Body Systems Lab: Designing Scientific Solutions for Health Challenges
Inquiry Framework
Question Framework
Driving Question
The overarching question that guides the entire project.How can we, as young scientists, use scientific investigations and data to design solutions that improve human health and maintain the balance of body systems?Essential Questions
Supporting questions that break down major concepts.- Understanding Systems (Criterion D – strand i) Describe how the structure and function of a human body system help maintain balance (homeostasis) and support life.
- Systems Interaction (Conceptual Depth) Explain how different body systems work together to maintain health and respond to changes.
- Investigation Design (Criterion B) Explain what defines a fair test and how independent, dependent, and controlled variables ensure reliable results.
- Data Analysis (Criterion C) Interpret data to identify patterns and trends related to a health issue.
- Evaluation (Criterion C) Discuss how the strengths and limitations of a scientific investigation influence the validity of conclusions.
- Real-Life Impact (Criterion D) Explain how scientific solutions can improve human health and contribute to Sustainable Development Goal 3 (Good Health and Well-being).
Standards & Learning Goals
Learning Goals
By the end of this project, students will be able to:- Describe and explain the relationship between a human body system and a health condition, including how homeostasis is disrupted.
- Formulate a focused research question and construct a testable hypothesis that clearly identifies independent, dependent, and controlled variables.
- Design and carry out a fair test or simulation, ensuring a logical, safe, and replicable method.
- Organize, transform, and present data using appropriate scientific conventions (tables, graphs, units, and averages).
- Interpret and analyze data to identify patterns and draw valid conclusions supported by scientific reasoning.
- Evaluate the validity and reliability of the method, identifying sources of error and suggesting realistic improvements.
- Develop and justify a scientific solution to a real-world health problem and evaluate its impact on well-being in relation to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).
IB MYP Science
Entry Events
Events that will be used to introduce the project to studentsThe Medical Mystery 'Cold Case' Files
Students enter a classroom transformed into a 'Medical Diagnostic Center' where they find a series of 'Confidential Case Files' representing anonymous community members suffering from undiagnosed physiological symptoms. They must use initial clues to identify which body system is failing and realize that traditional medicine has hit a wall, requiring a 'Research Scientist' (the student) to investigate the root cause and test potential lifestyle or biological interventions.Portfolio Activities
Portfolio Activities
These activities progressively build towards your learning goals, with each submission contributing to the student's final portfolio.The Data Lab: Evidence in Motion
It's time for action! Students conduct their investigation or run their simulations. The focus here is on precision in recording. Once the raw data is collected, students must determine the best way to 'transform' it—calculating averages and selecting the most appropriate graph (line, bar, or scatter plot) to reveal the story the numbers are telling.Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityA 'Data Dashboard' consisting of a raw data table, a processed data table (with averages), and at least one high-quality, labeled graph.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with MYP Science Criterion C (i): Presenting and transforming data into clear tables and graphs.The Insight Report: Patterns & Perspectives
In this activity, students move from 'what happened' to 'why it happened' and 'how well did I do it?' They will look for patterns in their graphs, compare their results back to their original hypothesis, and critically reflect on the flaws in their experimental design. This is where students demonstrate their ability to think like a skeptical, rigorous scientist.Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityA 'Critical Analysis Report' containing a written interpretation of patterns, a conclusion statement, and an evaluation of the method's reliability and validity.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with MYP Science Criterion C (ii, iii, iv, v): Interpreting data, evaluating the hypothesis, and evaluating the method and suggesting improvements.The Health Hero Solution: Science for Change
