​The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 6-8 do not meet expectations that they are designed to elicit direct, observable evidence for three-dimensional learning in the instructional materials. Each lesson is comprised of multiple investigations. The Teacher Edition provides one or more learning objectives for each investigation, but the objective(s) for each investigation are rarely three-dimensional, as they frequently exclude the crosscutting concepts. Further, the formative assessment tasks do not consistently reveal student learning and use of the three dimensions.

Additionally, the Lesson Planner in the Teacher Edition indicates formative assessments located within each investigation, but the formative assessments are not clearly labeled within the lesson materials. During the investigation, teachers assess what students understand about the investigations through class discussions, student worksheets and assignments, or student presentations. The Reflecting on What You’ve Done section at the end of lessons and investigations provides an Exit Slip question in addition to multiple questions students can answer as part of a class discussion or in their notebooks.

Examples where materials do not have three-dimensional learning objectives, nor include formative assessment tasks addressing three dimensions:

• In Unit: Genes and Molecular Machines, Lesson 4: Cellular Reproduction, Investigation 4.5, the learning objective is for students to “compare and contrast mitosis and meiosis using a Venn diagram.” Students answer a series of questions about the two processes (DCI-LS3.B-M1) before making their own Venn diagram. They compare their answers with a partner then in a class discussion before making any revisions. The Exit Slip at the end of the investigation asks, “Where do cells come from?” (DCI-LS3.B-M1). The learning objective did not include the three dimensions and the formative tasks did not assess student understanding of the three dimensions.
• In Unit: Matter and Its Interactions, Lesson 5: Building Blocks of Matter, Investigation 5.2, the learning objective is for students to “Use physical models to describe the atomic composition of simple molecules.” Students use a molecular model set to construct molecules for N2 and H20, drawing and labeling each in their science notebook. Students compare similarities and differences between the two molecules (DCI-PS1.A-M1). The Exit Slip at the end of the investigation, asks “How does a compound differ from an element?” (DCI-PS1.A-M1). The learning objective did not include the three dimensions and the formative tasks did not assess student understanding of the three dimensions.
• In Unit: Electricity, Waves, and Information Transfer, Lesson 9: The Electric Body, Investigation 9.2, the learning objectives are for students to “Describe the types of stimuli the nervous system respond to” and “Investigate factors that affect the time it takes for the body to respond to a stimulus.” Students plan and conduct an investigation (SEP-INV-M5) related to reaction time (using different hands, while distracted, visual or auditory stimuli, etc.), performing multiple trials and recording their predictions, hypotheses, data, and claims in their science notebooks. Students answer questions about factors affecting reaction time (DCI-LS1.D-M1) in the Student Guide and share answers during a class discussion. The learning objective did not include the three dimensions and the formative tasks did not assess student understanding of the three dimensions.
• In Unit: Space Systems Exploration, Lesson 8: Gravity’s Role in the Universe, Investigation 8.1, the learning objective is for students to “Use a model to examine the relationships between relative body mass and the speed of an orbiting body.” Students swing a Moon Orbiter over their heads, recording the number of revolutions in a specified time period. Students repeat the task multiple times and calculate the average orbital period (SEP-INV-M4). Students then add different numbers of washers to change the mass to model the relationship between the mass of a planet and the speed of the orbiting body. Students analyze their data and compare it to the provided Planet and Moon Data before answering questions in the Student Guide (DCI-PS2.B-M2). The learning objective did not include the three dimensions and the formative tasks did not assess student understanding of the three dimensions.

​The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 6-8 do not meet expectations that they are designed to elicit direct, observable evidence of the three-dimensional learning in the instructional materials. The Teacher Edition does not provide specific learning objectives for each unit; rather, it provides a list (usually 10-15) performance expectations intended to be met by the end of the unit.

The materials include two types of summative assessments: performance assessments and written assessments. Written assessments include multiple-choice and constructed-response questions. The final lesson in each unit serves as a performance assessment for the unit and is intended for students to apply learning from the unit as a performance task that includes research, preparing proposals or posters, and class presentations. Across each content area, neither type of assessment is consistently designed to measure student knowledge and use of all three dimensions, frequently omitting the crosscutting concepts.

