Science vs. Misinformation: Public Health Investigation

Created byKayla Olanrewaju

16 views0 downloads

Science vs. Misinformation: Public Health Investigation

Grade 9Science21 days

This project empowers 9th-grade students to investigate the impact of misinformation on public health. Students differentiate between scientific evidence and misinformation, analyze consequences of basing decisions on inaccurate information, and identify biases affecting research. They design and conduct scientific investigations, analyze data, and create public awareness campaigns to combat misinformation. This project emphasizes critical thinking, media literacy, and effective communication of scientific findings.

MisinformationPublic HealthScientific EvidenceBiasData AnalysisScientific InvestigationPublic Awareness Campaign

Want to create your own PBL Recipe?Use our AI-powered tools to design engaging project-based learning experiences for your students.

📝

Inquiry Framework

Question Framework

Driving Question

The overarching question that guides the entire project.In what ways does misinformation challenge the integrity of scientific findings, and what strategies can we employ to ensure public health decisions are rooted in reliable scientific evidence?

Essential Questions

Supporting questions that break down major concepts.

How can we differentiate between scientific evidence and misinformation?
What are the potential consequences of basing public health decisions on misinformation?
How do biases affect scientific research and the interpretation of scientific data?
What are the key components of a well-designed scientific investigation?
How can we effectively communicate scientific information to the public?

Standards & Learning Goals

Learning Goals

By the end of this project, students will be able to:

Students will be able to distinguish between scientific evidence and misinformation.
Students will be able to analyze the potential consequences of basing public health decisions on misinformation.
Students will be able to identify biases that can affect scientific research and the interpretation of scientific data.
Students will be able to describe the key components of a well-designed scientific investigation.
Students will be able to communicate scientific information to the public effectively.
Students will be able to apply design skills to a design thinking process.
Students will be able to formulate scientific questions and hypotheses.
Students will be able to design and conduct scientific investigations, identifying independent variables, dependent variables, constants, and control groups.
Students will be able to analyze data using charts and graphs and draw conclusions.
Students will be able to practice lab safety procedures.

PA Science Practices

3.5.9-12.P

Primary

Apply a broad range of design skills to a design thinking process.Reason: Directly aligns with the project's focus on addressing misinformation through a design thinking process.

Science Practices

Primary

Asking questions (for science) and defining problems (for engineering)Reason: Aligns with formulating scientific questions regarding misinformation.

Science Practices

Primary

Developing and using modelsReason: Supports the creation of models to understand the spread and impact of misinformation.

Science Practices

Primary

Planning and carrying out investigationsReason: Directly applicable to investigating the sources and effects of misinformation.

Science Practices

Primary

Analyzing and interpreting dataReason: Essential for evaluating the validity of information and identifying misinformation.

Science Practices

Primary

Using mathematics and computational thinkingReason: Useful for quantifying the spread of misinformation and its impact.

Science Practices

Primary

Constructing explanations (for science), and designing solutions (for engineering)Reason: Necessary for explaining the nature of misinformation and designing solutions to combat it.

Science Practices

Primary

Engaging in argument from evidenceReason: Crucial for debating the validity of scientific claims versus misinformation.

Science Practices

Primary

Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating informationReason: Directly addresses the skills needed to discern and communicate accurate scientific information.

Entry Events

Events that will be used to introduce the project to students

Spot the Fake

Students are shown a series of manipulated images, videos, and fabricated news articles related to a current health debate (e.g., vaccine safety, mask mandates). They must identify the misinformation, trace its origins, and analyze its potential impact on public opinion and health behaviors. This exercise develops critical thinking and media literacy skills.

📚

Portfolio Activities

These activities progressively build towards your learning goals, with each submission contributing to the student's final portfolio.

Activity 1

Questioning Misinformation: Hypothesis Factory

Students develop a testable question about a specific type of misinformation related to public health. They will then formulate a hypothesis based on their initial research.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.

1. Brainstorm various types of misinformation related to public health (e.g., vaccine safety, mask efficacy).

2. Choose a specific type of misinformation to focus on.

3. Conduct preliminary research on the chosen topic to understand the existing knowledge and identify gaps.

4. Formulate a testable question based on the research.

5. Develop a hypothesis that attempts to answer the question, predicting a relationship between variables.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityA clearly articulated scientific question and hypothesis regarding the spread or impact of misinformation.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAligns with Science Practices - Asking questions (for science) and defining problems (for engineering) by having students formulate testable questions about the spread of misinformation.