In the final portfolio activity, students return to the real world. Using the data they gathered, they will propose a solution (lifestyle change, medical device, policy, or awareness campaign) to the health issue they researched in Activity 1. They must evaluate how this solution contributes to UN Sustainable Development Goal 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and consider its impact on the community.Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityA 'Science for Society' Pitch (Video or Poster) that presents a data-backed solution and evaluates its real-world impact.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with MYP Science Criterion D (ii, iii): Discussing and evaluating the implications of the use of science in solving a specific problem, and linking to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).The Diagnostic Brief: Decoding the Body System
In this opening activity, students transition from the 'Medical Mystery' entry event into active researchers. They will select one specific body system (e.g., Circulatory, Respiratory, Nervous) and a related health issue (e.g., hypertension, asthma, chronic stress). Students will dive deep into the 'normal' functioning of the system and identify exactly how the chosen health issue disrupts homeostasis.Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityAn annotated 'System Blueprint' (Infographic) that illustrates the healthy body system versus the system under the stress of the chosen health issue.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with MYP Science Criterion D (i): Explaining the ways in which science is applied and used to address a specific problem or issue. It also covers the learning goal regarding describing homeostasis and body system disruption.The Variable Vault: Designing the Inquiry
Now that students understand the biological problem, they must narrow their focus to a specific factor they can test. Students will transform their broad health issue into a focused scientific inquiry. They will define what they are changing (Independent Variable), what they are measuring (Dependent Variable), and how they will keep the test fair (Controlled Variables).Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityA Formal Research Proposal document containing the Research Question, Hypothesis with 'If... then... because' logic, and a Variables Table.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with MYP Science Criterion B (i, ii, iii): Stating a research question, formulating a testable hypothesis, and identifying variables (IV, DV, CVs).The Protocol Architect: Planning the Fair Test
With a hypothesis in place, students must act as architects of their experiment. They will design a step-by-step protocol for either a physical investigation or a digital simulation. This activity focuses on the 'logistics' of science—ensuring that another scientist could read their plan and replicate the exact same experiment.Steps
Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.Final Product
What students will submit as the final product of the activityA 'Laboratory Protocol' (Procedure) featuring a materials list, safety considerations, and a numbered, logical sequence of steps.Alignment
How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with MYP Science Criterion B (iv): Designing a logical, safe, and complete scientific investigation.Rubric & Reflection
Portfolio Rubric
Grading criteria for assessing the overall project portfolioYoung Scientist & Health Problem Solver Portfolio Rubric
Scientific Inquiring & Designing
Focuses on the student's ability to define a problem, hypothesize, and plan a fair test.Criterion B
Assesses the ability to identify a health issue, explain its impact on homeostasis, and formulate a testable hypothesis with clearly defined variables.
No evidence
0 PointsThe student does not reach a standard identified by any of the descriptors below.
Basic
1 PointsStates a simple problem or question with very limited relevance Provides a hypothesis that is unclear or not testable Identifies variables incorrectly or incompletely
Limited
2 PointsStates a basic problem or question related to a body system Provides a simple hypothesis with limited scientific reasoning Identifies some variables (IV, DV, CV) with partial accuracy
Developing
3 PointsOutlines a health issue and a body system. Formulates a hypothesis that is testable but may lack clear scientific reasoning. Identifies variables, though the justification for controlled variables may be thin.
Developing
4 PointsOutlines a relevant health issue and associated body system. Formulates a testable hypothesis with some scientific reasoning. Correctly identifies independent, dependent, and controlled variables, with limited explanation of how controlled variables ensure a fair test.
Advanced
5 PointsOutlines a focused and relevant health issue and associated body system. Formulates a clear and testable hypothesis using appropriate scientific reasoning. Correctly identifies independent, dependent, and controlled variables, and begins to explain how controlled variables are maintained to ensure a fair test.
Advanced
6 PointsOutlines a well-focused and scientifically relevant health issue and associated body system. Formulates a well-developed and testable hypothesis supported by clear scientific reasoning. Correctly identifies and explains independent, dependent, and controlled variables, including how controlled variables are maintained to ensure the validity of the investigation.
