and gamma with 504/IEP plans as
particles leave different tracks and WHY) and they see their works
connects back to Claim (whether we can being acknowledged
identify these different particles in our cloud and praised by
chamber lab) classmates.
8
 Lesson Day 3
Key Content Standards:
HS-PS1-8: Develop models to illustrate the changes in the composition of the nucleus of the atom and the energy released
during the processes of fission, fusion, and radioactive decay.
Key ELD Standards:
A. Collaborative: 4. Adapting language choices to various contexts (based on task, purpose, audience, and text type)
How does this lesson relate to the Big Ideas of the Unit?
A. Where is the lesson located in the Unit?
This lesson is towards the end of the Unit on Energy as we wrap up our discussion of nuclear radiation. After students have
collected, analyzed data, and presented their scientific arguments regarding the Cloud Chamber Lab (Days 1 & 2), they will
now use their knowledge regarding the penetrating powers of decay particles to design protective gear that would help
shield against cancer-causing radiation for first responders, workers at nuclear power plants, etc. This lesson sets the
foundation for future lessons regarding cancer, how radiation is associated with high risks of getting it, and how protective
gear is crucial for protection.
B. Essential Question:
How can we design protective gear against nuclear radiation using our knowledge of decay particles, and their penetrating
powers as seen in their tracks from the cloud chamber?
C. What is the overarching goal of the unit? Same as Days 1 & 2.
D. What observable real world phenomena are being used to engage students' curiosity and understanding related to
student’s funds of knowledge, lived experiences?
The observable real-world phenomenon of nuclear disasters in the historical context of the Chernobyl incident. Students
will be able to engage in the discussion of what protective gears have to have to properly protect one’s body from the
radiation. Though not a direct correlation, students’ lived experiences
Learning Outcomes/Objective:
A. Lesson/Content Objective:
Students will be able to apply their understandings of nuclear decay reactions, the ionizing and penetrating powers of alpha,
beta, and gamma particles (DCI), as well as the patterns of tracks they’ve observed from the Cloud Chamber Lab (CCC) by
justifying their design of a protective gear that would shield against radiation (SEP), considering the interactions between
decay particles and their gears.
B. Understanding or Skill to be Enhanced: (What will students be able to do when class is over?)
Students will be able to create preliminary models for protective gear designs while considering the penetrating powers,
ionization energies, and momenta of particles involved in nuclear decay reactions (alpha, beta, gamma). Their
comprehensive models involve mainly qualitative data collected and analyzed from the cloud chamber lab (Days 1 & 2),
their revised CEJ scientific argument, and their application of various materials to shield against radiation. This lesson
serves as an opportunity for students to synthesize various scientific concepts and practices into one cumulative creative
project where they get to be the nuclear scientists proposing solutions for protective gear.
C. Transfer Goal: (How will students use this in future lessons, units or everyday applications?)
In wrapping up this lesson segment, students will be able to use their understanding of nuclear processes (specifically decay
reactions), the scientific argumentation cycle, and solution-design processes that scientists use everyday. Students will also
be able to apply this knowledge to consider damages of nuclear radiation and whether their everyday clothing is safe, since
radiation is spontaneously and naturally occurring. Besides the scientific concepts, students will be able to continue using
their modeling/designing skills for future lessons (for example, our next lesson on how radiation actually causes cancer on
the microscopic scale), which would be valuable skills for everyday applications (creating models to describe processes).

PART 2: Academic Language & Planned Assessments

Language Objective:
Students will be writing in order to propose a design (function) for a protective gear that would shield humans
from dangerous radiation, considering the three main decay particles (alpha, beta, gamma), their penetrating powers, and
momenta (vocab) in the format of a RAFT-style letter (discourse) to the Chernobyl fire department with structured tables,
graphic organizers, model scaffolds, and sentence frames that outline the Claim-Evidence-Justification argument (syntax).

Describe additional strategies you will use in order to meet the needs of students with varying levels of language
proficiency.
● Emerging: Intentionally designed RAFT worksheet to have lots of places for pictures, sketches, and diagrams so
the Emerging student can access the materials in ways they feel most comfortable; permit use of translation tool on device.

