Shared by Nimisha · Free to use as a template on AssessmentWiz.
Type
project_assessment
Rubric
Criteria
Name: Ecosystem Model: Food Web & Matter Cycle
Below: Constructs a model that includes fewer than 4 organisms with arrows that are missing or incorrectly directed. Labels 0–1 organisms with trophic roles. Matter-cycle section is absent or shows matter moving in only one direction with no connection to nonliving components. Includes 0–1 annotation notes. The disruption location is not identified on the model.
Meets: Constructs an annotated model that includes a food web with at least 6 organisms across at least 3 trophic levels, with directional arrows correctly showing the direction of energy flow. Labels at least 4 organisms with their trophic role (producer, primary consumer, secondary consumer, decomposer). Includes a matter-cycle section tracing at least 2 matter pathways (e.g., carbon and water) connecting at least 3 living organisms to at least 2 nonliving components, with labeled arrows. Includes at least 4 annotation notes that accurately explain what is happening at specific transfer points in the model. Marks the location where the disruption entered the system.
Weight: 35%
Exceeds: Constructs an annotated model that includes all 'meets' requirements and additionally shows at least 8 organisms across 4 or more trophic levels. Traces 3 or more matter pathways with labeled arrows. Includes 6 or more annotation notes that use precise science vocabulary (e.g., 'photosynthesis,' 'cellular respiration,' 'decomposition,' 'nutrient cycling') and explain both the before-disruption and after-disruption state of at least 2 pathways. Model is organized so that energy-flow arrows and matter-cycle arrows are visually distinguishable (e.g., different colors or line styles).
Approaching: Constructs a model that includes a food web with 4–5 organisms across 2 trophic levels, with arrows present but 1–2 arrows pointing in the wrong direction or missing labels. Labels 2–3 organisms with trophic roles. Includes a matter-cycle section that traces 1 matter pathway connecting at least 2 living organisms to 1 nonliving component, with some arrows labeled. Includes 2–3 annotation notes, at least 1 of which contains a factual inaccuracy. The disruption location is marked but not explained.
Below: Writes fewer than 150 words or does not follow the CER structure. States an opinion or general observation in place of a science claim. Cites 0–1 data points and does not include source names. Reasoning section is absent or consists of 1 sentence that does not connect evidence to the claim. Uses 0–1 science vocabulary terms. Does not name an alternative explanation.
Meets: Writes a science argument of at least 250 words organized into 3–4 paragraphs using the CER framework. States a clear claim that identifies the disruption and names a cascading effect on at least 2 other organisms or components. Cites at least 3 specific data points or facts with the source name included in the text, drawn from at least 2 different credible sources. Writes a reasoning section of at least 4 sentences that connects each piece of evidence to the claim using at least 4 science vocabulary terms (e.g., energy flow, trophic level, matter cycling, biotic, abiotic, cascading effect). Names at least 1 alternative explanation and provides 1 evidence-based response to it.
Weight: 35%
Exceeds: Writes a science argument of at least 350 words that meets all 'meets' requirements and additionally cites 5 or more specific data points from 3 or more credible sources, including at least 1 primary source (e.g., a government agency report, university study, or scientific organization data). Synthesizes evidence from multiple sources to support the claim rather than listing each source separately. Identifies 2 or more alternative explanations, responds to each with specific evidence, and explains why the primary claim is still the most supported explanation. Uses 6 or more accurate science vocabulary terms integrated naturally into sentences.
Approaching: Writes a science argument of 150–249 words that includes a claim but does not clearly name the cascading effect on other organisms. Cites 1–2 data points with source names, but at least 1 claim in the argument is unsupported by evidence. Writes a reasoning section of 2–3 sentences that restates the evidence without fully explaining how it connects to the claim. Uses 2–3 science vocabulary terms, at least 1 of which is used inaccurately. Names an alternative explanation but does not respond to it with evidence.
Name: Ecosystem Summit Presentation: Communication & Evidence Use
Below: Presents for fewer than 2 minutes or reads directly from the written argument without referencing the model. Does not point to the model at any point. Does not state a clear claim or share any specific data points verbally. Does not answer audience questions or responds with 'I don't know' without attempting to connect to any evidence from the research. Model is not visible to the audience during the presentation.