Exemplary
7 PointsDescribes a precise and scientifically relevant health issue and associated body system. Formulates a detailed and testable hypothesis fully supported by accurate scientific reasoning. Clearly explains independent, dependent, and controlled variables, and justifies how controlled variables are maintained to ensure a valid and reliable investigation.
Exemplary
8 PointsDescribes a highly focused and scientifically relevant health issue with clear links to real-life context and body system function. Formulates a sophisticated and testable hypothesis supported by detailed and accurate scientific reasoning. Precisely identifies and thoroughly justifies independent, dependent, and controlled variables, clearly explaining how controlled variables are maintained to ensure a valid, reliable, and fair investigation.
Criterion B
Evaluates the logic, safety, and replicability of the experimental procedure or simulation design.
No evidence
0 PointsThe student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors below.
Basic
1 PointsDesigns a method that is very limited or unclear, with little logical sequence. Materials, variables, and safety considerations are mostly missing. There is no clear plan for trials, making the investigation unreliable.
Limited
2 PointsDesigns a method that shows some basic structure, but steps are unclear or incomplete. Materials and safety considerations are partially identified but lack clarity. A minimal or unclear plan for trials is present, limiting reliability.
Developing
3 PointsDesigns a method that follows a simple logical sequence, but lacks detail in key steps. Materials and safety considerations are identified but may be incomplete or general. A basic plan for trials is included, but control of variables is not clearly addressed.
Developing
4 PointsDesigns a generally logical method with most steps clearly outlined. Materials and safety considerations are mostly appropriate. Variables are identified, but control of variables may not be fully justified. A plan for trials is included but may lack clarity in ensuring reliability.
Advanced
5 PointsDesigns a clear and logical method that can be followed with minor support. Materials and safety considerations are appropriate and mostly detailed. Variables are correctly identified, and some explanation of control is included. A clear plan for multiple trials is present to support reliability.
Advanced
6 PointsDesigns a well-structured and logical method that can be replicated with ease. Materials and safety considerations are clearly described and appropriate. Variables are correctly identified and explained, including how they are controlled. A clear plan for multiple trials (3 or more) ensures reliability and validity.
Exemplary
7 PointsDesigns a detailed and logical method that is easy to replicate. Materials, variables, and safety considerations are clearly explained and justified. Control of variables is clearly described to ensure a fair test. A well-developed plan for repeated trials supports reliability and consistency.
Exemplary
8 PointsDesigns a highly detailed, precise, and fully logical method that ensures accurate replication. Includes a comprehensive materials list, thorough and justified safety considerations, and precise control of variables. Clearly explains how variables are controlled to ensure a valid, reliable, and fair investigation. A fully integrated plan for multiple trials demonstrates a strong understanding of reliability and data quality.
Processing & Evaluating
Focuses on the student's ability to process results, draw conclusions, and evaluate their own scientific process.Criterion C
Assesses the accuracy and clarity of data organization, including tables, graphs, units, and calculations.
No Evidence
0 PointsThe student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors below.
Basic
1 PointsPresents data that is very limited or unclear. Tables or graphs are missing or inappropriate. Units, labels, and titles are mostly absent, and calculations are not attempted or incorrect.
Limited
2 PointsPresents data in a basic form, but organization is unclear or incomplete. Tables or graphs are attempted but contain major errors (e.g., missing labels, incorrect type). Units and titles are inconsistent, and calculations are partially correct or unclear.
Developing
3 PointsPresents data in simple tables, but organization may lack clarity. Graphs are included but may contain errors in scale, labels, or graph type. Some units and titles are present. Basic calculations are attempted with limited accuracy.
Developing
4 PointsPresents data in generally organized tables with most labels and units included. Graphs are appropriate but may contain minor errors in scale or labeling. Calculations (e.g., averages) are mostly correct but may lack precision.
Advanced
5 PointsPresents data clearly in organized tables with appropriate labels and units. Selects suitable graph types and represents data with mostly accurate scales and labeling. Calculations are generally accurate, with minor errors.
