Investigating Our World: Forces, Life, and Earth Systems

Your child pushes and pulls real objects, measures force with a spring scale, and rolls balls down ramps to collect real data. They learn motion has both a speed and a direction, that forces can cancel out or not, and that a pattern in their own trial data lets them predict something they haven't tried yet.

1. Push and pull as the two basic forces+

   Given a photo or short video of an action, students classify the force shown as a push or a pull.

2. Force measured in newtons or spring-scale units on varying surfaces+

   Students use a spring scale to measure the force needed to start a toy car moving on three different surfaces.

3. Balanced forces on a stationary object+

   Students explain why an object sitting still on a table has balanced forces acting on it, using the table's push-back as evidence.

4. Unbalanced forces and net direction of motion+

   Given two forces acting on the same toy from opposite directions with different strengths shown by arrow length, students predict which way the object will move.

5. Speed and direction as the two parts of motion+

   Students describe an object's motion using both its speed (fast/slow) and its direction (which way) from a rolling-ball demonstration.

6. Pattern between ramp height (force input) and roll distance (motion outcome)+

   Students record ramp-height and roll-distance data across at least four trials and identify the pattern connecting them.

7. Predicting an untested case from a data pattern+

   Using their own trial data pattern, students predict how far the ball will roll from an untested ramp height and justify the prediction with the data.

8. Balanced vs. unbalanced force applied to an unfamiliar device+

   Given a description of a brand-new device the class has never seen (a wind-up toy on a slanted tray), students decide whether the forces on it are balanced or unbalanced and predict its motion.

9. Claim-evidence-reasoning structure applied to ramp investigation data+

   Students write a claim-evidence-reasoning paragraph that states a prediction, cites their trial data as evidence, and explains why the pattern supports the prediction.

10. Limits of a single-variable pattern when a second force-changing variable is introduced+

    Given a new case where BOTH ramp height and surface friction change together, students decide whether height alone still explains the distance and identify what else must be considered.

11. Force vocabulary applied to informational text about tools+

    Students identify the push or pull force and the object it acts on in a short nonfiction passage about simple machines.

Your child takes the push/pull vocabulary from Unit 1 and applies it to forces that work without anything touching. They test which ends of magnets attract or repel, build a static charge with a balloon and wool, and design a fair test that changes only distance to see how magnet strength changes.

1. Contact force vs. non-contact force+

   Given a labeled diagram of two objects interacting, students classify the interaction as contact force or non-contact force.

2. Magnetic attraction and repulsion by pole orientation+

   Students predict whether two magnets will attract or repel based on which poles face each other, then test the prediction with real magnets.

3. Static electric charge produced by friction+

   Students explain why a balloon rubbed with wool sticks to a wall, using the term static electric charge from friction.

4. Isolating distance as the one changed variable in a magnet-strength test+

   Students design a test that changes only the distance between a magnet and a paperclip, holding the magnet and paperclip the same, to find how force strength changes.

5. The pattern between distance and magnetic force strength+

   Students compare their magnet-distance data across multiple trials to identify the pattern connecting distance and force strength.

6. Contact vs. non-contact force in an unfamiliar mechanical system+

   Given a new, unfamiliar object pair never discussed in class (for example, a doorbell button and a doorbell), students infer whether the interaction is contact or non-contact and justify the choice with evidence.

7. Balanced/unbalanced force logic applied to magnetic force data, including the case of a stationary object under opposing forces+

   Students argue from their own distance-force data whether magnetism follows the same balanced/unbalanced force logic taught for pushes and pulls in Unit 1, correctly identifying that a stationary object held against a magnet's pull still has forces acting on it.

8. Definitions of static electric charge and non-contact force+

   Students recall the definition of static electric charge and non-contact force when prompted with a word bank.

Your child follows a frog and a bean plant through their repeating stages, noticing that each stage has traits that fit what the organism needs right then. A weeks-long bean-plant log is the backbone of the unit — dated, measured entries that become evidence for a final diagram and comparison.

1. The sequence of frog life cycle stages (egg, tadpole, froglet, adult)+

   Students identify the four stages of a frog's life cycle from a labeled diagram.

2. The closed-loop diagram structure for a life cycle already demonstrated by the teacher (frog, then bean plant)+

   Students copy a labeled stage-and-loop diagram for a life cycle shown in a worked example, reproducing stage names in the correct closed-loop order.

3. The relationship between a life stage and the trait it needs to survive that stage+

   Students match a stage-specific trait (gills, lungs) to the correct life cycle stage and explain why that trait suits what the organism needs at that stage.

