Engineering Design · California Grade 6-8

MS-ETS1-3

Analyze data from tests to determine similarities and differences among several design solutions to identify the best characteristics of each that can be combined into a new solution to better meet the criteria for success.

Source: California Department of Education, NGSS Preferred Integrated Course Model, Grade 6-8 (accessed 2026-10-18)

Chapters

Chapter 2: Molecules and Extended Structurespractice

Lab 3 pools push, load and drop results across the class and asks groups to name the features shared by the designs that passed and build a second version; W9 uses drop-test and cost data from three prototypes the same way. Practice, not assessment, because the problems are small and the data are partly simulated.

Chapter 3: Substances and Their Propertiespractice

In Lab 2 students sketch a two-material spoon that pairs a metal bowl with a plastic handle, and in Worksheet 9 they keep a feature from a weaker tank design when building their own line. Both are small, guided versions of the PE's combine-the-best-features idea, so the role is practice; no test data from student-built designs is analyzed.

Chapter 13: Atoms in Chemical Reactionsassesses

The lesson's engineering spread shows how two improvements to an ibuprofen process were combined into a better one. In Lab 3 the class tests three gas-trap designs, pools the mass-change, sealing-time and cost data, identifies the strongest feature of each design and builds a combined version; W9 and the slide task repeat the same analysis with simulated process data. This PE is listed for grades 6-8 in the California sequence.

Chapter 14: Energy in Chemical Reactionsassesses

Lab 3 gives students test data from six simulated hand-warmer prototypes, asks what each did well and badly for three different users, and requires them to propose a new design that combines the best characteristics. W5 practices the same data analysis on a smaller set.

Chapter 18: The Water Cycleassesses

W9 assesses this PE: students analyze side-by-side test data from six solar still prototypes, identify the best characteristic of each, and combine them into a new design. The Lab 1 class results table and the slide 22 design-data task practice the same move.

Chapter 24: Heat, Temperature, and State Changesassesses

In Lab 3 groups post their first-round melt data, compare the features of the best and worst designs across the class, and build a second version that combines the most effective characteristics, then retest it. The class data table and the written redesign rationale are direct evidence for this PE.

Chapter 26: Mass Wasting, Tsunamis, and Floodspractice

The lesson's DART story shows engineers combining a wider sound beam, a tiltmeter and new software into a more reliable design. Students do the same with their own work: in Lab 2 they borrow features from other groups' bridges and retest, and in Lab 3 they merge the strongest steps of two warning procedures. The redesign cycle is short and framed by the teacher, so the role is practice.

Chapter 27: Biodiversitypractice

The lesson's engineering spread combines a gecko-inspired texture with a mussel-inspired glue after testing each one. Students analyze that test story (slide 21) and, in Lab 3, use pilot data to pick the best characteristic of each single plan and combine them into a hybrid, then check it against the criteria; W9 q4 asks how a half-marsh, half-pond design borrows the best feature of two designs that each fail.

Chapter 28: The Importance of Healthy Ecosystemspractice

In Lab 2 every team posts its filter design and test results, then uses the class table to identify features that gave the clearest and fastest water and combines them in a second round. Only one redesign cycle is run, so the chapter treats this as practice.

Worksheets (13)

Chapter	Worksheet	Role	How it connects
Ch. 2	W9 · Design Brief: A Touchable Salt-Crystal Model for Science Night Transfer and design	practice	Students use drop-test and cost data from three prototypes to identify the best feature of each and propose a combined design.
Ch. 3	W9 · Design Challenge: A Float-Sink Line for Five Plastics Transfer and design	practice	Students analyze what each candidate design does well and poorly and are asked to combine the best features into a new design that better meets the criteria, which is the heart of this PE.
Ch. 7	W9 · Where Should the Trees Go? Judging Three Carbon-Capture Plans Transfer and design	practice	After comparing, students combine the best characteristics of two sites into a new plan. The data come from a table rather than from tests students ran, so this builds toward the PE rather than meeting it.
Ch. 10	W9 · Design Challenge: A Sealed Mini-World That Survives Twenty-One Days Transfer and design	practice	Part B compares three prototypes' test data to find the best feature of each and combine them into a new design, which is the practice this PE describes.
Ch. 13	W9 · Choose the Greener Route: Combining the Best of Three Process Designs Transfer and design	assesses	Students compare simulated batch data from three process routes, identify which characteristic of each performs best against the criteria, and design a combined route whose predicted performance they calculate. This is the PE's task as written. The code is listed for grades 6-8 in the California sequence and is paired with this lesson's engineering spread.
Ch. 13	W10 · Atoms in Chemical Reactions: Mastery Check Retrieval and mastery check	practice	One item computes process efficiency from mass data and one asks why combining two improvements can beat either alone, retrieving the engineering reasoning from the lesson's green chemistry spread. This PE is listed for grades 6-8 in the California sequence.
Ch. 14	W5 · Three Prototypes, One Winter: Reading Hand-Warmer Test Curves Data and graphing	practice	Students compare test data from three prototypes, name what each did best and worst, and propose a fourth design that combines the best characteristics. The set is small and the criteria are supplied, so this builds the practice that Lab 3 assesses with six prototypes and three users.
Ch. 14	W10 · Energy in Reactions: Mastery Check Retrieval and mastery check	supports	The synthesis item asks what characteristic to change in a prototype that fails one criterion, a small piece of the analysis of test data that Lab 3 assesses in full.
Ch. 15	W5 · Does It Break Down, and Is It Worth It? Two Cup Datasets Data and graphing	practice	Students analyze test data on four competing cup materials to find each one's strengths and weaknesses, which is the data-analysis step of comparing design solutions; the data are simulated and the decision is classroom-scale.
Ch. 18	W9 · Design Challenge: A Solar Still That Runs on the Water Cycle Transfer and design	assesses	Students analyze side-by-side test data from six prototypes, identify which feature of each one helped, and combine the best characteristics into a new design, which is the PE as written.
Ch. 26	W9 · After the Fire: Choosing Debris-Flow Defenses for Sycamore Canyon Transfer and design	practice	Because no single option meets every criterion, students identify each option's strongest feature and combine several into a plan, as the DART engineers combined three fixes. The options come with engineers' estimates rather than students' own test data, so this is practice.
Ch. 26	W10 · Mass Wasting, Tsunamis and Floods: Mastery Check Retrieval and mastery check	supports	Item 6 checks that students remember how engineers combined three fixes into a more reliable DART system. Recalling the case does not require students to analyze test data, so the item supports rather than assesses this PE.
Ch. 27	W8 · The Island Fox Jigsaw: Twelve Cards, Five Solutions, One Recovery Collaborative investigation	supports	Comparing the strengths and weaknesses of each solution and explaining why their combination succeeded uses the same reasoning engineers use to combine the best features of several designs.