Advanced
6 PointsPresents data clearly and well-organized in tables with correct units and headings. Transforms data into appropriate graphs with correct titles, axes, and scales. Calculations (e.g., averages) are accurate and clearly shown.
Exemplary
7 PointsPresents data in well-structured and precise tables, with consistent use of units and clear headings. Selects and constructs accurate graphs that clearly show patterns and trends. Calculations are accurate, clearly presented, and support understanding of results.
Exemplary
8 PointsPresents data in highly organized, professional-quality tables with precise labels, units, and structure. Selects and constructs the most appropriate graph types, with accurate scales, titles, and labels, clearly highlighting patterns and trends. Calculations are fully accurate, clearly shown, and enhance interpretation of the data.
Criterion C
Evaluates the ability to interpret patterns in data and draw conclusions that address the original hypothesis.
No Evidence
0 PointsThe student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors below.
Basic
1 PointsStates what happened in the investigation in a very limited way, without identifying clear patterns or trends. The conclusion is missing, unclear, or not linked to the data or hypothesis.
Limited
2 PointsIdentifies very simple observations (e.g., increase/decrease), but interpretation is unclear or unsupported. Attempts a conclusion, but it is weakly linked to the data or hypothesis and lacks scientific reasoning.
Developing
3 PointsDescribes basic patterns or trends in the data with limited use of evidence. Draws a simple conclusion that relates to the hypothesis but may lack clear scientific explanation.
Developing
4 PointsDescribes clear patterns and trends in the data using some supporting evidence. Draws a conclusion that states whether the hypothesis is supported or refuted, but scientific reasoning may be partial or not fully developed.
Advanced
5 PointsInterprets patterns and trends using relevant data as evidence. Draws a clear conclusion linked to the hypothesis, with basic scientific reasoning.
Advanced
6 PointsAccurately interprets patterns and trends using appropriate data evidence. Draws a valid conclusion that clearly links results to the hypothesis using clear scientific reasoning.
Exemplary
7 PointsProvides a detailed interpretation of patterns and trends, supported by specific data evidence. Draws a well-developed conclusion that clearly links results to the hypothesis and relevant scientific concepts.
Exemplary
8 PointsProvides a nuanced and insightful interpretation of patterns and trends using precise and relevant data evidence. Draws a sophisticated conclusion that explicitly links results to the hypothesis and scientific theory, demonstrating deep understanding.
Criterion C
Assesses the student's ability to critically reflect on the reliability of their method and suggest improvements.
No evidence
0 PointsThe student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors below.
Basic
1 PointsMentions errors or mistakes in a very limited way, without evaluating the method. Improvements are missing, unclear, or unrealistic.
Limited
2 PointsIdentifies simple weaknesses or errors, but explanations are unclear or lack detail. Suggestions for improvement are basic or not clearly linked to the identified issues.
Developing
3 PointsOutlines some strengths and weaknesses of the method. Identifies general sources of error but may lack specificity. Suggests basic improvements, though they may be generic rather than clearly linked to the investigation
Developing
4 PointsDescribes strengths and weaknesses of the method with some clarity. Identifies relevant sources of error, but explanation may be partial. Suggests improvements that are somewhat appropriate, but not fully developed or justified.
Advanced
5 PointsEvaluates the method by identifying specific sources of error. Suggests relevant improvements that are linked to the investigation. Shows some understanding of reliability or validity, but explanation may be limited.
Advanced
6 PointsEvaluates the reliability and validity of the method. Identifies specific sources of error (e.g., measurement issues, human error). Suggests realistic and relevant improvements that would enhance the investigation.
Exemplary
7 PointsProvides a detailed evaluation of the method, including reliability and validity. Identifies specific sources of error, including random or systematic errors. Suggests well-developed improvements or extensions, with clear justification of how they improve accuracy.
