Knowledge/Skill Building
🧪 Buoyancy, Stability, and Test Data
Collaboration
Effective Communication
Self Directed Learning
Academic Mindset
Content Expertise
Critical Thinking & Problem Solving
Product
Assessment
Reflection
Core Content
Project Launch
Essential Question
Submission Required
Using teacher-led demonstrations and short technical texts, students examine buoyancy, center of mass, hull shape, and fair testing methods. They analyze results from the splash tests, compare sample hull forms, and practice turning observations into measurable criteria and constraints for the regatta challenge. Students begin an individual criteria-and-constraints list that includes size, performance, and remote-control readiness.
Plan day
Day 3
Duration
135 min
Grouping
Whole Class
Steps
8 steps
Lesson plan
8 steps · 135 min| # | What teachers do |
|---|---|
| 1 | Launch the session by reconnecting students to the Splash and Sketch Social, naming the goal of using evidence to answer the essential question, and previewing that today they will study buoyancy, stability, hull shape, and fair testing to strengthen the design brief for the scaled boat model. (10 min) |
| 2 | Model buoyancy and stability with a live demonstration using contrasting sample hull forms and added weights; have students record what they notice about flotation, tipping, center of mass, and how hull shape changes performance. (20 min) |
| 3 | Guide pairs through a quick analysis of their earlier splash-test notes and sketches, asking them to identify which observations were measurable, which were vague, and which testing conditions may not have been fair or consistent. (15 min) |
| 4 | Facilitate a short technical text and diagram study in pairs on buoyancy, center of mass, hull form, and fair testing; students annotate key ideas and connect each concept to one possible boat design choice for the regatta challenge. (20 min) |
| 5 | Run a structured partner comparison of three sample hull options or images, where students discuss strengths, weaknesses, likely stability, and remote-control readiness, then rank the hulls using evidence from demonstrations and texts. (15 min) |
| 6 | Lead teams through a mini test-data protocol in which they review sample or class-generated results, sort observations into categories such as flotation, stability, speed potential, maneuverability, and build constraints, and then identify which variables most matter for competition. (20 min) |
| 7 | Have students individually draft a criteria-and-constraints list for their own scaled boat model, including at least size, flotation, stability, and future remote-control readiness, then exchange with a partner for feedback and revision. (20 min) |
| 8 | Close with a quick design-review share-out and reflection: students name one academic gain, one teamwork or self-management success, and one design criterion they now consider essential; collect lists and test evidence for the next gallery walk and research activity. (15 min) |
Preparation (10 items)
- Prepare a water-testing station or demonstration tank with towels, trays, spill control materials, and a safe space where all students can observe flotation and tipping behavior.
- Gather or fabricate contrasting sample hull forms such as flat-bottom, V-hull, and rounded hull examples, plus removable weights to demonstrate center of mass and stability changes.
- Print or organize students' splash-test notes, sketches, photos, or result sheets from the previous activity so pairs can analyze real data from their own work.
- Select short grade-appropriate technical texts or diagrams on buoyancy, center of mass, hull shape, and fair testing; prepare annotation supports or vocabulary guides for students who need them.
- Create a comparison protocol or note-catcher that prompts students to record evidence about flotation, stability, likely maneuverability, and possible fit for later remote-control integration.
- Prepare sample data sets or class data displays that show different testing outcomes and variables so students can practice identifying measurable evidence and unfair test conditions.
- Draft a criteria-and-constraints template with prompts for measurable targets such as maximum size, stable floating, balanced weight distribution, and space or structure for future electronics and remote-control systems.
- Set up reflection materials for quick check-ins and partner talk, including sentence stems for academic gains, design changes, lessons from failure, and strategies used to stay focused.
- Plan heterogeneous partnerships and discussion groupings in advance to support collaboration, participation, and peer feedback.
- Coordinate, if possible, a visible connection to community partners by displaying references, images, or design considerations related to Pioneer Works, Red Hook Initiative, Billion Oyster Project, and the local regatta context.
Student-facing instructions
You will study how buoyancy, stability, center of mass, hull shape, and fair testing affect boat performance. First, watch the demonstrations and record specific observations about what floats, what tips, and what changes when weight placement or hull shape changes. Then you will work with a partner to analyze your earlier splash-test results, look for measurable evidence, and notice where testing conditions may not have been consistent. Next, you will read and annotate short technical texts or diagrams, compare sample hull forms, and use evidence to discuss which designs seem strongest, most stable, and most ready for future remote-control features. After that, your task is to turn observations into engineering language by drafting your own criteria-and-constraints list for a scaled boat model. Your list should include measurable expectations for size, flotation, stability, and readiness for later electronics or remote-control integration. You will revise your list after partner feedback, then complete a short reflection naming one academic gain, one teamwork or self-management success, and one lesson learned from testing or failure. Use your notes, sketches, prior test results, and the provided materials to support every claim you make.