Assumption: Class periods are approximately 45–55 minutes, and students have permission to collect non-identifying school waste data through audits, observations, surveys, or cafeteria/classroom counts using safe procedures. ═══════════════════════════════ 1. UNIT OVERVIEW ═══════════════════════════════ * Driving Question: How can our school reduce its plastic waste, and what evidence proves it worked? This question is engaging because students investigate a real problem they can see in their own school: plastic bottles, wrappers, utensils, bags, packaging, and cafeteria waste. It is open-ended because there is no single correct solution; students must gather evidence, design an intervention, test it, and prove whether it worked. Over four weeks, students act as environmental scientists and STEM problem-solvers. They begin by auditing plastic waste in the school, identify patterns and causes, design a realistic waste-reduction action, collect before-and-after data, and present an evidence-based recommendation to an authentic school audience. Alignment note: The unit directly addresses data collection and analysis through waste audits and surveys; argument from evidence through claims supported by baseline and post-intervention data; human impact on ecosystems through investigation of plastic pollution; and persuasive communication through a final public presentation or campaign proposal. Key vocabulary and concepts students will master: * Plastic waste * Single-use plastic * Waste audit * Baseline data * Intervention * Variable * Data table * Graph * Trend * Percent change * Claim, evidence, reasoning * Ecosystem impact * Microplastics * Reduce, reuse, recycle * Sustainability * Persuasive communication * Authentic audience ═══════════════════════════════ 2. AUTHENTIC FINAL PRODUCT ═══════════════════════════════ Students create a public “Plastic Waste Reduction Proposal and Evidence Report” for the school. The product explains a specific plastic-waste problem, presents data showing the problem, describes the student-designed intervention, analyzes whether the intervention worked, and recommends next steps for the school. Authentic audience: * School principal or assistant principal * Cafeteria manager or custodial staff * Student council or environmental club * Families, teachers, or school community members The final product demonstrates mastery because students must: * Collect and organize real data from the school setting. * Analyze patterns using graphs, averages, totals, or percent change. * Explain how plastic waste affects ecosystems. * Make a clear argument using claim, evidence, and reasoning. * Persuade a real audience to take action based on evidence. Acceptable product format options for student choice: * Slide presentation with data visuals and recommendation * Scientific poster or infographic with oral pitch * Short video campaign with evidence report attached * Written proposal to school leaders with graphs and action plan ═══════════════════════════════ 3. MILESTONE TIMELINE ═══════════════════════════════ Milestone 1: Launch the Problem and Define Success Approximate timeframe: Week 1, Class Periods 1–3 Student-facing goal: Students understand the driving question, explore why plastic waste matters, and define what “reduced plastic waste” would look like at school. Key activities and mini-lessons: * Entry event: View school photos, cafeteria observations, or a short video clip about plastic pollution. * Class discussion: Where do we see plastic waste in our school? * Mini-lesson: Human impacts on ecosystems, including plastic pollution and microplastics. * Introduce final product, audience, and rubric. * Teams choose a focus area, such as cafeteria trays, water bottles, snack wrappers, plastic utensils, classroom bins, or hallway trash. * Mini-lesson: What counts as evidence? Difference between opinion, observation, and measurable data. Formative check or deliverable: * Team problem statement: “Our team will investigate plastic waste from ____ because ____.” * Initial success criteria: “We will know our solution worked if ____ changes by ____.” How it builds toward the final product: Students identify the specific school-based plastic waste problem they will investigate and begin thinking about evidence they will need to prove whether a solution works. --- Milestone 2: Collect Baseline Data Approximate timeframe: Week 1, Class Period 4 through Week 2, Class Period 6 Student-facing goal: Students collect reliable baseline data to show the current amount, type, or source of plastic waste before any solution is tested. Key activities and mini-lessons: * Mini-lesson: Designing a fair and safe data collection method. * Teacher models sample methods: * Count plastic bottles in recycling bins. * Tally plastic utensils used during one lunch period. * Survey students about reusable bottle use. * Observe how many snack wrappers are thrown