Exemplary
8 PointsProvides a critical and insightful evaluation of the method, clearly addressing reliability, validity, and limitations. Accurately identifies and distinguishes between random and systematic errors. Suggests highly realistic, specific, and justified improvements or extensions, explaining how they significantly enhance accuracy, reliability, and overall quality of the investigation.
Reflecting on Science & Communication
Focuses on the application of science to solve real-world problems and the effective communication of findings.Criterion D
Evaluates the student's ability to propose a science-based solution and assess its impact on society and SDG 3.
No Evidence
0 PointsThe student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors below.
Basic
1 PointsProposes a solution that is unclear or not scientifically relevant to the problem. Shows little or no understanding of its impact on health or well-being. Does not meaningfully connect to SDG 3.
Limited
2 PointsProposes a simple or partially relevant solution with limited scientific support. Mentions health or well-being in a general way. Makes a basic or unclear reference to SDG 3.
Developing
3 PointsProposes a solution that is generally related to the health issue. Provides a basic explanation of how it may improve health. Mentions SDG 3, but the connection to real-world impact is superficial.
Developing
4 PointsProposes a relevant solution supported by some scientific understanding. Explains how the solution improves health and well-being, though explanation may lack depth. Makes a clear but general connection to SDG 3.
Advanced
5 PointsProposes a clear and appropriate science-based solution. Explains how the solution improves health and well-being using relevant scientific ideas. Links the solution to SDG 3 with some evaluation of its impact.
Advanced
6 PointsProposes a well-developed, science-based solution supported by appropriate evidence. Explains and evaluates how the solution improves health and well-being. Clearly connects the solution to SDG 3, considering its impact on individuals or communities.
Exemplary
7 PointsProposes a detailed and effective solution supported by strong scientific evidence. Provides a well-developed evaluation of its impact on health and well-being. Makes clear and relevant connections to SDG 3, including broader social or environmental implications.
Exemplary
8 PointsProposes a sophisticated and innovative solution supported by robust and accurate scientific evidence. Provides a comprehensive and critical evaluation of its impact on health and well-being. Demonstrates deep understanding by linking the solution to specific SDG 3 targets and wider social, environmental, or ethical implications.
Criterion D
Assesses the clarity of the final presentation and the correct use of scientific language and citations.
No Evidence
0 PointsThe student does not reach a standard described by any of the descriptors below.
Basic
1 PointsPresentation is very limited or incomplete and lacks logical structure. Scientific language is rarely used or used incorrectly. Bibliography is missing or does not follow MLA format.
Limited
2 PointsPresentation is partially complete, but organization is unclear. Uses basic scientific language, with frequent errors in terminology. Bibliography is attempted but incomplete or incorrectly formatted.
Developing
3 PointsPresentation includes most components, but flow may be inconsistent. Uses some appropriate scientific terminology, though errors are present. Bibliography is included but may have formatting errors or limited sources.
Developing
4 PointsPresentation is generally clear and organized with most components included. Uses appropriate scientific language, though accuracy may vary. Bibliography is complete but may contain minor MLA formatting errors.
Advanced
5 PointsPresentation is clear and logically structured. Uses mostly accurate scientific terminology. Includes a complete MLA bibliography with relevant sources, with minor formatting issues.
Advanced
6 PointsPresentation is well-organized and coherent, with all components clearly presented. Uses accurate and appropriate scientific language throughout. Includes a correctly formatted MLA bibliography with credible sources.
Exemplary
7 PointsPresentation is well-structured and engaging, with smooth flow between components. Uses precise scientific terminology consistently to communicate understanding. Includes a well-formatted MLA bibliography with multiple credible sources.
Exemplary
8 PointsDelivers a highly engaging and polished presentation with seamless integration of all components. Uses accurate, precise, and sophisticated scientific terminology throughout. Includes a flawless MLA bibliography, correctly formatted, with a wide range of credible and relevant sources.