Activity 2

Investigation Blueprint: Designing the Study

Students design an investigation to test their hypothesis. This includes identifying variables, controls, and procedures to ensure a safe and ethical study.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.

1. Identify the independent and dependent variables for the investigation.

2. Determine the control group and constants to ensure a fair test.

3. Outline the step-by-step procedures for data collection.

4. Address potential safety concerns and ethical considerations related to the investigation.

5. Create a timeline for completing each stage of the investigation.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityA detailed research proposal outlining the methodology, including variables, controls, safety measures, and ethical considerations.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsAddresses Science Practices - Planning and carrying out investigations and Lab Safety by designing a safe and ethical investigation into the spread of misinformation.

Activity 3

Data Dive: Analyzing the Evidence

Students collect data according to their research proposal, then analyze it using appropriate charts, graphs, and statistical methods. They will interpret the data to determine whether their hypothesis is supported or refuted.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.

1. Collect data according to the outlined procedures.

2. Organize the data in a spreadsheet or database.

3. Create charts and graphs to visualize the data.

4. Perform statistical analysis to determine the significance of the findings.

5. Interpret the data and draw conclusions about the hypothesis.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityA comprehensive data analysis report including charts, graphs, statistical analysis, and a clear statement of findings related to the hypothesis.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsCorrelates with Science Practices - Analyzing and interpreting data and Using mathematics and computational thinking by analyzing collected data to determine the validity of their hypothesis.

Activity 4

Truth Teller: Report on Findings & Solutions

Students write a scientific report summarizing their research question, hypothesis, methodology, results, and conclusions. They will also discuss the implications of their findings for public health and suggest potential solutions to combat misinformation.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.

1. Write an introduction that outlines the research question and hypothesis.

2. Describe the methodology used in the investigation.

3. Present the results of the data analysis.

4. Interpret the findings and draw conclusions about the hypothesis.

5. Discuss the implications of the findings for public health.

6. Suggest potential solutions to combat misinformation based on the research.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityA well-written scientific report with a detailed discussion of the findings, implications, and potential solutions to address the misinformation.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsConnects to Science Practices - Constructing explanations (for science), and designing solutions (for engineering) and Engaging in argument from evidence by having students develop evidence-based arguments about the impact of misinformation.

Activity 5

Truth Campaign: Spreading Awareness

Students design a public awareness campaign to communicate their findings and educate the public about the dangers of misinformation. They will use a variety of media (e.g., posters, videos, social media) to reach a wide audience.

Steps

Here is some basic scaffolding to help students complete the activity.

1. Identify the key message to communicate to the public.

2. Determine the target audience for the campaign.

3. Choose the appropriate media to reach the target audience (e.g., posters, videos, social media).

4. Design the campaign materials, ensuring they are clear, concise, and engaging.

5. Develop a plan for disseminating the campaign materials to the public.

Final Product

What students will submit as the final product of the activityA comprehensive public awareness campaign including a clear message, target audience, chosen media, and plan for dissemination.

Alignment

How this activity aligns with the learning objectives & standardsSupports Science Practices - Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information and ties into Apply a broad range of design skills to a design thinking process. by having students create a campaign to communicate accurate scientific information.

🏆

Rubric & Reflection

Portfolio Rubric

Grading criteria for assessing the overall project portfolio

Science vs. Misinformation Rubric

Category 1

Question & Hypothesis

This category assesses the quality of the scientific question and hypothesis developed by the student.

Criterion 1

Clarity of Question

Clarity and relevance of the scientific question to the chosen type of misinformation.

Beginning

1 Points

The scientific question is unclear, irrelevant, or missing.

Developing

2 Points

The scientific question is somewhat clear and relevant, but lacks focus or depth.

Proficient

3 Points

The scientific question is clear, relevant, and focused on a specific type of misinformation.

Exemplary

4 Points

The scientific question is exceptionally clear, relevant, focused, and demonstrates a deep understanding of the misinformation topic.

Criterion 2

Hypothesis Quality

Quality and testability of the hypothesis.

Beginning

1 Points

The hypothesis is missing, untestable, or unrelated to the research question.

Developing

2 Points

The hypothesis is vague, difficult to test, or only loosely related to the research question.

Proficient

3 Points

The hypothesis is testable, clearly stated, and logically connected to the research question.

Exemplary

4 Points

The hypothesis is exceptionally well-crafted, testable, clearly articulates the relationship between variables, and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the topic.

Category 2

Investigation Design

This category evaluates the design of the student's investigation, focusing on the identification of variables, controls, procedures, and ethical considerations.