Part 3: Planned Formative and Summative Assessments

9
 A. How will you uncover student thinking DURING the lesson, as they work towards the objective you clarified above?
How will this inform instructional decision making during the lesson?
What type of probing When: What will it tell you about Proposed Instructional
questions? student thinking? Moves:

How can we design protective
gear against radiation involved
in nuclear reactions?
- What is fundamentally
different about each
material listed on the
handout?
- How would different decay
particles seen in the cloud
chamber interact
differently with each
material type?
- How do different charged
particles behave differently
in the cloud chamber?
After CDT/Warmup Think-pair-share and whole-class Emphasize certain
to remind students share-out will help reveal whether characteristics of the various
of our anchoring students require more scaffolding decay particles (alpha, beta,
phenomenon and in determining the penetrating gamma) outlined in the
why we are power of various decay particles. table.
designing
protective gear. The backside of the CEJ would Facilitate a debrief session
also help students make for the cloud chamber lab
During students’ predictions for what they would where students share out
discussions in observe if different aspects of the the various tracks they were
pairs to share out cloud chamber lab were changed: able to actually observe, and
their responses to - Is aluminum foil/paper/fabric then guide students in a
the backside of the enough to block alpha, beta, discussion to identify the
CEJ handout (from or gamma particles? How tracks and explain why
Days 1 & 2). would that affect the tracks? some particles (gamma)
didn’t leave behind tracks.

How does our prior knowledge
of momentum relate to these
decay particles?
How can we use conservation
of momentum to explain the
different tracks we observe in
the cloud chamber lab?
During whole-class Students will describe the graphic Revisit momentum
discussion, using to their table partner then, demonstration and ask
transitions selecting and sequencing probing questions to guide
(covering) on responses to facilitate a students to understand that
slides to guide whole-class discussion regarding conservation of momentum
students in how energy and momenta are can be used to justify why
discussing how “shared” in alpha and beta certain particles have higher
conservation of emissions. penetrating power after
momentum is seen being emitted in decay (see
in the lab. instructional sequence).

What would you want to
include in your protective gear
design to ensure that it shields
against all three forms of
radiation?
- What evidence and
justification do you have?
- How would you know your
protective gear is
effective? How would you
convince others?
When students As students are discussing how
independently fill different protective gears serve to
out the RAFT shield them against radiation, they
worksheet will discuss various designs of the
protective gear -> different
Also during team materials to use -> how these
share out where materials help shield against
students pitch radiation differently.
various design
ideas to their Students also reveal their
peers. creativity in designing protective
gears that are scientifically
supported by evidence from the
cloud chamber lab.
Ask more probing questions
that challenge students to
consider the interactions
between decay particles and
the particles that make up
the material (How does
using aluminum or lead help
you shield against radiation?
How exactly is the structure
of lead particles serving the
function of “blocking”
emitted particles?)
Praise all students for their
creative designs, following
up with questions that probe
them to tie back to scientific
ideas.

B. Closure (think about what student samples you want to collect for analysis):
The Protective Gear RAFT would serve as the final assessment collected at the end of this lesson segment, which
include students’ models for their protective gear, revised CEJ scientific arguments (embedded into the RAFT), as well as
nuclear reaction equations to show understanding of emitted particles.

C. Artifacts of Student Understanding: What evidence of student thinking can you collect for analysis after the lesson
and to make instructional decisions for tomorrow?
Based on students’ RAFT and scientific arguments for why they chose to design their gears in the manner they
chose, I will be able to assess whether students can 1) present a scientific argument stating that various particles can be
detected in the cloud chamber lab, 2) apply their knowledge of the penetrating powers of the particles (using conservation
of energy and momentum) to create a protective gear. Based on this assessment, I can determine whether I need to develop
future lessons that would revisit radioactive decay.
10
NGSS dimensions:
DCIs SEPs CCCs
(Disciplinary Core Ideas) (Science & Engineering Practices) (Crosscutting Concepts)
Nuclear Decay Design Solutions (Protective Gear against Structure and Functions (structure of
- Alpha, Beta, Gamma Particles Nuclear Radiation) materials and how exactly it interacts with
decay particles to block radiation)
Momentum (on a particulate scale) Create models (in conjunction with
designing protective gears) Matter and Energy (nuclear decay)