Examples where the summative assessment tests and tasks are not three-dimensional in design and do not fully assess the targeted three-dimensional learning objectives (listed as multiple PEs):

• In Unit: Earth’s Dynamic Systems, Lesson 12: Assessment, the Teacher Edition shows alignment to seven performance expectations within the assessments and the alignment at the start of the unit includes 11 PEs; the ETS PEs are not included in the summative assessments and not all of the other seven PEs are fully assessed across the two assessments. During the performance assessment, students are guided by questions in the Student Guide as they research historic earthquakes and volcanic eruptions and develop a proposal for geodynamic event preparedness. The written assessment includes ten questions which do not fully assess the three-dimensional learning objectives (PEs) for the unit. Across the two assessments, several DCIs and SEPs are assessed.  Assessment of the CCCs is not evident within the targeted PEs. 
• In Unit: Electricity, Waves, and Information Transfer, Lesson 10: Assessment, The Teacher Edition shows alignment to 10 performance expectations, while the alignment at the start of the unit includes 13 PEs; three of the ETS PEs are not included in the summative assessments and not all of the other 10 PEs are fully assessed across the two assessments. During the performance assessment, students are guided by questions in the Student Guide as they research neurological disorders and support a claim related to how the researched disorder could affect job function. The written assessment includes 10 questions, yet they do not fully assess the three-dimensional learning objectives (PEs) for the unit. Across the two assessments, several DCIs, SEPs, and the CCC of cause and effect are assessed.  Assessment of the CCCs is not evident within the targeted PEs.
• In Unit: Genes and Molecular Machines, Lesson 11: Assessment, The Teacher Edition shows alignment to six performance expectations, but not all of the PEs are fully assessed across the two assessments. During the performance assessment, students answer questions in the Student Guide as they research a technology used to develop or influence a desired trait of an organism; students create a poster showing what they learned about the technology and how it was used to influence the trait. The written assessment includes 15 questions, yet they do not fully assess the three-dimensional learning objectives (PEs) for the unit. Across the two assessments, several DCIs, SEPs, and the CCC of cause and effect are assessed.  Assessment of the CCCs is not evident within the targeted PEs.
• In Unit: Ecosystems and Their Interactions: Lesson 11: Assessment, The Teacher Edition shows alignment to 12 performance expectations while the alignment at the start of the unit includes 13 PEs; the assessment also includes MS-LS1-7, not listed at the start of  the unit. Not all of the other 13 PEs are fully assessed across the two assessments. During the performance assessment, students answer questions in the Student Guide as they research a threat to an ecosystem service in the area they live, create a plan for reducing the threat in their area, and create a poster to report their findings to the class. The written assessment includes 12 questions, yet they do not fully assess the three-dimensional learning objectives (PEs) for the unit. Across the two assessments, several DCIs and SEPs area assessed.  Assessment of the CCCs is not evident within the targeted PEs.

​The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 6-8 do not meet expectations that phenomena and/or problems in the series are presented to students as directly as possible. Few lessons and associated investigations present phenomena designed for students to explain. When phenomena are present, they are typically presented to students in a reading passage as an example or to illustrate a larger science concept or topic without further student engagement. When problems are present, students are generally given the problem and then directed to solve the provided problem. Only two instances were found where phenomena are presented as directly as possible. This is a missed opportunity for the materials to consistently present phenomena and problems more directly to support students' meaningful participation.

Example of a phenomenon presented in the materials, but not as directly as possible:

• In Unit: Genes and Molecular Machines, Lesson 9: Selection, the lesson phenomenon is how multiple varieties of cabbages have been derived from a single wild cabbage species. This phenomenon is presented to students with a picture of wild cabbage and five varieties (e.g., broccoli, kale, cauliflower, etc.) with the Focus Question, “How do natural and artificial selection change a population over time?” A more direct presentation is possible for students to visualize the different varieties.

Examples of problems presented in the materials, but not as directly as possible:

• In Unit: Ecosystem and their Interactions, Lesson 2: Ecosystem Organization, Investigation 2.3, the problem is focused on determining if an organism is a good choice for a zoo exhibit. After researching an assigned organism’s habitat, population, community, and ecosystem, students read how ecosystems are organized. Students then view a picture of a sloth bear exhibit at a zoo and the teacher tells students to determine if their organism would be a good candidate for a zoo exhibit. A more direct presentation is possible for students to visualize requirements for zoo exhibits.
• In Unit: Ecosystems and Their Interactions, Lesson 9: Biodiversity, Investigation 9.2, the problem is focused on determining whether an organism should be reintroduced to part of its historic range. Students view a picture of freshwater mussels which have been reintroduced to parts of their historic range. The teacher (and Step 1 in the Procedure) tells students to determine whether their assigned organism should be reintroduced to a part of its historic range. A more direct presentation of species reintroduction is possible.
• In Unit: Electricity, Waves, and Information Transfer Unit, Lesson 5: Transforming and Transferring Energy, Investigation 5.2, the problem is focused on designing a device to maximize or minimize thermal energy from containers (used in the prior investigation). The problem is presented to students by reading text accompanied by three pictures (i.e., person in coat and gloves, pot of water boiling, mug of hot chocolate) and instructions in Step 1 of the procedure.  A more direct presentation of thermal energy transfer is possible.
• In Unit: Energy, Forces, and Motion, Lesson 8: Transforming Energy, the problem is focused on designing and building a prototype roller coaster that has the highest velocity, the largest loop, or the highest hills. This problem is presented to students with a picture of one loop in a roller coaster and the Focus Question, “How do energy transformations inform the design of a roller coaster?” A more direct presentation is possible for students to visualize the motion and full design of a roller coaster.
• In Unit: Space Systems Exploration, Lesson 9: The Challenges of Space Exploration, the problem is focused on designing solutions to support humans living in space. This problem is presented to students with a picture of mars and the Focus Question, “What are the criteria and constraints for humans to live in space?” A more direct presentation is possible for students to help students visualize requirements for space habitation.