Meets: Presents for 3–5 minutes and points to at least 2 specific locations on the displayed model while explaining energy-flow or matter-cycle pathways. States the claim clearly in 1–2 sentences. Shares at least 2 specific data points verbally as evidence during the presentation. Names 1 alternative explanation and responds to it. Answers at least 2 audience questions with responses that include at least 1 specific fact or data point per answer. Speaks loudly enough for the audience to hear without being asked to repeat.
Weight: 20%
Exceeds: Presents for 3–5 minutes and meets all 'meets' requirements. Additionally points to 4 or more specific locations on the model while explaining distinct pathways. Shares 3 or more specific data points verbally during the presentation. Responds to audience questions by referencing both the written argument and the model simultaneously in at least 1 answer. Proactively invites a question from the audience rather than waiting. Adjusts explanation language based on an audience member's question (e.g., simplifies or adds detail in response to the question asked).
Approaching: Presents for 2–3 minutes and points to 1 location on the model. States a claim but does not clearly connect it to evidence during the verbal presentation. Shares 1 data point verbally. Does not name an alternative explanation during the presentation. Answers 1–2 audience questions but responses consist of restating the claim without adding specific evidence. Audience must ask the presenter to speak up or repeat at least once.
Name: Scientific Thinking: Reflection & Revision
Below: Completes 0–2 of the 4 milestone check-in reflection prompts, or responses consist of 3 words or fewer per prompt. Shows no identifiable revision between draft and final versions of the model or argument. Post-Summit self-reflection is absent or consists of 1 sentence that does not name a specific strength or area for improvement.
Meets: Completes all 4 milestone check-in reflection prompts with responses of at least 2 sentences each that name a specific idea, source, or part of the model — not just a general feeling. Incorporates at least 1 specific revision to the model or argument based on written peer feedback received during the Gallery Walk or CER Peer Review (revision is identifiable by comparing the draft and final versions). Completes the post-Summit self-reflection naming 1 specific strength and 1 specific area for future improvement.
Weight: 10%
Exceeds: Completes all 4 milestone check-in reflections with responses of at least 3 sentences each that include a specific connection between the reflection and a change made to the model or argument. Incorporates at least 2 identifiable revisions based on peer feedback, and in the post-Summit self-reflection, explains in 3 or more sentences what the revision was, why the peer feedback prompted it, and how the change improved the final product. Post-Summit reflection names 1 question the student still wants to investigate based on audience feedback received.
Approaching: Completes 3 of the 4 milestone check-in reflection prompts with responses of 1 sentence each that describe a general feeling (e.g., 'I thought it was interesting') without naming a specific idea or source. Shows 1 revision to the model or argument but the revision is cosmetic (e.g., neatening handwriting or changing a color) rather than content-based. Completes the post-Summit self-reflection but names only a general strength or improvement without specifics.
Resources
Name: National Park Service: Yellowstone Wolf Project
Type: website
Description: Official NPS data and reports on wolf reintroduction in Yellowstone, including population counts and observed ecosystem changes — an excellent primary source for students choosing this disruption.
Name: NOAA Ocean Service: Coral Reef Ecosystem
Type: website
Description: Government agency data on coral reef health, bleaching events, and species interactions — credible source for students investigating coral reef disruptions.
Name: NASA Climate Kids: The Carbon Cycle
Type: website
Description: Age-appropriate, visually clear explanation of the carbon cycle with diagrams showing connections between living and nonliving components — useful for building the matter-cycle layer of the model.
Name: National Geographic Kids: Ecosystems
Type: website
Description: Accessible articles on a wide range of ecosystems with photos and key vocabulary — useful for identifying organisms and understanding food web relationships.
Name: Google Drawings or Google Slides
Type: tool
Description: Free digital tools students can use to create, layer, color-code, and annotate their ecosystem models — allows easy revision and digital submission.
Name: Canva for Education
Type: tool
Description: Free design platform with diagram and infographic templates that students can adapt to build their food web and matter-cycle model — good for students who want a visually polished product.
Description: A half-page reference card with sentence frames for each section of the Claim-Evidence-Reasoning argument — reduces cognitive load so students can focus on science thinking rather than writing structure.
