Deliverable

✍️ How Might We and Design Brief Draft

Gather and organize original data Develop an inquiry plan Analyze and interpret data Develop as a multilingual Engage in discussion HS-ETS1-1 Plan an investigation or test a design individually and c... Design, evaluate, and/or refine a solution to a complex r... 6.3.12.GeoGI.1 Compare and evaluate competing arguments or design soluti... Evaluate competing design solutions to a real-world probl... 6.3.12.EconGE.1 6.3.12.HistoryCA.12 Humanity faces major global challenges today, such as the... Product Core Content Community Partners Essential Question Critique and Revision Submission Required Grading Required

Teams convert their evidence clusters and matrix into one focused How Might We statement and a first design brief. The brief must name the target users, infection-prevention problem, historical and statistical evidence, Spanish or multilingual access needs, and success measures for both the policy/campaign direction and the prototype direction. Students use a template that requires concise problem framing rather than jumping to a finished solution.

Plan day

Day 10

Duration

80 min

Grouping

Small Group

Steps

6 steps

Lesson plan

6 steps · 80 min

#	What teachers do
1	Launch the drafting session by posting the design brief criteria, reviewing the goal for today, and having teams pull out their evidence clusters, tradeoff matrix, Black Death comparison notes, clinic/community feedback, and data displays. Ask each team to name one user group, one infection-prevention problem, and one statistic they believe must appear in their brief. (10 min)
2	Guide teams through a focused How Might We protocol: list 2-3 possible problem statements, test each one against target users, evidence strength, multilingual access needs, and feasibility for both a policy/campaign and prototype direction, then select one final How Might We statement. (15 min)
3	Have teams complete the first half of the design brief template by drafting the problem definition, target users, historical parallels, modern outbreak evidence, community partner concerns, and quantitative indicators that show why the problem matters now. (20 min)
4	Have teams complete the second half of the design brief template by identifying criteria, constraints, tradeoffs, ethical considerations, language-access requirements, and two development pathways: one for the policy brief/public health campaign and one for the infection-prevention prototype. (20 min)
5	Run a midpoint partner swap in which one member stays to explain the team’s draft while another visits a nearby team to listen for clarity, missing evidence, over-specific solutions, and weak success measures; teams capture at least three revision notes directly on the draft. (10 min)
6	Close with a revision sprint and exit share: teams revise their How Might We statement and design brief for posting in the next activity’s gallery walk, then complete a brief team note identifying one unanswered question, one needed source or stakeholder input, and one section they want feedback on tomorrow. (5 min)

Preparation (8 items)

Prepare a design brief template with required sections: How Might We statement, target users, infection-prevention problem, historical comparison evidence, modern outbreak evidence, statistics, community partner concerns, criteria, constraints, tradeoffs, ethical considerations, multilingual access needs, policy/campaign direction, prototype direction, success measures, and next inquiry steps.
Print or organize team evidence packets so each group has access to its criteria/constraints/tradeoff matrix, Black Death comparison notes, outbreak research notes, data tables or graphs, and community or clinic feedback from earlier activities.
Create and post a concise drafting checklist aligned to the activity goals so students can verify that their brief includes both qualitative and quantitative criteria, realistic constraints, and measurable success indicators.
Prepare sentence stems and examples for writing How Might We statements, naming tradeoffs, citing historical parallels, and describing multilingual access needs, including Spanish-language communication examples where relevant.
Arrange the room for team drafting and quick partner swaps, with chart paper or display space available so briefs can be posted immediately in the next activity for response cards and critique.
Highlight or excerpt community partner comments from the nurse, epidemiologist, or infection-control perspective so teams can reference realistic user needs, infection-control priorities, and implementation constraints while drafting.
Prepare facilitator conferencing prompts such as: Who is most affected? What evidence proves this is urgent? What pattern from the Black Death helps explain this issue? What measurable outcome would show success? How will Spanish or multilingual users access this solution?
Gather drafting materials including printed templates, sticky notes, markers, laptops or tablets if available, bilingual dictionaries or translation supports, and highlighters for marking evidence used in the brief.

Student-facing instructions

You will work with your team to turn your research and evidence into one clear How Might We statement and a first design brief. Use your evidence cluster, criteria/constraints/tradeoff matrix, Black Death comparison notes, outbreak research, data charts, and community or clinic feedback. Your task is to define the problem before designing a final solution. Start by drafting 2-3 possible How Might We statements, then choose the one that best names your target users, the infection-prevention challenge, and the boundaries of your work. Next, complete the design brief template. Include: who your users are, what problem they face, what historical patterns connect to your modern outbreak, what statistics show the problem is urgent, what community concerns matter, what criteria and constraints must guide your work, what tradeoffs or ethical issues you must consider, and what Spanish or other multilingual access needs your audience has. Then outline two possible pathways your team will continue developing: a policy brief or public health campaign direction and a prototype direction. For each pathway, include success measures. During the partner swap, explain your draft clearly, listen to another team’s feedback, and record at least three revision notes. Your goal is to leave class with a posted draft that is ready for tomorrow’s critique and revision cycle.

Success criteria

Your team is done when you have: 1) written one focused How Might We statement that names a specific user group and infection-prevention problem; 2) completed all major sections of the design brief template; 3) included at least one historical parallel from the Black Death comparison and at least two relevant statistics or data points from your outbreak research; 4) identified clear criteria, constraints, tradeoffs, and at least one ethical consideration; 5) included specific Spanish or multilingual access needs for your audience; 6) described both a policy/campaign direction and a prototype direction; 7) written measurable success indicators for both directions; 8) recorded at least three peer revision notes from the partner swap; and 9) identified one next inquiry question or needed stakeholder feedback item for the next phase.

Facilitator notes

Push teams to frame the problem, not pitch a finished invention too early. A common pitfall is writing a How Might We statement that already contains the solution; redirect with prompts like, 'What user need comes before that idea?' and 'Could multiple solutions fit this statement?' Encourage students to use evidence visibly by underlining where each statistic, historical parallel, and community concern appears in the brief. If teams struggle to narrow scope, have them choose one priority user group and one setting such as clinic waiting rooms, schools, transit, or households. For multilingual access, move beyond 'translate it into Spanish' by asking how audience language needs affect instructions, visuals, usability, trust, and distribution. Differentiate by offering sentence frames, color-coded templates, bilingual vocabulary supports, and a reduced requirement of one pathway drafted first for teams that need pacing support, while extending advanced teams by asking them to quantify thresholds for success and justify tradeoffs more explicitly. During the partner swap, remind students to give feedback on clarity, evidence, and feasibility rather than personal preference. Keep the final 5 minutes protected so teams can revise and leave a clean draft ready for the next gallery walk and response card protocol.

Resources

No resources yet