4. The difference between metamorphosis and direct growth as two patterns of life cycle change+

   Students distinguish metamorphosis (frog, butterfly) from direct growth (human, dog) using two contrasted animal cases.

5. The bean plant's current growth stage and its change since the last recorded entry+

   Students record a dated, measured observation of their bean plant's stage and describe one visible change from the prior entry.

6. The boundary between force (instant push or pull) and growth response (change over time)+

   Students classify a plant's growth toward light as a life-cycle response, not a force, using the force definition from Unit 1.

7. The life cycle stage order of an organism not taught in this unit+

   Students sequence the life cycle stages of an unfamiliar organism from unlabeled photos and justify the order using visible traits.

8. The main idea and supporting details of a life-cycle informational text+

   Students summarize the main idea and key details of a short informational text about an animal life cycle.

9. Information located in diagrams versus information located in running text+

   Students use text and diagram together to answer a question a diagram alone could not answer.

10. The contrast between gradual life-cycle change and instant force-caused change+

    Students write a short explanation comparing a life-cycle change to a force-caused change, using evidence from their observation log and Unit 1 notes.

Your child learns offspring inherit traits from parents, but no two offspring turn out exactly alike. They build a firm line between traits you're born with and traits you pick up during life, then measure a real trait across many samples and graph how much it varies.

1. Inheritance of traits from parent to offspring+

   Students state that offspring inherit traits from parents.

2. Inherited vs. acquired traits+

   Students classify a given trait as inherited or acquired using the birth-presence test.

3. Inherited vs. acquired traits applied to new examples+

   Students classify a novel trait example not used in instruction as inherited or acquired, and justify the classification.

4. Measured variation in a single trait across a sample+

   Students measure a trait across at least 10 samples and record the values.

5. Range and typical value as evidence of variation, including that differing individual data points are not errors+

   Students explain how the range and typical value in a graphed trait relate to variation within a group, and accept a data point that differs from their own as legitimate rather than a mistake.

6. Comparison of variation across two data sets+

   Students compare two data sets of the same trait from different groups and infer which shows more variation.

7. Context-dependence of whether a trait is helpful or harmful+

   Students explain that a trait's value for survival depends on the environment, not on the trait alone.

8. Inherited vs. acquired traits in an unfamiliar organism and context+

   Students classify an unfamiliar organism's trait as inherited or acquired using only a written description, no picture or class discussion cue.

9. Written classification argument for trait cards+

   Students generate a written argument sorting trait cards into inherited vs. acquired, citing the birth-presence test as evidence.

Your child learns a fossil is evidence of something that lived long ago, not a living thing itself. They compare specific traits on fossils to the same traits on living things today, learn that rock layers stack oldest-at-bottom, and combine both ideas to figure out what an ancient environment might have looked like.

1. Fossils as evidence of past life+

   Identify that a fossil is evidence of a living thing from long ago, not a living thing itself.

2. The three-way distinction between fossil, living thing, and non-living rock+

   Sort picture cards into fossil, living thing, and non-living rock using the definitions taught on Day 1.

3. Fossil traits compared to living-organism traits+

   Compare a named trait on a fossil to the same trait on a living organism today.

4. Rock layers as a record of relative time, oldest at bottom+

   Explain how the position of a rock layer indicates its relative age.

5. Relative age ranking from a new rock-layer diagram+

   Rank an unfamiliar rock-layer diagram from oldest to youngest using layer position.

6. Past environment inferred from fossil trait evidence+

   Infer a past environment from a fossil's trait, citing the specific trait as support.

7. Limits of fossil evidence+

   Distinguish a question a fossil can answer from a question it cannot answer.

8. Two texts describing the same fossil site+

   Compare information about the same fossil site from two different texts.

9. Past environment inference from a novel fossil sample+

   Infer the likely past environment of an unfamiliar rock-and-fossil sample never discussed in class.

Your child asks whether a trait that helps in one environment can hurt in another if that environment changes. They build out everything 'environment' actually includes — weather, food, water, other organisms, shelter — and compare what happens to a population when change is fast (a fire) versus slow (temperature drifting over years).

1. Environment as everything around an organism, including weather, food, water, and other organisms+

   Students list at least four components of an environment (weather, food, water, other organisms) for a given habitat picture.

2. The distinction between fast and slow environmental change+

   Students classify a given environmental change as fast (fire, flood, new predator arriving) or slow (temperature drift, gradual habitat loss).

3. The fit between a specific trait and a specific environment+

   Students explain why a specific trait (e.g., thick fur, long beak, camouflage color) helps an organism survive in one named environment.