Description: A one-page visual reference showing the carbon, water, and nitrogen cycles with labeled arrows — students use this as a guide when adding matter pathways to their ecosystem model.
Standards
NGSS MS-LS2-2: Construct an explanation that predicts patterns of interactions among organisms across multiple ecosystems, including competitive, predatory, and mutually beneficial relationships.
NGSS MS-LS2-3: Develop a model to describe the cycling of matter and flow of energy among living and nonliving parts of an ecosystem.
NGSS MS-LS2-4: Construct an argument supported by empirical evidence that changes to physical or biological components of an ecosystem affect populations.
Milestones
Due: End of Day 1
Title: Choose Your Ecosystem & Gather Evidence
Number: 1
Deliverable: A completed Ecosystem Research Organizer (1 page, teacher-provided template) that includes: (1) your chosen ecosystem and disruption event written in 1–2 sentences, (2) 3 credible sources listed with title, author or organization, and URL or location, (3) 2–3 bullet-point notes from each source, and (4) one specific data point or statistic from each source that you plan to use in your argument.
Description: Students browse a curated list of 8–10 real-world ecosystem disruption events (provided by the teacher) and select one that interests them. Options include wolf reintroduction in Yellowstone, coral bleaching in the Great Barrier Reef, sea otter decline in Pacific kelp forests, deforestation in the Amazon, or zebra mussel invasion in the Great Lakes. Students use school databases (e.g., National Geographic Kids, NOAA, National Park Service, NASA Climate Kids) and the provided Research Organizer graphic organizer to take structured notes. Students evaluate each source using the 3-question Source Check: (1) Who wrote this? (2) Is it based on real observations or data? (3) When was it published? Students write their disruption event choice in one sentence at the top of their organizer using this frame: 'In [ecosystem], [disruption event] caused changes to [biotic or abiotic component].'
Check In Prompt: Which source surprised you the most? What did you expect to find about your ecosystem before you started researching, and what is one thing the data showed you that you did not expect?
Feedback Method: Exit-ticket share: Before leaving class, each student reads their disruption sentence aloud to one partner. The partner gives one 'I understand' (something that is clear) and one 'I wonder' (a question they still have). Students record the 'I wonder' at the bottom of their organizer to guide Day 2 research.
Due: End of Day 3
Title: Build Your Annotated Food Web & Matter-Cycle Model
Number: 2
Deliverable: A hand-drawn or digitally created model (minimum 8.5 x 11 inches or equivalent digital canvas) that includes: (1) a food web showing at least 6 organisms across at least 3 trophic levels with labeled arrows showing direction of energy flow, (2) at least 2 organisms labeled with their role (producer, primary consumer, secondary consumer, or decomposer), (3) a matter-cycle section showing at least 2 matter pathways (e.g., carbon, water, or nitrogen) with labeled arrows connecting at least 3 living organisms to at least 2 nonliving components, (4) a minimum of 4 annotation sticky notes or text boxes explaining what is happening at specific points in the model, and (5) one highlighted or circled location on the model showing where the disruption event entered the system.
Description: Students use their Day 1 research notes to draft their ecosystem model across Days 2 and 3. On Day 2, students sketch the food web first using pencil on paper or a digital tool of their choice (Google Slides, Google Drawings, Canva for Education, or hand-drawn). They use directional arrows to show energy flow ('energy moves from prey to predator') and label each organism with its trophic role. On Day 3, students add the matter-cycle layer to the same model, drawing arrows that show how matter (carbon, water, or nitrogen) moves between organisms and nonliving parts such as soil, atmosphere, and water. Students add annotation notes (minimum 4) explaining key transfer points in their own words. The teacher circulates with a 'Model Checklist' that students self-check before submitting. Students choose whether to work digitally or by hand and whether to show the carbon cycle, water cycle, nitrogen cycle, or a combination.
Check In Prompt: Look at your model so far. Point to one arrow and explain out loud — to yourself or a partner — exactly what matter or energy is moving, where it came from, and where it is going. Was that easy or hard to explain? What does that tell you about what you still need to add or fix?