Prerequisite Skills and Knowledge:

Describe common scientific preconceptions, errors or misunderstandings with your lesson and how you will address them.
What can you anticipate your students struggling with in terms of content?
I anticipate that students may think that gamma particles are the “most dangerous” type of decay particle because of our
previous lesson about the EM spectrum and their prior knowledge that gamma rays have the greatest frequency and thus
highest energy. However, a subtle difference is that gamma particles, though have the highest penetrating power, actually
have the lowest ionization energy, which makes it the most dangerous because they are able to penetrate human skin and
damage our internal cells directly. If we expose a cell directly to alpha, beta, and gamma particles alike (without any
clothing or outer layers), then alpha particles actually cause the most damage because they have the highest ionization
power. I plan to address this preconception at the end of our cancer lesson segment (immediately following this one). As
for skills, students come in with great skills of creating models, analyzing and communicating data, and constructing
scientific arguments, which are skills that would be assessed by the RAFT assessment and continually developed
throughout future lessons.

Part 4: INSTRUCTIONAL SEQUENCE: ENGAGING STUDENTS IN THE LEARNING PROCESS

Tuesday Tutorial schedule: Period 6: 1:00 - 2:25 (85 minutes) ONLY CONSIDER FIRST 45 MINUTES
Lesson Resources/Materials: Day 3 Instructional Materials, skateboard & basketball (for demo).

Highlighted in green: Instruction and guided practice related to the selected language demand.
Describe step-by-step what the teacher and the students will be doing during the lesson. Include questions you will use to
help make thinking visible, and code assessing questions that help you understand how students see things (UQ) and
advancing questions that help you move student learning forward (AQ). Highlight student discourse strategies in blue

Introduction (10 minutes):