away. * Weigh or estimate clean, sorted plastic waste if safe and approved. * Teams design a data collection plan: * What will we measure? * Where will we collect data? * When and how often? * Who will record it? * How will we stay safe and respectful? * Mini-lesson: Organizing data in tables. * Students collect data over multiple observations when possible. Formative check or deliverable: * Approved data collection plan * Baseline data table * One preliminary graph or visual How it builds toward the final product: The baseline data becomes the “before” evidence students will compare against later to prove whether their intervention made a difference. --- Milestone 3: Analyze Causes and Design an Intervention Approximate timeframe: Week 2, Class Periods 7–9 Student-facing goal: Students use their baseline data to identify a likely cause of plastic waste and design a realistic action to reduce it. Key activities and mini-lessons: * Mini-lesson: Reading graphs and identifying patterns. * Teams analyze: * Which plastic item appears most often? * Where does most plastic waste happen? * What behaviors seem connected to the problem? * What might be easy or difficult to change? * Mini-lesson: Claim, evidence, reasoning. * Students develop a cause statement: * “Our data suggests that ____ is a major source of plastic waste because ____.” * Teams brainstorm interventions and evaluate feasibility. * Possible interventions: * Reusable water bottle reminder campaign * “No plastic utensil unless requested” lunchroom sign * Classroom snack wrapper reduction challenge * Plastic bottle recycling station redesign * Awareness posters near trash and recycling bins * Morning announcement campaign * Student pledge or tracking challenge * Mini-lesson: Persuasive communication and audience awareness. Formative check or deliverable: * Intervention design brief including: * Problem * Baseline evidence * Proposed action * Target audience * Predicted outcome * How success will be measured How it builds toward the final product: Students move from data collection to action. They design the solution they will test and decide what post-intervention evidence they need. --- Milestone 4: Implement the Intervention and Collect Post-Data Approximate timeframe: Week 3, Class Periods 10–12 Student-facing goal: Students test their intervention in the school and collect evidence to determine whether plastic waste changed. Key activities and mini-lessons: * Teams finalize campaign materials, signs, announcements, surveys, or procedures. * Teacher reviews plans for safety, accuracy, and school appropriateness. * Students implement the intervention for a short test period. * Mini-lesson: Comparing before-and-after data. * Teams collect post-intervention data using the same or similar method as the baseline. * Students calculate: * Total change * Difference between before and after * Percent change when appropriate * Patterns or unexpected results Formative check or deliverable: * Intervention evidence log * Post-intervention data table * Before-and-after graph How it builds toward the final product: Students now have evidence to answer the second half of the driving question: “What evidence proves it worked?” --- Milestone 5: Build and Present the Evidence-Based Recommendation Approximate timeframe: Week 4, Class Periods 13–16 Student-facing goal: Students create and present a clear, persuasive final product that answers the driving question using evidence. Key activities and mini-lessons: * Mini-lesson: Strong scientific argument structure: * Claim: What should the school do? * Evidence: What data supports it? * Reasoning: Why does the evidence prove the solution worked or needs revision? * Mini-lesson: Designing clear graphs and visuals. * Mini-lesson: Speaking to an authentic audience. * Teams draft final products. * Peer critique using “Glow, Grow, Question.” * Revision time focused on strengthening evidence and recommendation. * Final presentation to authentic audience. * Audience feedback or Q&A. Formative check or deliverable: * Draft presentation, poster, video, or proposal * Peer feedback form * Final public product and presentation How it builds toward the final product: Students synthesize the full learning journey into a polished answer to the driving question, using real school data and persuasive communication. ═══════════════════════════════ 4. ASSESSMENT RUBRIC OUTLINE ═══════════════════════════════ Rubric Criteria and Performance Levels ``` Criterion 1: Data Collection and Reliability Descriptor: Students collect relevant, organized, and reasonably reliable data connected to the school’s plastic waste problem. Emerging: Data is missing, incomplete, or not clearly connected to the problem. Developing: Data is collected but may be inconsistent, limited, or missing important details. Proficient: Data is relevant, organized, and collected using a clear method. Exemplary: Data is