​The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 6-8 do not meet expectations that phenomena and/or problems drive individual lessons or activities using key elements of all three dimensions. Materials provide few investigations across the series using phenomena or problems to drive student learning. For the majority of investigations, a science topic is used as the basis for learning.

When a phenomenon is present, the materials consistently provide students with an explanation of the phenomenon in the next step or paragraph. This represents a missed opportunity for students to engage with all three dimensions to make sense of the phenomenon. Problems drive learning within individual investigations more frequently than phenomena. However, when problems are used to drive student learning, key elements of all three dimensions are not incorporated, and most often exclude the CCCs.

Examples of lessons that use a problem to drive learning, but do not use key elements from all three dimensions, most often excluding CCCs:

• In Unit: Matter and Its Interactions, Lesson 8: Releasing Energy, Investigation 8.2, students design a calcium chloride instant hot pack to produce heat on demand. While engaging in this design problem (DCI-ETS1.B-E1, SEP-INV-M5, SEP-CEDS-M7), students apply prior learning related to chemical reactions releasing energy (DCI-PS1.B-M3).
• In Unit: Ecosystems and their Interactions, Lesson 2: Ecosystem Organization, Investigation 2.3, the problem is focused on determining which organisms are good choices for zoo exhibits (DCI-ETS1.A-E1). Students select or are assigned an animal. They research the animal’s habitat, population characteristics, and community (DCI-LS2.A.M1). Students identify what is needed to house their animal at a zoo (what does the animal need, what does the zoo need to do to meet that need - and is it possible/practical/cost efficient to do so). Students make a poster with a claim as to whether their animal would be a good choice as a zoo exhibit and support the claim with evidence about the animal’s habitat, needs, and the costs/constraints for the zoo (SEP-CEDS-M2).
• In Unit: Ecosystems and Their Interactions, Lesson 9: Biodiversity, Investigation 9.2, the problem is focused on determining whether an organism should be reintroduced to part of its historic range. Students research the organism assigned by the teacher and its role in an ecosystem, the proposed area for reintroduction, other reintroductions, and the stakeholders with an interest or concern in the problem. Students research and identify criteria that would be met for a successful reintroduction (e.g., food, shelter, impact on livestock). Students research and identify constraints (size of range, cost, stakeholders) that would impact the reintroduction plan. Students gather evidence to support their argument for whether the organism would be a good choice for reintroduction (SEP-ARG-M3, DCI-LS2.C-M1). Students make a poster to communicate their solution.

​The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 6-8 do not meet expectations that materials intentionally leverage students’ prior knowledge and experiences related to phenomena or problems. Lesson 1 of each unit is designed as a pre-assessment for each unit. Students are provided with a Focus Question and often an image related to that focus question, but the image is often not connected to a phenomenon students are asked to explain. The Getting Started section asks students additional questions related to the focus of the unit. If a phenomenon is present, these questions may elicit prior knowledge and experience about the phenomenon, but the questions generally elicit prior knowledge related to the broader science concept. Additionally, an investigation in Lesson 1 of a unit frequently has students begin a KWL chart related to the topic of the unit, but it is not specific to the phenomenon or problem, if present.

Examples where the materials do not elicit or leverage students’ prior knowledge or experience related to the phenomenon or problem:

• In Unit: Genes and Molecular Machines, Lesson 9: Selection, the phenomenon is multiple varieties of cabbages having been derived from a single wild cabbage species. This phenomenon is presented to students with a picture of wild cabbage and five varieties (e.g., broccoli, kale, cauliflower, etc.) and the Focus Question, “How do natural and artificial selection change a population over time?” Student prior knowledge or experience specific to cabbage varieties is not elicited or leveraged.
• In Unit: Matter and Its Interactions, Lesson 8: Releasing Energy, Investigation 8.2, the problem is for students to design a calcium chloride instant hot pack to produce heat on demand. Before engaging in this design problem, students learned in prior investigations about chemical reactions releasing energy, but prior knowledge or experience specific to hot packs was not elicited or leveraged.
• In Unit: Ecosystem and their Interactions, Lesson 2: Ecosystem Organization, Investigation 2.3, the problem is focused on determining if an organism is a good choice for a zoo exhibit. Student prior knowledge or experience specific to zoos and designing zoo habitats is not elicited or leveraged.
• In Unit: Ecosystems and Their Interactions, Lesson 9: Biodiversity, Investigation 9.2, the problem is focused on determining whether an organism should be reintroduced to part of its historic range. Student prior knowledge or experience specific to species reintroduction is not elicited or leveraged.

