|
Next Generation Science Standards
|
3-5-ETS1-1 - Define a simple design problem reflecting a need or a want that includes specified criteria for success and constraints on materials, time, or cost.
|
- I can identify a simple repairable-toy design problem from the Chicago Public Library context, but my criteria and constraints are incomplete, unclear, or not yet connected to materials, time, or cost
- I can contribute ideas with support from peers and adults, and I can name at least one toy need or want, but I need help explaining why my choices matter or how they fit the challenge.
|
- I can define a repairable-toy design problem that includes clear criteria for success and at least one constraint related to materials, time, or cost
- I can work with my team to describe the client’s needs, compare a few possible solutions, and explain how my idea could help families repair and reuse toys.
|
- I can define a clear and usable repairable-toy design problem with specific criteria and multiple constraints, and I can connect it to toy failure points, reuse, and waste reduction
- I can collaborate to compare several solution ideas, justify a chosen direction using evidence from observations or measurements, and revise the problem statement based on feedback.
|
- I can define a precise and well-supported repairable-toy design problem that fully includes the client’s needs, success criteria, and realistic constraints on materials, time, and cost
- I can lead or co-lead my team in refining the problem, comparing strong solution options with evidence, and explaining how our chosen direction best supports repair, reuse, and reduced waste for the Chicago Public Library.
|
|
Next Generation Science Standards
|
3-5-ETS1-2 - Generate and compare multiple possible solutions to a problem based on how well each is likely to meet the criteria and constraints of the problem.
|
- I can name more than one possible repairable toy design, but I may compare them using only a few criteria or with help from my group
- I can share simple reasons for my choices, and I may need reminders to connect my ideas to the project constraints for materials, time, safety, and cost.
|
- I can generate at least two repairable toy design ideas and compare them using clear criteria and constraints, such as durability, ease of repair, and available materials
- I can use measurements, material observations, and peer feedback to explain which solution is likely to work better and why.
|
- I can generate several repairable toy solutions and compare them thoughtfully based on how well each meets the project criteria and constraints
- I can use evidence from material testing, failure-point analysis, and team discussion to justify why one design is stronger, and I can revise ideas based on feedback from others.
|
- I can independently and collaboratively generate multiple repairable toy solutions, compare them with detailed evidence, and select the best option based on criteria, constraints, and real user needs
- I can clearly justify my decision using measurements, material properties, repairability, safety, and likely durability, while also responding to peer, teacher, and client feedback to improve my choice.
|
|
Next Generation Science Standards
|
3-5-ETS1-3 - Plan and carry out fair tests in which variables are controlled and failure points are considered to identify aspects of a model or prototype that can be improved.
|
- I can help set up or follow a test plan for a toy prototype when the steps are given, but I may not yet control all the variables or notice every failure point
- I can share simple observations with my team and use teacher or peer feedback to make one small improvement to my work.
|
- I can help plan and carry out a fair test by changing one variable at a time, taking basic measurements, and looking for one or two failure points in a toy prototype
- I can explain simple material properties, listen to teammates, and use feedback to improve part of the design or repair guide.
|
- I can plan and carry out a fair test with my team by controlling variables, collecting clear data, and identifying several failure points that affect how well a repairable toy works
- I can compare test results to the project criteria and constraints, explain how material properties support repair and reuse, and revise the prototype or repair plan based on evidence and team discussion.
|
- I can independently and collaboratively design and carry out a fair test that carefully controls variables, uses accurate measurements, and identifies failure points that show where a repairable toy prototype can be improved
- I can use evidence about material properties, durability, repairability, and cost or time constraints to compare solutions, justify revisions, communicate findings clearly to the Chicago Public Library, and reflect on how my choices reduce waste and improve reuse.
|
|
Next Generation Science Standards
|
5-PS1-3 - Make observations and measurements to identify materials based on their properties.
|
- I can identify a few materials in a broken toy by making simple observations with help, and I can describe one or two visible properties such as hard/soft, flexible/rigid, smooth/rough, or waterproof/absorbent
- With support from my team, I can share my ideas about what might be causing the toy to break and name at least one part that could be repaired or reused.
|
- I can observe and measure several materials in a toy and explain how their properties help me identify them and think about repair, using words, drawings, or labels
- I can compare at least two repair ideas with my group and use feedback to choose a solution that fits basic criteria for safety, time, and available materials.
|
- I can make careful observations and measurements to identify materials in a toy, including how plastics, fabrics, fasteners, and joints behave under use
- I can work with my team to compare multiple repair solutions, explain which one is most likely to meet the criteria and constraints, and use test results to improve a prototype or repair guide.
|
- I can accurately identify and justify material choices using observations, measurements, and evidence from fair tests of durability, flexibility, strength, and repairability
- I can lead or share in collaborative decision-making to compare several design options, revise my prototype based on failure points, and clearly communicate how the material properties support a repairable, reusable toy design.
|