thorough, organized, repeated when possible, and collected using a method that improves reliability and fairness. Criterion 2: Data Analysis and Use of Evidence Descriptor: Students analyze data accurately and use it to explain whether plastic waste changed. Emerging: Little or no analysis is provided; conclusions are mostly opinion-based. Developing: Some analysis is attempted, but graphs, calculations, or conclusions may be unclear or incomplete. Proficient: Data is analyzed accurately using tables, graphs, comparisons, or percent change. Exemplary: Analysis is accurate, detailed, and clearly explains trends, limitations, and what the data proves or does not prove. Criterion 3: Understanding Human Impact on Ecosystems Descriptor: Students explain how plastic waste affects ecosystems and why reducing it matters. Emerging: Explanation of environmental impact is vague, inaccurate, or missing. Developing: Explanation shows basic understanding but lacks detail or clear connection to the school problem. Proficient: Explanation accurately connects plastic waste to ecosystem impacts. Exemplary: Explanation is accurate, specific, and connects local school actions to broader environmental consequences. Criterion 4: Argument from Evidence Descriptor: Students make a clear claim supported by evidence and reasoning. Emerging: Claim is unclear or unsupported by evidence. Developing: Claim is present but evidence or reasoning is weak, incomplete, or loosely connected. Proficient: Claim is clear and supported with relevant evidence and logical reasoning. Exemplary: Claim is compelling, evidence is well-chosen, reasoning is strong, and limitations or counterpoints are addressed. Criterion 5: Persuasive Communication and Audience Impact Descriptor: Students communicate their recommendation clearly and persuasively for a real school audience. Emerging: Product is difficult to follow or not appropriate for the audience. Developing: Product communicates basic ideas but lacks clarity, organization, or persuasive impact. Proficient: Product is clear, organized, audience-appropriate, and persuasive. Exemplary: Product is polished, engaging, visually effective, and likely to influence real school action. ``` ═══════════════════════════════ 5. REFLECTION CHECKPOINTS ═══════════════════════════════ Start-of-Unit Reflection Timing: Class Period 1 or 2 Prompts: * What plastic waste do I notice most often at our school? * What do I already believe about plastic waste, and what evidence would I need to confirm or challenge that belief? * How can student choices affect the environment beyond our classroom? Suggested protocol: * Think-Pair-Share: Students write first, discuss with a partner, then share one idea with the class. --- Midpoint Reflection Timing: After baseline data analysis, around Class Period 8 or 9 Prompts: * What pattern or surprise did our data reveal? * How has our thinking changed since the start of the unit? * What evidence do we still need in order to prove whether our solution works? Suggested protocol: * Peer Data Walk: Teams display their baseline graph and receive sticky-note feedback using: * “I notice…” * “I wonder…” * “One suggestion is…” --- End-of-Unit Reflection Timing: After final presentations, Class Period 16 Prompts: * What claim can we now make about reducing plastic waste at our school? * What evidence best supports our claim? * What would we change if we had more time to improve our intervention or collect stronger data? Suggested protocol: * Self-Assessment Using the Rubric: Students highlight the rubric level they believe they reached for each criterion and write one piece of evidence to justify each rating. ═══════════════════════════════ 6. DIFFERENTIATION & EXTENSION ═══════════════════════════════ Scaffolds for students who need support: * Provide data collection templates with labeled columns, sentence starters, and sample tally charts. * Offer claim-evidence-reasoning frames, such as: * “Our claim is ____.” * “The evidence that supports this is ____.” * “This proves or suggests ____ because ____.” * Use small-group mini-conferences to help teams narrow overly broad problems into measurable questions. * Provide graphing support, including pre-labeled axes or digital graphing tools. Extension challenges for students ready for more: * Calculate percent reduction and compare results across different locations or grade levels. * Research the life cycle of one plastic item and include its broader environmental impact in the final recommendation. * Create a cost-benefit analysis for the proposed schoolwide solution. * Design a longer-term monitoring plan that another class or student council could continue after the unit ends. Student voice and choice: Students choose their team’s focus area, data collection method, intervention strategy, and final product format, as long as each choice helps answer the driving question and produces evidence of impact.