Time Teacher Actions and Questions
stamp
0-5 CDT:
min - Why do employees at
nuclear power plants need to
be very cautious about
personal safety?
- What specifically are they at
risk of? Why?
5-10 Instruct students to share out and
min discuss with table partners to
revise the backside of CEJ
handout (assigned at the end of
Day 2 as out-of-class activity).
- Monitor pairs using the 5
discourse practices by
reminding students to refer to
the table in their lab handout.
- “What’s different about
aluminum foil, paper, and
fabric? How would that affect
the tracks?”
Facilitate quick class share-out
(using equity sticks) where one
Student Actions and Possible Responses to Universal Design for
Thinking Learning; Support or
Accommodations for
Identified Students
Students engage in a think-write-pair-share Grounding the lesson
discourse where they get to generate some again on the basis of
thoughts regarding why they think protective culturally relevant,
gears should be used (whether they have the real-world phenomena
prior knowledge of cancer-causing factors and helps remind students of
how to shield against them). Accept all ideas why we are learning about
during class share out: protect against cancer, nuclear decay. (UDL 7.2) -
pollution, chemicals, high temperatures, etc. optimizing value and
authenticity by positioning
After initial share-out to ground all students on students as nuclear
the same discussion, they will take out their CEJ scientists -> establishes a
handout and discuss the backside of their sense of community and
handout. When circulating, some anticipated agency in the classroom.
students’ responses and teacher actions are:
- “Aluminum foil blocks the alpha and beta Table template and
particles emitted from the mantle, so no bold-faced texts on CEJ
more thick and long tracks.” -> How did you handout helps students
come to that prediction? What do you know organize and distinguish
about alpha and beta particles that justify different types of
this prediction? materials (UDL 5.2)
- “Fabric and paper will be enough to block - Helps ELLs and
alpha particles, so only thin tracks are students with 504/IEP
visible.” -> What happens to the material accommodations for
when alpha particles are “blocked”? How processing needs to
11
 student shares each row of the
handout.
Body of the Lesson (25 minutes):
Time Teacher Actions and Questions
stamp
10-20 Cloud Chamber Lab & CEJ
min Debrief (prompt students to share
what we’ve seen and learned from
the lab) -> show slide revealing
the tracks and get students to
match them with a particle.
20-30 Show slide on how momentum
min relates to the decay particles ->
think-write-pair-share:
- How is momentum of the
system conserved? Where
does momentum “come from”
and “go”?
- Class demonstration using
a skateboard and throwing
a basketball. Ask students to
draw diagrams to model
conservation of momentum
30-35 Show graphic (same slide from
min Day 1) to remind students why we
need protective gear (Chernobyl
incident) and start crafting RAFT
- What should we consider in
designing protective gear?
- How can we present a
scientific argument that could
be understood by the fire
department (our audience)?
- How could we convince
others that our design is the
most effective?
Closure (10 minutes):
Time Teacher Actions and Questions
35-42 Share out individual RAFT with
min group members and decide which
one is the best RAFT to share out
with the class.
42-45 Collect RAFT as assessment
min artifacts.
Transition into next lesson
segment regarding cancer
(connecting back to CDT) — not
detailed here
might this help us consider different easily distinguish
materials to use in our protective gear? between the different
materials.
Student Actions and Possible Responses to Universal Design for
Thinking Learning; Support or
Accommodations for
Identified Students
Think-write-pair-share to decide which tracks Providing students the
belonged to which decay particle based on discretionary space to
observation and analysis. Volunteers use the share their understanding
laser pointer to match the tracks to its with the class using the
corresponding decay particle. Then, another laser pointer. Then,
round of turn-and-talk to “agree or respectfully prompting peers to provide
disagree and why.” Students will be prompted constructive feedback in
to revise their notes based on new the form of agree or
understanding. disagree. (UDL 7.1, 8.3,
8.4) - positioning students
During demonstration, students will model how as change agents (nuclear
momentum is conserved in the situation of me scientists) to optimize
(higher mass) throwing the basketball (much student autonomy while
lower mass): also fostering a community
- “Momentum is not conserved.” -> Why of learners and feedback
not? What momentum does the givers and receivers (agree
person-basketball system start with? or respectfully disagree)
How does direction play a role?
- “The basketball has higher energy and Class demonstration of
momentum than the person who threw it.” conservation of momentum
-> Is momentum still conserved in this in the case of nuclear
case? How does total momentum and decay involving nucleus
energy get distributed? (massive) and emitting
particles (much less mass).
During individual draft of RAFT, ask students to (UDL 2.5) - using physical
consider nuclear decay particles, momenta, objects to demonstrate
and other scientific ideas in the checklist while nuclear processes provide
creating a design for the protective gear. How ELLs and students with
can you, as the director of the NRC, processing needs an
convince others to adopt your protective alternative way to
gear design? conceptualize conservation
of momentum in nuclear
decay.
Student Actions and Possible Responses to Universal Design for
Thinking Learning; Support or
Accommodations for
Identified Students
Students will share their individual RAFT with Allowing students to share
group members, adhering to the same role first with group members
assignments they have from Day 1. Then, according to assigned
students self-arrange the best RAFT their team roles before sharing with
has to share out to the class. If time permits, whole class helps foster
allow 2-3 fishbowl discussions for the best collaboration. (UDL 8.3) -
protective gear design. Back-pocket questions: roles and back-pocket
- Which design have we decided here, questions help encourage
scientists? What else could we add to peer-to-peer interactions
this protective gear design to make it and collaboration.
even better? - Support 504/IEP
- Did every group member get to share? students by setting
Which design(s) did we pass up on? roles and routines for
Why so? group work.
12
References

References
The Composition of Nuclear Protection Suits.
Cloud Chamber
The California English Language Development Standards: Kindergarten Through Grade 12
Science Argument on a Whiteboard Poster

Day 1 Resources:
ADI Laboratory Investigation Proposal A: Descriptive Studies
1) Sampson, Victor. Student Lab Manual for Argument-Driven Inquiry in Physics, Volume 1.
National Science Teachers Association, 2017.
Carolina Biological Supply Company. Observing Ionizing Radiation Using a Cloud Chamber. Carolina
Chemonstrations, 2021. Carolina,
https://www.carolina.com/nuclear-chemistry/observing-ionizing-radiation-using-a-cloud-chamber-kit/84
0374.pr?question=cloud+chamber.
https://www.carolina.com/nuclear-chemistry/observing-ionizing-radiation-using-a-cloud-chamber-digital-resources/840374
EBK.pr
Dickson, Mickey