4. Trait-environment fit applied to an unfamiliar organism-environment pair+

   Given a new organism and environment not used in class examples, students predict whether a named trait would help or hurt survival.

5. Population outcomes under fast versus slow environmental change+

   Students compare what happens to a population when its environment changes quickly versus slowly, using the idea that slow change gives more time for some individuals to survive by chance variation.

6. A trait-environment survival claim supported by cited evidence from a prior unit+

   Students construct a written argument that states a claim about whether a given trait helps or hurts survival under a stated environmental change, supported by at least one piece of evidence drawn from Unit 4 or Unit 5 content.

7. The logical connection between claim, environmental change, and cited evidence in a peer's argument+

   Students critique a peer's written survival argument by checking whether the claim, the stated environmental change, and the cited evidence actually connect to each other.

8. Trait-environment fit judgment under a genuinely novel scenario+

   Given a completely novel scenario (an environment changing in a way never discussed in class, e.g., a new food source appearing) students judge whether a stated trait would now help, hurt, or make no difference, and justify the judgment.

Your child collects real weather data, graphs it, and uses the pattern they find to justify a preparedness action. It moves from daily readings (temperature, wind, rain) to a multi-week household weather log, then to reasoning about whole seasons, then to matching a hazard to a real preparedness step.

1. The three measurable weather variables: temperature, wind, precipitation+

   Given a thermometer reading, a wind description, and a sky description, the student names each as temperature, wind, or precipitation.

2. Thermometer reading procedure+

   The student reads a household or classroom thermometer and records the temperature to the nearest labeled line, on at least 5 different days.

3. A temperature line graph of a recorded data set+

   Given two weeks of a class temperature log shown as a line graph, the student identifies the day with the highest and lowest recorded temperature.

4. The relationship between season and typical weather pattern+

   Given a season and a region description, the student explains why that season's typical temperature and precipitation pattern occurs there, using the recorded-data evidence from the class log.

5. The distinction between a repeating seasonal pattern and unpredictable daily variation+

   Given a new city's multi-week weather data table (not used in class), the student determines whether the data shows a seasonal pattern or random day-to-day variation.

6. The match between a weather hazard and a preparedness action suited to it+

   Given descriptions of three weather hazards (flood, severe storm, extreme heat/cold), the student matches each hazard to one preparedness action and explains why that action addresses that specific hazard.

7. A graph of the student's own collected weather data+

   Using their own multi-week household weather log, the student constructs a bar or line graph of one weather variable across the log's dates.

8. A hazard-preparedness action justified by a student's own weather-pattern evidence+

   Using their own graphed log and a stated seasonal pattern, the student designs one preparedness action and justifies it in writing using the words 'pattern' and 'evidence.'

No new content here — this unit asks your child to take four ideas built all year (force, pattern, trait, evidence) and use them on scenarios mixed from every unit, then design and run their own small investigation with household materials, ending in a written explanation and a family showcase.

1. The definitions of pattern and evidence+

   Students state the definitions of 'pattern' and 'evidence' from memory without a prompt card.

2. The definitions of force and trait+

   Students state the definitions of 'force' and 'trait' from memory without a prompt card.

3. The claim-evidence-reasoning structure+

   Students recall the three parts of a CER explanation, in order, from memory.

4. Contact vs. non-contact force in an unfamiliar scenario+

   Students correctly classify a novel scenario as involving a contact force, a non-contact force, or no force, using the Unit 1-2 push/pull definition.

5. Force, pattern, trait, and evidence as applied across all prior-unit contexts+

   Given a mixed set of scenario cards from all seven prior units, students sort each card under the correct master idea (force, pattern, trait, or evidence).

6. The shared structure underlying 'pattern' across the fossil-layer and weather-data contexts+

   Students explain why the same word 'pattern' correctly describes both a fossil rock layer sequence and a week of weather data.

7. An original testable investigation combining force-and-weather or life-cycle-and-variation ideas+

   Students design one testable investigation, choosing a variable to change and a measurement to collect, from a bounded set of integrated scenario options.

8. Their own chosen investigation's data collection+

   Students run their designed investigation with household materials and record measured results in a data log.

9. A claim-evidence-reasoning explanation linking their investigation to specific prior units+

   Students construct a claim-evidence-reasoning explanation of their investigation, naming which prior unit each piece of reasoning came from.

10. The match between a stated claim and the evidence offered for it+

    Students evaluate a peer's claim by checking whether the stated evidence actually supports it.

11. The limits of evidence from a single household investigation+

    Students identify what their own investigation's evidence can and cannot show about their claim.