Feedback Method: Model Gallery Walk (10 minutes at end of Day 3): Students post their models on their desk or wall. Every student receives 3 sticky notes — 2 green (one labeled 'Energy flow is clear here' and one labeled 'Matter cycle is clear here') and 1 yellow (labeled 'I am not sure about this arrow or label'). Students walk silently and place sticky notes on 3 different peers' models. Students return to their own model, read the feedback, and write 1 revision goal on the bottom of their model before taking it home or saving it digitally.
Due: End of Day 4
Title: Write Your Science Argument
Number: 3
Deliverable: A written science argument of 3–4 paragraphs (minimum 250 words) structured using the CER framework: (1) Claim paragraph — 2–3 sentences stating how the disruption affected the ecosystem, (2) Evidence paragraph — cites at least 3 specific data points or facts from at least 2 different credible sources with source names included in the text, (3) Reasoning paragraph — explains in 4–6 sentences how the evidence connects to the claim using science vocabulary (energy flow, matter cycling, trophic level, producer, consumer, decomposer, abiotic, biotic, cascading effect), and (4) a final sentence or short paragraph that names at least 1 alternative explanation or counterargument and responds to it with evidence.
Description: Students use their completed model and research notes to write their science argument. The teacher opens Day 4 with a 10-minute mini-lesson on the CER framework using a shared example unrelated to students' chosen ecosystems (e.g., a brief model argument about a fictional forest fire). Students then draft independently using a CER sentence-starter reference card provided by the teacher. Students are encouraged to reference their annotated model directly in their writing (e.g., 'As shown in my food web model, when wolves were removed from Yellowstone...'). Students must include at least 1 alternative explanation — for example, acknowledging that climate change, not just one species change, may have also contributed to observed effects. Students self-edit using a 3-step checklist: (1) Did I state a clear claim? (2) Did I cite at least 3 data points with source names? (3) Did I address a counterargument? Students choose whether to write by hand or type their argument.
Check In Prompt: Read your reasoning paragraph out loud. Does every sentence connect your evidence back to your claim? If someone who had never seen your model read only your argument, would they understand the cascading effect? What is one sentence you want to make stronger before the Ecosystem Summit?
Feedback Method: Structured Peer Review using the 'CER Feedback Protocol': Students exchange written arguments with one assigned partner. The reviewer reads the argument and completes a half-page feedback form with 3 prompts: (1) 'The claim I can identify is ___ and it is / is not clearly stated because ___,' (2) 'I found ___ (number) data points cited with source names — the strongest one is ___,' and (3) 'One place where the reasoning could be stronger is ___ because ___.' Partners have 8 minutes to write feedback, then 4 minutes to discuss face-to-face. Students use the written feedback to make at least 1 specific revision to their argument before the final presentation.
Due: End of Day 5
Title: Ecosystem Summit: Present Your Model & Argument
Number: 4
Deliverable: A 3–5 minute oral presentation to an audience that includes classmates and at least 1 invited guest (e.g., a parent, another teacher, school librarian, or virtual guest scientist). The presentation must: (1) display the completed annotated model visibly (printed, posted, or shown digitally on a screen), (2) walk the audience through at least 2 specific energy-flow or matter-cycle pathways on the model using a pointer or finger, (3) state the claim, share 2 specific data points as evidence, and explain the cascading effect, (4) name 1 alternative explanation and respond to it, and (5) answer at least 2 audience questions with evidence-based responses.
Description: Day 5 is the Ecosystem Summit — a structured science presentation event. The classroom is arranged in a science-fair style layout or a gallery-talk format where students stand beside their posted model. Invited guests and classmates rotate through presentations in small groups of 3–4 listeners per presenter. Each presenter has 3–5 minutes to present, followed by 2 minutes of Q&A. The teacher provides each audience member (including student peers) with a 3-question Audience Response Card: (1) 'One thing I learned from this ecosystem model is ___,' (2) 'One question I still have is ___,' and (3) 'One connection I can make to another ecosystem we studied is ___.' After all presentations, students complete a 5-minute written self-reflection. Students choose how to display their model — printed large, shown on a tablet, projected on a screen, or posted on the wall — and how to organize their talking points (note cards, a printed outline, or memory).
Check In Prompt: After your presentation, read the Audience Response Cards you received. What is one thing your audience understood clearly? What is one question they asked that you want to research more? If you could redo one part of your model or argument based on today's feedback, what would it be and why?
