Lesson 7: Culminating Performance Task – Build, Defend, and Reflect

• How can we design a platform that drives engagement responsibly?
• How do algorithm structures shape user behavior?
• What trade-offs must be balanced in sociotechnical systems?
• How can we defend a design using evidence from prior analysis?
• Where might our platform fail or produce unintended consequences?

Platform identity
Target audience
Engagement strategy
Algorithm logic
Feedback loop
Ethical safeguard
Moderation
Trade-off
Prototype
Pitch
System constraint
Amplification

HS ETS1-2
Evaluate and refine a complex solution based on criteria and constraints.

Science and Engineering Practices:
Developing and Using Models
Engaging in Argument from Evidence
Constructing Explanations
Designing Solutions

Crosscutting Concepts:
Systems and System Models
Cause and Effect
Stability and Change

• Constructing extended written explanations
• Presenting structured arguments
• Evaluating peer claims
• Synthesizing multiple concepts into one coherent response
• Reflective reasoning

Phase 1 – Platform Foundations (1–3 days)

Students define:

Platform category
Target audience
Core purpose
Primary engagement drivers

Students must reference:

It Factors from Segment 2
Engagement reasoning from Segment 3

They justify why their platform would attract and retain users.

Purpose:
Ground creativity in analysis.

DOK: 3 – Apply conceptual understanding.

Phase 2 – Algorithm and Amplification Model (1–3 days)

Students construct a simplified amplification diagram:

User interaction ? Engagement signal ? Ranking ? Visibility ? Reinforcement

They describe:

How content is prioritized
How engagement influences distribution
How new users gain visibility

Students must explain how small engagement differences could scale over time.

Purpose:
Demonstrate systems-level understanding.

DOK: 4 – Develop and justify original system model.

Phase 3 – Ethical Safeguards (1–2 days)

Students draft a structured Ethics Statement addressing:

Privacy
Mental health
Misinformation
Moderation
Data collection

They must:

Identify at least one risk introduced by their design
Explain how a safeguard modifies the feedback loop
Acknowledge trade-offs

Purpose:
Integrate ethical reasoning into system design.

DOK: 4 – Evaluate and redesign system constraints.

Phase 4 – Prototype Development (1–4 days)

Students create a visual mock-up of:

Feed layout
Profile interface
Core feature interaction

Emphasis is placed on coherence rather than aesthetic perfection.

Students annotate:

Where amplification occurs
Where safeguards exist

Purpose:
Translate abstract reasoning into tangible structure.

DOK: 3

Phase 5 – Shark Tank and Presentation (1–3 days)

Students present:

Platform identity
Target audience
Engagement strategy
Algorithm logic
Ethical safeguards

Peers question feasibility, amplification risks, and trade-offs.

Students must defend their design using prior concepts.

Purpose:
Assess synthesis and argumentation.

DOK: 4 – Defend and evaluate system-level solution.

Phase 6 – Individual Reflection (1 day)

Students respond to prompts:

What trade-off was most difficult to balance?
Where might your platform produce unintended harm?
How did your understanding of amplification influence your design?

Purpose:
Solidify systems reasoning and ethical awareness.

DOK: 3

Students simulate the role of technology designers balancing innovation, engagement, profit, and responsibility.

They recognize:

Every design choice shapes user behavior.
No system is neutral.
Constraints influence outcomes.

• High engagement justifies all design decisions.
• Ethical safeguards eliminate all harm.
• Algorithms operate independently of user behavior.
• Creativity alone determines success.
• Trade-offs can be avoided rather than managed.

• Provide structured design templates.
• Offer algorithm diagram scaffolds.
• Allow varied presentation formats within rubric constraints.
• Offer guided conferencing during development.
• Extension: Require stress-testing scenario for advanced students.

Performance Rubric Categories:

System coherence
Engagement strategy grounded in It Factors
Accurate amplification modeling
Ethical reasoning and trade-off awareness
Quality of defense during questioning

Individual Reflection Rubric:

Depth of systems reasoning
Recognition of unintended consequences
Connection to prior segments