Criterion 1

Variable Identification

Completeness and clarity of the identification of independent and dependent variables.

Beginning

1 Points

Variables are not identified or are incorrectly identified.

Developing

2 Points

Variables are identified, but lack clarity or completeness.

Proficient

3 Points

Variables are clearly and correctly identified.

Exemplary

4 Points

Variables are clearly and correctly identified with a detailed explanation of their relationship and potential confounding factors.

Criterion 2

Control & Constants

Appropriateness and justification of the control group and constants.

Beginning

1 Points

Control group and constants are not identified or are inappropriate.

Developing

2 Points

Control group and constants are identified, but justification is weak or missing.

Proficient

3 Points

Control group and constants are appropriate and adequately justified.

Exemplary

4 Points

Control group and constants are exceptionally well-justified, demonstrating a thorough understanding of experimental design principles.

Criterion 3

Procedure Clarity

Detail and clarity of the step-by-step procedures for data collection.

Beginning

1 Points

Procedures are vague, incomplete, or missing.

Developing

2 Points

Procedures are described, but lack sufficient detail for replication.

Proficient

3 Points

Procedures are clear, detailed, and allow for replication of the study.

Exemplary

4 Points

Procedures are exceptionally clear, detailed, and demonstrate a deep understanding of experimental methodology, including considerations for minimizing bias and error.

Criterion 4

Safety & Ethics

Consideration of safety and ethical concerns.

Beginning

1 Points

Safety and ethical concerns are not addressed.

Developing

2 Points

Safety and ethical concerns are mentioned, but not adequately addressed.

Proficient

3 Points

Safety and ethical concerns are addressed appropriately.

Exemplary

4 Points

Safety and ethical concerns are comprehensively addressed, demonstrating a strong understanding of responsible research practices.

Category 3

Data Analysis

This category assesses the student's ability to collect, organize, visualize, and analyze data to draw valid conclusions.

Criterion 1

Data Organization

Organization and accuracy of the collected data.

Beginning

1 Points

Data is not collected or is disorganized and inaccurate.

Developing

2 Points

Data is collected, but poorly organized and contains inaccuracies.

Proficient

3 Points

Data is collected, well-organized, and generally accurate.

Exemplary

4 Points

Data is meticulously collected, accurately organized, and demonstrates attention to detail.

Criterion 2

Data Visualization

Appropriateness and clarity of charts and graphs used to visualize the data.

Beginning

1 Points

Charts and graphs are missing or inappropriate for the data.

Developing

2 Points

Charts and graphs are used, but lack clarity or are not well-suited to the data.

Proficient

3 Points

Charts and graphs are appropriate, clear, and effectively visualize the data.

Exemplary

4 Points

Charts and graphs are expertly crafted, providing insightful visualizations of the data and highlighting key trends and patterns.

Criterion 3

Statistical Analysis

Appropriateness and accuracy of statistical analysis.

Beginning

1 Points

Statistical analysis is missing or inappropriate.

Developing

2 Points

Statistical analysis is attempted, but contains errors or is poorly explained.

Proficient

3 Points

Statistical analysis is appropriate and accurately performed.

Exemplary

4 Points

Statistical analysis is sophisticated, accurately performed, and demonstrates a deep understanding of statistical principles.

Criterion 4

Conclusion Validity

Validity of the conclusions drawn from the data.

Beginning

1 Points

Conclusions are not supported by the data or are missing.

Developing

2 Points

Conclusions are weakly supported by the data or are overgeneralized.

Proficient

3 Points

Conclusions are logically derived from the data and clearly stated.

Exemplary

4 Points

Conclusions are insightful, nuanced, and strongly supported by the data, demonstrating a deep understanding of the limitations of the study.

Category 4

Scientific Report

This category evaluates the quality of the scientific report, including the introduction, methodology, results, discussion, and suggested solutions.

Criterion 1

Introduction Quality

Clarity and completeness of the introduction, including the research question and hypothesis.

Beginning

1 Points

The introduction is missing, unclear, or does not include the research question and hypothesis.

Developing

2 Points

The introduction is present, but lacks clarity or completeness in presenting the research question and hypothesis.

Proficient

3 Points

The introduction clearly and completely presents the research question and hypothesis.

Exemplary

4 Points

The introduction is compelling, clearly presents the research question and hypothesis, and provides a strong rationale for the study.

Criterion 2

Methodology Description

Accuracy and detail in the description of the methodology.

Beginning

1 Points

The methodology is not described or is inaccurate.

Developing

2 Points

The methodology is described, but lacks sufficient detail or contains inaccuracies.