Labs (10)

Chapter	Lab	Role	How it connects
Ch. 2	Lab 3 · Sheets or Networks: Build a Structure That Survives Engineering design challenge	practice	In the debrief the class pools test results, names the features shared by the structures that passed (triangles, connections in three directions, four-connection nodes) and groups use them in a second build. The textbook lesson has no engineering strand; this lab supplies the practice.
Ch. 3	Lab 2 · Pick the Spoon: Property Data Decides Data-driven decision	practice	The final design question invites students to combine a metal bowl with a plastic handle, using property data from each, which is the combine-the-best-features idea of the PE in a simple form.
Ch. 13	Lab 3 · Trap Every Gram: Design a Gas Catcher for a Fair Mass Test Engineering design challenge	assesses	Students compare three designs against the same criteria using class data, name which feature made each design win a criterion, and justify a combined design with numbers. That is the evidence this PE asks for; the redesign test shows whether the combination actually improved the result. Listed for grades 6-8 in the California sequence.
Ch. 14	Lab 3 · The Decision Meeting: Six Hand-Warmer Prototypes, Three Customers Data-driven decision	assesses	The six prototypes differ by one feature at a time, so students can attribute each result to a feature, name the best characteristic of each prototype for a given criterion, and combine them into a proposed design with predicted performance. That is the PE as written, done on supplied data.
Ch. 18	Lab 1 · Build, Test, Improve: a Solar Distiller That Runs on Sunlight and Gravity Engineering design challenge	practice	The class comparison table pools every group's feature change and output; students use it to propose a combined design, which builds the practice of analyzing several solutions without fully assessing it.
Ch. 24	Lab 3 · Save the Ice Cube: Design, Test and Improve an Insulated Holder Engineering design challenge	assesses	Groups compare the class's first-round results, name the features shared by the most and least effective holders (q5), build a second version that combines features from at least two other designs, and retest it (q6, q7). The class table and the written redesign rationale are direct evidence for this PE.
Ch. 26	Lab 2 · Clear the Flood: Design, Test and Combine a Model Bridge Engineering design challenge	practice	After the matrix, each group names the strongest feature of at least two other designs, combines them in version 2 and retests it, then reports whether the combination beat every original on each criterion, mirroring the three combined DART fixes in the lesson.
Ch. 26	Lab 3 · Four Hours or Twenty Minutes: Write a Tsunami Warning Procedure Data-driven decision	practice	Two groups compare their scores event by event, identify which steps of each prevented misses or false alarms, and write a combined procedure, as the DART engineers combined three fixes. The cycle is short, so the role is practice.
Ch. 27	Lab 3 · Bring Back the Forest: Choosing a Restoration Plan for Driftwood Cove Data-driven decision	practice	Students use projection data to find each plan's best characteristic (speed, staying power, low cost) and combine them into a hybrid that they check against the criteria, mirroring the lesson's gecko-and-mussel adhesive. The data are simulated rather than gathered from students' own tests, so this is practice.
Ch. 28	Lab 2 · Build a Better Filter: Can Sand and Gravel Do a Watershed's Job? Engineering design challenge	practice	Every team posts its design and results; students use the class table to find which features gave the clearest water and which gave the fastest flow, and combine them in round 2 (q2, q3, q7). Only one redesign cycle is run and the materials are fixed, so this is practice.