Feedback Method: Audience Response Cards (collected from all listeners) are returned to the presenter after the Summit. Students staple all cards to the back of their final written argument and submit the complete packet — model, argument, and audience cards — as their final portfolio. The teacher uses the audience cards as additional formative data alongside the rubric.
Description
Have you ever wondered where the atoms in your body came from, or where they will go after you die? In this project, you will become an Ecosystem Detective investigating a real-world ecosystem disruption — such as wolf reintroduction in Yellowstone, coral bleaching in the Great Barrier Reef, or deforestation in the Amazon. You will build an annotated food web and matter-cycle model that shows exactly how energy flows and matter cycles through living and nonliving parts of your chosen ecosystem. Then you will write a science argument explaining how one change — to a single plant, animal, or abiotic factor — sent ripple effects through the entire system.
Your work matters beyond this classroom. Scientists, park rangers, and environmental policymakers use exactly these kinds of models and arguments to make decisions about protecting ecosystems. At the end of the week, you will present your model and argument at our class Ecosystem Summit, where your peers and invited guests will ask you real questions about your findings. You will also have a chance to give and receive feedback to strengthen your work before the final presentation.
You get to choose your ecosystem and your disruption event, which means your investigation will be uniquely yours. By the end of this project, you will be able to look at any ecosystem and explain — with real data — how matter cycles, how energy flows, and why every single organism matters.
Project Type
research_presentation
Teacher Notes
Common Pitfalls: The most common misconception is arrow direction in food webs — students draw arrows pointing from predator to prey (showing 'who eats whom') rather than from prey to predator (showing energy transfer direction). Address this on Day 2 with a quick whole-class check using mini-whiteboards before students finalize their webs. A second common struggle is the counterargument paragraph — students often write 'Some people think...' without citing any evidence for the alternative view. Provide 1–2 sentence frames and a model example during the Day 4 mini-lesson. Students also tend to write annotations that simply label ('This is a wolf') rather than explain ('When wolves were removed, elk populations increased by 400% because the predator-prey balance was disrupted'). Show 2 contrasting annotation examples on the projector at the start of Day 3.
Differentiation
Advanced: Challenge advanced learners to trace 3 or more matter cycles and show how disruption of one cycle (e.g., carbon) affects another (e.g., water). Ask them to find and cite a primary source — an actual scientific study or government agency data report — and explain in their argument why primary sources are more reliable than secondary summaries. During the Summit, encourage advanced students to prepare a 'What Should Be Done?' extension slide or section that proposes and evaluates one design solution for their disruption, connecting to MS-LS2-5.
Struggling: Provide struggling learners with a pre-labeled food web template showing 4 organisms already placed, so they only need to add 2 more and draw the arrows. Offer a 'Matter Cycle Tracing Sheet' where the nonliving components are already placed and students draw arrows to connect organisms. For the written argument, allow students to complete a structured CER graphic organizer (with sentence frames for every section) as their argument draft, and then read it aloud as their 'written argument.' During the Summit, allow struggling students to point to their model and respond to questions using their organizer as a reference rather than speaking from memory. Pair these students with a supportive peer reviewer during the CER Peer Review who has been briefed on giving specific, kind feedback.
Facilitation Tips: Introduce the project on Day 1 by showing a 2–3 minute video clip of one of the disruption events (e.g., the 'How Wolves Change Rivers' YouTube video for Yellowstone) before revealing the driving question — this creates immediate emotional investment. Post the driving question visibly throughout the week and return to it at the start of each class with a brief 2-minute 'turn and talk.' Keep a class anchor chart listing all the ecosystem disruptions students chose so students can see the range of real-world cases being investigated. During the Gallery Walk on Day 3, circulate and listen for common misconceptions about arrow direction in food webs (students frequently reverse arrows) — address these in a 5-minute whole-class huddle before students begin revisions. On Summit day, brief invited guests with a one-paragraph overview of the project and the Audience Response Card instructions so they feel comfortable asking questions.