Proficient

3 Points

The methodology is accurately and clearly described.

Exemplary

4 Points

The methodology is described with exceptional clarity and detail, demonstrating a thorough understanding of the research process.

Criterion 3

Results Presentation

Clarity and accuracy in the presentation of the results.

Beginning

1 Points

Results are not presented or are unclear and inaccurate.

Developing

2 Points

Results are presented, but lack clarity or contain inaccuracies.

Proficient

3 Points

Results are clearly and accurately presented.

Exemplary

4 Points

Results are presented with exceptional clarity and accuracy, using appropriate visual aids to enhance understanding.

Criterion 4

Discussion Quality

Validity and depth of the discussion of the findings and implications for public health.

Beginning

1 Points

Discussion is missing or does not address the findings and implications.

Developing

2 Points

Discussion is superficial or weakly connected to the findings and implications.

Proficient

3 Points

Discussion is valid and addresses the findings and implications for public health.

Exemplary

4 Points

Discussion is insightful, thoroughly explores the findings and implications for public health, and offers nuanced perspectives.

Criterion 5

Solution Quality

Feasibility and potential impact of the suggested solutions to combat misinformation.

Beginning

1 Points

Solutions are not suggested or are unrealistic and irrelevant.

Developing

2 Points

Solutions are suggested, but lack feasibility or clear impact.

Proficient

3 Points

Solutions are feasible and have the potential to combat misinformation.

Exemplary

4 Points

Solutions are innovative, highly feasible, and have the potential to significantly impact the spread of misinformation.

Category 5

Public Awareness Campaign

This category assesses the quality of the public awareness campaign, focusing on the clarity of the message, the appropriateness of the media, the engagement of the materials, and the feasibility of the dissemination plan.

Criterion 1

Message Clarity

Clarity and conciseness of the key message.

Beginning

1 Points

The key message is unclear or missing.

Developing

2 Points

The key message is somewhat clear, but lacks conciseness.

Proficient

3 Points

The key message is clear and concise.

Exemplary

4 Points

The key message is exceptionally clear, concise, and memorable.

Criterion 2

Media Appropriateness

Appropriateness of the chosen media for the target audience.

Beginning

1 Points

The chosen media is inappropriate for the target audience.

Developing

2 Points

The chosen media is somewhat appropriate, but may not effectively reach the target audience.

Proficient

3 Points

The chosen media is appropriate and likely to reach the target audience.

Exemplary

4 Points

The chosen media is exceptionally well-suited to the target audience, demonstrating a deep understanding of their preferences and behaviors.

Criterion 3

Campaign Engagement

Engagement and effectiveness of the campaign materials.

Beginning

1 Points

Campaign materials are unengaging and ineffective.

Developing

2 Points

Campaign materials are somewhat engaging, but lack effectiveness.

Proficient

3 Points

Campaign materials are engaging and effective in communicating the message.

Exemplary

4 Points

Campaign materials are exceptionally engaging, creative, and highly effective in communicating the message and influencing behavior.

Criterion 4

Dissemination Plan

Feasibility and potential reach of the dissemination plan.

Beginning

1 Points

The dissemination plan is unrealistic or missing.

Developing

2 Points

The dissemination plan is somewhat feasible, but has limited reach.

Proficient

3 Points

The dissemination plan is feasible and has the potential to reach a wide audience.

Exemplary

4 Points

The dissemination plan is innovative, highly feasible, and has the potential to reach a vast audience and create significant impact.

Reflection Prompts

End-of-project reflection questions to get students to think about their learning

Question 1

Reflecting on the entire project, what was the most surprising thing you learned about the spread and impact of misinformation?

Text

Required

Question 2

How has your understanding of the difference between scientific evidence and misinformation changed as a result of this project?

Text

Required

Question 3

In what ways do you think biases can affect scientific research and the interpretation of scientific data, and how did you try to mitigate these biases in your own investigation?

Text

Required

Question 4

What was the most challenging aspect of designing and conducting your investigation, and how did you overcome it?

Text

Required

Question 5

How effective do you think your public awareness campaign will be in combating misinformation, and what changes would you make to improve its impact?

Text

Required

Question 6

To what extent do you agree with the statement: 'Public health decisions should always be based on scientific evidence.'?

Scale

Required

Question 7

Which of the following skills do you feel you improved the most during this project?

Multiple choice

Required

Options

Formulating scientific questions and hypotheses

Designing and conducting scientific investigations

Analyzing data using charts and graphs

Communicating scientific information to the public

Identifying and mitigating biases in research