Students investigate the essential question, What happens to a plant when it gets water and sunlight versus when it does not?, by planning and conducting a hands-on seedling study that makes plant growth visible over time. The purpose is for students to build content expertise and critical thinking as they compare light, dark, watered, and unwatered conditions, connect their findings to real places like Death Valley, and explain cause and effect using evidence from their journals and plant cups. With support from Community Schools and teachers, students collaborate, reflect through quick journal check-ins, partner turn-and-talks, and a gallery walk, and communicate their learning through a before-and-after investigation board and a paired oral defense.

Students will plan and carry out a simple investigation to answer, “What happens to a plant when it gets water and sunlight versus when it does not?” and use observations from seedlings to make evidence-based claims about plant growth and health. They will record changes in quick plant journal check-ins, compare before-and-after drawings or photos on an investigation board, and explain what changed using words, labels, and sentence strips. Working with classmates, teachers, and Community Schools partners, students will practice shared decision-making, partner turn-and-talks, and a short oral defense to communicate one observation, one claim, and one question with care and clarity. They will also reflect through gallery walk feedback and use peer and teacher comments to revise their thinking about how water, sunlight, and habitat conditions help plants survive.

Students will create plant investigation journals with dated drawings, labels, and quick check-ins that show how seedlings change when they get sunlight and water versus when they do not. In pairs, they will care for plant cups, build simple observation pages or plant models, and prepare a before-and-after investigation board with drawings or photos, sentence strips, and evidence from light and shade conditions. Reflection products will include partner turn-and-talk notes and gallery walk feedback with one kind note and one science comment for a classmate. The final products will be a class display for teachers and Community Schools partners and a short pair oral defense using plant cups and journals to share one observation, one evidence-based claim, and one question about water and sunlight.

Launch the project with a See-Think-Wonder using photos of a Death Valley super bloom and two real plant cups—one healthy and one weak from low light or low water—to spark the question, “What happens to a plant when it gets water and sunlight versus when it does not?” Students work with partners to share observations, feelings, and questions, then help co-plan a simple class investigation by choosing what will stay the same and what will change in their plant cups. Teachers and Community Schools staff can join the launch to model careful observation and help students set up the seedlings that will be revisited in quick plant journal check-ins throughout the project. End the launch by starting a class investigation board with prediction drawings, which will later connect to the before-and-after display, oral defense, and gallery walk with kind notes and science comments.

Students can host a “Plant Investigation Museum” for Community Schools staff, teachers, and families, displaying their plant cups, journals, and a before-and-after investigation board that compares seedlings grown with sunlight, shade, and different water conditions. During the exhibition, pairs give a short oral defense using their plant cups and journals to share one observation, one evidence-based claim, and one question connected to the essential question about what happens when plants get water and sunlight versus when they do not. A simple gallery walk lets visitors and classmates study plant models or observation pages, while students leave one kind note and one science comment for a peer. This celebration highlights communication, collaboration, and careful science thinking through real evidence from the two-week investigation.