Assessment Strategy: Use the Milestone 1 Research Organizer as a formative check on source quality and disruption understanding — if a student's disruption sentence is vague or their data points are missing, intervene on Day 2 morning before they begin modeling. Use the Milestone 2 Gallery Walk sticky notes as real-time diagnostic data: collect 3–4 yellow 'I am not sure' notes from across the room and use them to identify the 1–2 most common model errors to address in a 5-minute whole-class mini-lesson at the start of Day 4. Use the Milestone 3 CER Peer Review forms to identify students whose reasoning sections are weak — pull these students for a 5-minute small-group conference at the start of Day 5 before the Summit begins. Score the final portfolio holistically using the rubric, but weight the model and argument scores most heavily (35% each) since these are the primary evidence of MS-LS2-3 and MS-LS2-4 mastery. Audience Response Cards serve as additional formative data about communication clarity and can inform future instruction on scientific communication.
Driving Question
If matter never disappears and energy only flows one way, how does a single leaf become part of a wolf, a river, and the air we breathe?
Learning Objectives
Construct an annotated food web model that accurately shows energy flow through at least 3 trophic levels, labeling producers, primary consumers, secondary consumers, and decomposers.
Develop a matter-cycle diagram that traces at least 2 matter pathways (e.g., carbon cycle, water cycle, or nitrogen cycle) connecting living organisms to nonliving components of the ecosystem.
Write a scientific argument using the Claim-Evidence-Reasoning (CER) framework that cites at least 3 specific data points from credible sources to explain how one disruption caused cascading effects across the ecosystem.
Communicate scientific reasoning clearly during the Ecosystem Summit presentation by responding to at least 2 audience questions with evidence-based answers and acknowledging at least 1 alternative explanation.
Student Instructions
Tip: Pick something that genuinely surprises or interests you — you will be spending the whole week on it, so curiosity makes everything easier. If two events sound equally interesting, choose the one where you can find a specific number or statistic in the first 5 minutes of searching.
Step: 1
Title: Pick Your Ecosystem Disruption (Day 1)
Description: Start by looking at the list of 8–10 real ecosystem disruption events your teacher has posted or handed out. Read the one-sentence description of each event. Choose the ONE that you find most interesting or most surprising — this will be your focus for the entire week. Once you choose, open or grab your Ecosystem Research Organizer (the template your teacher gives you). Write your disruption event in one sentence at the top using this frame: 'In [ecosystem], [disruption event] caused changes to [biotic or abiotic component].' Next, find 3 credible sources about your ecosystem using the approved websites listed on the organizer (National Geographic Kids, NOAA, National Park Service, NASA Climate Kids, or a school database). For each source, write the title and website name, take 2–3 bullet-point notes, and find 1 specific number or statistic you could use as evidence. Use the 3-question Source Check on your organizer to make sure each source is trustworthy. Before the end of class, share your disruption sentence with a partner and listen to their 'I wonder' question — write it at the bottom of your organizer.
Choice Point: You choose which ecosystem disruption event interests you most from the teacher-provided list. You may also propose a different real-world disruption not on the list, with teacher approval.
Tip: Start with the producers at the bottom and build upward — this makes it easier to see the trophic levels. If you are not sure which organisms live in your ecosystem, your research sources from Day 1 are the best place to check.
Step: 2
Title: Draft Your Food Web (Day 2)
Description: On Day 2, you will start building your ecosystem model. Begin with the food web. First, list at least 6 organisms that live in your ecosystem — try to include at least 1 plant or algae (producer), at least 2 animals that eat plants (primary consumers), at least 1 animal that eats other animals (secondary consumer), and at least 1 decomposer (like fungi, bacteria, or worms). Then draw each organism in a box or circle on your paper or digital canvas. Draw arrows between them to show energy flow — remember, the arrow always points FROM the organism being eaten TO the organism doing the eating (energy moves from prey to predator). Label each arrow with a tiny 'E' to remind yourself it shows energy. Label each organism with its trophic role in parentheses. Check your work: do all your arrows point the right direction? Do you have at least 3 trophic levels? Add a star or circle to show where your disruption event enters the food web.
Choice Point: You choose whether to draw your model by hand on paper or create it digitally using Google Slides, Google Drawings, or Canva for Education. Both are equally accepted.
Tip: Annotations are where you show your thinking — do not just label what something is, explain WHY it matters or HOW it connects to the disruption. The best annotation notes sound like you are talking to a friend who has never studied ecosystems before.
