NGSS K-2-ETS1-3
Analyze data from tests of two objects designed to solve the same problem to compare the strengths and weaknesses of how each performs.
At a Glance
THIS STANDARD FOCUSES ON
Testing and comparing two or more engineering solutions to the same problem — analyzing real performance data to determine which design works better and why. The catapult and balloon rocket activities both provide clear comparison data.
KEY SKILLS ADDRESSED
Engineering design thinking, data collection and comparison, analysis of trade-offs, iteration, measurement, evidence-based recommendation
CORE CONCEPTS
Engineering design cycle (build → test → compare → improve), design criteria, constraints, variable testing, performance comparison
HOW BRAINIAC BUNCHSUPPORTS THIS
Episode 6's Marshmallow Catapult is the strongest engineering design activity in Season 1 — kids build and test 3 pull-back configurations, compare performance data, and identify what change improved the result. Episode 3's Balloon Rocket Races tests 6 configurations for direct comparison.
Official Standard Language
Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), 2013
Standard Code:
NGSS K-2-ETS1-3
Grade Level:
Kindergarten–Grade 2
Performance Expectation:
Analyze data from tests of two objects designed to solve the same problem to compare the strengths and weaknesses of how each performs.
Disciplinary Core Idea:
ETS1.C: Optimizing the Design Solution — Because there is always more than one possible solution to a problem, it is useful to compare and test designs.
How Our Content Aligns
Mapping Brainiac Bunch resources to this standard
Little Lab Challenges supports NGSS K-2-ETS1-3 through two Season 1 episodes that are inherently comparative engineering challenges. Episode 6's catapult tests different rubber-band pull-back distances to compare launch performance. Episode 3's balloon rocket tests different balloon sizes and configurations. Both generate real data for student analysis.
✓
Episodes:
Episode 6 (catapult with 3+ pull-back configurations — compare which launches farthest) and Episode 3 (balloon rocket with 6 configurations — compare speeds, distances, designs)
✓
Activities:
Marshmallow Catapult Build Challenge (build, test 3 configs, redesign v2) and Balloon Rocket Race Track (test 6 configurations, compare in Score Sheet)
✓
Printables:
Catapult Blueprint + Score Sheet (engineering documentation), Rocket Race Score Sheet (comparison data), Newton's Laws Diagram Card (member bonus — connects engineering to physics vocabulary)
✓
Topics:
Engineering & Design (Applied Science) — design cycle, build-test-compare, forces and motion application
Aligned Episodes
2 Episodes
supporting this standard
🏹
Mini Marshmallow Catapult
Little Lab Challenges • 8 minutes • Ages 5–10
🚀
Balloon Rocket Races
Little Lab Challenges • 8 minutes • Ages 5–10
Using This Standard Across Ages
For Younger Learners (Ages 5-6)
Run the catapult as a whole-group activity first — teacher builds, kids watch all three pull-back tests and physically observe the different distances. Ask: 'Which pull-back made it go farthest? How do you know?' Let kids take turns pulling back and launching in the Score Sheet recording. Skip formal written analysis; use verbal comparison: 'Which one won? By how much?'
For Grade-Level Learners (Ages 7-8)
Have kids build their own catapult (or in pairs) following the Blueprint, then test independently. After 6 rounds of Score Sheet data, ask: 'What one change would make your catapult better? How do you know from your data?' This is the full engineering design cycle argument. Introduce the vocabulary: this is called 'redesigning' — what engineers do every time a test shows room to improve.
For Advanced Learners (Ages 9-10)
Run two full catapult builds back to back — Version 1 (standard) and Version 2 (one change chosen by the student). Record both datasets side by side. Write a design comparison: 'Version 2 was [better/worse] than Version 1 at [the launch distance criteria] because [evidence from data]. Next I would try [specific change] because [reasoning].' This is the full K-2 ETS1 engineering argument.
Evidence of Learning
Observable outcomes and assessment support
Students demonstrate mastery when they can:
✓ Describe what they tested and what they measured (the criteria for success).
✓ Record data from at least 2 different configurations.
✓ State which configuration performed better using data as evidence ('Configuration X went farthest because...').
✓ Identify one thing they would change to improve the design and explain why they think it would help.
Assessment Note:
Score Sheet data comparison (formative), Version 1 vs Version 2 comparison table (summative for advanced), oral engineering argument: 'Which balloon went farthest and why?', design portfolio: Blueprint (Version 1) + Score Sheet + written comparison.