The materials infrequently elicit students’ prior knowledge and experience related to a phenomenon or problem, but when they do it is typically through a class discussion or students recording their ideas in their science notebooks. These student ideas are not leveraged in subsequent learning as students make sense of the phenomenon or solve the problem; often the explanation or solution immediately follows in the next step of the lesson or investigation. There are minimal instances where materials only elicit student ideas and experiences related to phenomena or problems, however, the elicitation is not found consistently across the series.

Examples where the materials elicit, but do not leverage students’ prior knowledge or experience related to the phenomenon or problem:

• In Unit: Matter and Interactions, Lesson 4: Just a Phase, Getting Started, the phenomenon is the scent of peppermint oil is able to leave an open bottle and distribute through the classroom. Student prior knowledge and understanding of this phenomenon is elicited by students describing the phenomenon and drawing a diagram of what they think happened with the peppermint oil particles. While student drawings are revisited and modified during a subsequent lesson in the unit, their understandings are not leveraged during the other lessons.
• In Unit: Space Systems Exploration, Lesson 9: The Challenges of Space Exploration, the problem is focused on designing solutions to support humans living in space. Student prior knowledge and understanding of this problem is elicited by a series of questions from the lesson that students discuss with partners and record in their science notebook. While student ideas are revisited and modified during subsequent lessons in the unit, their understandings are not leveraged during the other lessons.

​The instructional materials reviewed for Grades 6-8 do not meet expectations that materials embed phenomena or problems across multiple lessons (or investigations) for students to use and build knowledge of all three dimensions. Across the series, the materials provide few lessons using phenomena or problems to drive student learning of the three dimensions across multiple investigations. For the majority of lessons, a science topic is used as the basis for learning.

Each unit consists of multiple lessons; Lesson 1 of each unit is designed as a pre-assessment for each unit and the final lesson of the unit is intended to be a summative assessment. Each lesson provides a Focus Question and often an image related to that focus question. The Focus Question is rarely connected to a specific phenomenon that students are asked to explain or a problem students are asked to solve, but rather it is connected to a broader science concept or topic. As a result, the investigations within the lesson are typically connected to the science topic of the lesson, but not to a specific phenomenon or problem.

When a phenomenon is present, the materials consistently provide students with an explanation of the phenomenon in the next step or paragraph. Multiple examples of phenomena driving learning were not found. In two instances, problems drive learning across multiple investigations in a lesson. Additionally, when problems are used to drive student learning, key elements of all three dimensions are not incorporated, and most often exclude the CCCs.

Examples of lessons using a problem to connect multiple investigations for students, but do not use and build knowledge of all three dimensions:

• In Unit: Energy, Forces, and Motion, Lesson 8: Transforming Energy, students design and build a prototype roller coaster. In Investigation 8.1, students follow procedures to build a basic roller coaster, then test how various heights will affect marble velocity (SEP-INV-M1, DCI-PS3.A-M2). In Investigation 8.2, students sketch a design, build a prototype, test whether their roller coaster design works, and plan modifications (SEP-INV-M1, DCI-ETS1.C-M1). After completing the design, students answer questions about energy transfers (DCI-PS3.A-M1, DCI-PS3.A-M2) and read several articles and answer questions.
• In Unit: Space Systems Exploration, Lesson 9: The Challenges of Space Exploration, the problem is focused on humans living in space. In Investigation 9.1, students read scientific text and explore particular criteria and constraints regarding living in space, particularly on mars (SEP-INFO-M1, DCI-ETS1.A-M1). They present their group’s list to the class and accept feedback, as well as, provide feedback to other groups (SEP-ARG-M3). In Investigation 9.2, students brainstorm challenges of living in space (e.g., ground support, technology needed for moving around, supporting life, etc.) and gather additional information from assigned readings to support an argument for or against habitation in space (SEP-ARG-E6 ). In Investigation 9.3, students define criteria and constraints related to their specific topic for supporting life in space (ENG-INFLU-M1, ENG-INFLU-M2).