Step: 3
Title: Add the Matter Cycle Layer & Annotations (Day 3)
Description: On Day 3, you will add a matter-cycle section to your existing model. Choose at least 2 matter pathways to show — carbon cycle, water cycle, or nitrogen cycle (your teacher will have a reference sheet for each). On your model, draw a new set of arrows (use a different color or a dashed line to tell them apart from your energy arrows) that show how matter moves between living organisms and nonliving parts of the ecosystem like soil, water, atmosphere, or rocks. Label these arrows with a tiny 'M' and the name of the matter (e.g., 'M-carbon'). Make sure at least 3 living organisms and at least 2 nonliving components are connected by your matter arrows. Now add at least 4 annotation notes — these are small text boxes or sticky notes placed next to important parts of your model. Each annotation should explain in 1–2 of your own sentences what is happening at that point (for example: 'When the elk eats the grass, chemical energy stored in the grass transfers to the elk's body — but about 90% is lost as heat'). Before you leave class, do the Model Self-Check using the checklist your teacher provides, and write your 1 revision goal on the bottom of your model.
Choice Point: You choose which 2 (or more) matter cycles to show — carbon, water, nitrogen, or a combination. You also choose the color coding or visual system you use to distinguish energy-flow arrows from matter-cycle arrows.
Tip: The reasoning paragraph is the hardest part — if you are stuck, try this: for each piece of evidence, ask yourself 'So what does this prove?' and write your answer. That answer IS your reasoning.
Step: 4
Title: Write Your Science Argument (Day 4)
Description: On Day 4, you will write your science argument using the CER framework. Use the CER sentence-starter card your teacher gives you. Here is the structure to follow: Paragraph 1 — Claim (2–3 sentences): State what happened in your ecosystem disruption and name the cascading effect on at least 2 other organisms or components. Use this starter: 'When [disruption] occurred in [ecosystem], it caused [cascading effect] because...' Paragraph 2 — Evidence (varies): Cite at least 3 specific data points or facts from at least 2 different sources. Write the source name in your sentence like this: 'According to the National Park Service, wolf populations in Yellowstone increased from 31 to over 300 between 1995 and 2005.' Paragraph 3 — Reasoning (at least 4 sentences): Explain HOW your evidence proves your claim. Use at least 4 science vocabulary words from the word bank your teacher provides. Paragraph 4 — Counterargument (1–3 sentences): Name 1 alternative explanation someone might give for the change you observed, then respond to it using evidence. Example: 'Some scientists argue that climate change, not wolf reintroduction, caused the vegetation recovery. However, data from [source] shows that vegetation recovery was 3x greater in areas with wolf presence than in areas with similar climate but no wolves.' After drafting, use the 3-step self-checklist, then swap with a partner for the CER Peer Review. Use their written feedback to make at least 1 specific revision before tomorrow.
Choice Point: You choose whether to write your argument by hand or type it. You also choose which counterargument to address — pick the one you find most interesting to respond to.
Tip: The best presenters talk TO their audience, not AT their model. Make eye contact with at least 2 different people during your presentation. If you get nervous, take one slow breath and then point to something on your model — pointing gives you something to do with your hands and helps you remember what to say next.
Step: 5
Title: Present at the Ecosystem Summit (Day 5)
Description: Today is the Ecosystem Summit! Before the Summit begins, spend 10 minutes reviewing your model and your argument. Practice pointing to 2 specific spots on your model and saying out loud what is happening there. Write 3–5 key words on a notecard to help you remember your main points — do not write out full sentences, because reading from a script makes it hard to connect with your audience. During your presentation, start by showing your model and saying your claim in 1–2 sentences. Then point to 2 specific pathways on your model and explain them. Share 2 data points as evidence. Name your alternative explanation and respond to it. Then answer at least 2 questions from your audience — if you are not sure of an answer, say 'That is a great question. Based on my research, I think... but I would want to investigate that more.' After all presentations, read the Audience Response Cards you received. Complete your 5-minute post-Summit self-reflection. Then staple your model, written argument, all reflection prompts, and your Audience Response Cards together and hand in your complete portfolio.
Choice Point: You choose how to display your model (printed large, shown on a tablet or laptop screen, projected, or posted on the wall) and how to organize your talking points (note cards, a printed outline, or memory).