13
 Brainstorm/Breakdown
Day 1: Cloud Chamber Launch
- If there are so many nuclear decay particles shooting at you right now, why aren’t we hurt?
- How is our clothing, the classroom, or even just your skin protecting us from these high-energy particles?
- R1: scientific concept: nuclear decay; investigation: cloud chamber lab and how introducing a layer may
change tracks of decayed particles.
- ADI Cloud Chamber proposal (could we possibly do this the day before so students jump right into the lab)
- Connection to students’ funds of knowledge and real-life experiences:
- Are your clothing good enough at protecting you against the alpha and beta particles that were emitted in
radioactive decay processes?
- R2: model of students’ various clothing/protective gear help tie in the relevance piece and enable students
to engage in the learning process in multimodal ways (drawing, writing, describing).
- Cloud chamber lab itself:
- Redesign worksheet so they are not given much information on the traces left behind by decayed
particles.
- OCA: Video/picture of cloud chamber and have students analyze tracks/trails left behind
- What particles can you predict that resulted in these tracks being left behind by the decayed particles?
- What do we notice about the various tracks?

Day 2: Data Analysis + Short CEJ Presentation

- Data analysis: pool data from various groups: (longest tracks, thickest tracks, curviest tracks, which one resulted
from which decayed particles)

- Sources of error?
- Have students write a lab report (CEJ) that support their claim regarding the particle’s identity based on the tracks
they left behind

14
 - justification: Conservation of mass and energy: that the decayed particle will leave behind tracks of
varying sizes and lengths because of the energy they had coming in.
- Present findings (CEJ) as a group to class. (Maybe just do a quick one by picking and choosing different groups
that have different findings from the same tracks).
- One glow and one grow from the proposal, findings, and analysis? Data analysis + uncertainty, etc.
- Are your clothes safe enough to prevent these particles from ionizing you?
- CFU on

Day 3: Momentum launch (large -> small scale).

- Momentum launchl
- Cloud Chamber Experiment, Cloudylabs »
Momentum & Energy conservation
- Revisit model/assessment after considering
momentum
- CFU on Momentum

- Actual math behind small particles requires a lot of math and high-level physics, so we will look at
collisions of large-scale objects (cars!) and then scale down to understand the interactions at a particular
level.
- assessment feedback for all 3 samples.

15
APPENDIX

BIG IDEAS:
● Think of big ideas as what you would like your students to be able to tell you after the unit or lesson is over. Use the
language and ideas that you would like students in your class to be able to use.

● Big ideas are rarely confined to an individual lesson. If you are writing plans for a single lesson, you may need to
include ideas from other lessons to write a coherent statement of the big ideas you want your students to
understand.

● Here is a great resource for how standards are connected and interdependent. Coherence Map

● Checklist for Big Ideas:

Do you have a coherent summary of the most important patterns, models, and principles for your topic?
Big ideas should express the key patterns and explanations in student language, not just name them.

Have you used important disciplinary ideas from the California Content Standards or Progressions
Documents?

Is the language (e.g., vocabulary level) appropriate for students in your class? Big ideas don’t include
every vocabulary word in the unit (though they should include the most important ones), and they don’t
have many specific examples. The language you use in your summary of big ideas should be the
language you would like your students to use.

The word “students” does NOT belong in your statement of big ideas. Think of big ideas as what you
would like your students to be able to tell you after the unit or lesson is over.

Does the big idea address the cultural and linguistic diversity of your students? How?

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:

● Checklist for Objectives for Student Learning.

Does each objective describe student learning—something that your students will be able to do after the
class is over—not just a teaching activity to be completed in class? It should be observable and
measurable, therefore guide your instruction and assessment. For example, “Sketch graphs showing key
features of functions by hand and using technology,” is a good learning activity, but not a good objective. It
doesn’t say what students will learn to do as a result of engaging in the learning experience.

Does each objective incorporate aspects of the Standards for Mathematical Practice (SMP)? In what ways
does a focus on a key SMP support students in developing targeted understandings?

Task 3: speak to AL use in video clip or student work

- how to inform instruction for next step (

16