At a glance
Groups of three · three class periods of work time — Unit 5, Days 8, 9 and 10 — then presented on Day 11 · Format: a written proposal and a five-minute pitch
Three of you build the proposal, and nothing on this task carries a common group mark. The five numbered sections below are shared out between you and each one is signed by whoever wrote it; the counter-argument is written individually, so there are three of those, side by side. Those signed pieces are what I mark.
The task
You are a mission scientist. Propose a mission, and defend it against the argument that the money would be better spent on Earth.
Your proposal must include
- The destination and the question. Not “go to Europa” but “determine whether Europa’s subsurface ocean has the chemistry to support life”.
- The instruments. What do you need to measure, and what would measure it?
- The journey. Distance, rough travel time, and the main hazard. Distances in Space has the numbers.
- The benefit on Earth. What comes back besides knowledge? Point to real precedents from Technology From Space Exploration.
- The honest cost. A number, and what else that number could buy.
The counter-argument — required
Write the strongest possible case against your own mission, then answer it. Do not choose a weak objection to knock down.
This is the actual skill
Anyone can argue for something they like. Stating the opposing case fairly and then responding is what separates an argument from an advertisement — and it is exactly what the scientific literacy expectation asks of you.
Assessment
| Criterion | What I am looking for |
|---|---|
| Scientific accuracy | Distances, timescales, and instruments are plausible |
| Depth of research | Real missions and real technologies cited |
| Quality of the counter-argument | The strongest objection, fairly stated |
| Communication | Your signed section, and the slide you built for it, followed by somebody who has never heard of your destination |
The pitch is not separately marked. Five minutes of three people talking is not something I can judge fairly while I am running the room, and a mark for it would be a group mark by another name. What I mark is what you wrote and what you made — and you deliver your own section, so the room hears the person who wrote it.
Run these four rows over your own signed sections before the rehearsal — Judging Your Own Work is the routine — and use the time left in that period on the row you called weakest.
The class votes at the end of the presentations on which mission it would fund. That vote is a good argument and it is worth having. It is not part of anybody’s mark, and neither is anything your group says about your work or each other’s.
Hand in
- Written proposal
- Slides or visual for the pitch
- Source list
Curriculum connection
E1.1
evaluate social, environmental, and economic impacts of space observation and exploration
Link to original
E1.2
evaluate how space observation and exploration technologies contribute to our understanding of climate change, natural disasters, and other phenomena
Link to original
E1.3
assess ways in which technological innovations related to space observation and exploration are applied in various fields, including their contributions to sustainable practices on Earth
Link to original
A2.1
design an experiment or a prototype to explore a problem relevant to a STEM-related occupation, such as a skilled trade, using findings from research
Link to original
E2.1
describe the importance of the Sun and its characteristics, including its role in the solar system and in sustaining life on Earth
Link to original
E2.2
explain how the Sun’s energy causes natural phenomena on Earth, and how these phenomena contribute to renewable energy production
Link to original
E2.5
quantify distances in the solar system and the universe by applying an understanding of relative distances and sizes and using appropriate units of measure
Link to original