Elementary School Science Quiz: Arguing About Reversible Changes
20 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Arguing About Reversible ChangesQuestion 1 of 20

Look at these changes. Use evidence to argue which can be reversed by heating or cooling.​

Wax melting is reversible because when we cooled the melted wax, it became solid wax again. Bread toasting is not reversible because cooling the toast did not make it soft bread again. This shows some changes can change back and some cannot.
Wax melting and bread toasting are both reversible because they both use heat. If you cool them, they will both return to the way they were. Heat changes can always be undone.
Wax melted when we heated it. Bread turned brown in the toaster. After that, we put them on the counter.
Bread toasting is reversible because toast is crunchy. Wax melting is not reversible because wax is used for candles. So bread can change back but wax cannot.
← Back to quizzes

Elementary School Science Quiz

Elementary School Science Quiz: Arguing About Reversible Changes

Practice Arguing About Reversible Changes in Elementary School Science with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Arguing About Reversible Changes, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for Elementary School Science.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

Look at these changes. Use evidence to argue which can be reversed by heating or cooling.​

  1. Wax melting is reversible because when we cooled the melted wax, it became solid wax again. Bread toasting is not reversible because cooling the toast did not make it soft bread again. This shows some changes can change back and some cannot. (correct answer)
  2. Wax melting and bread toasting are both reversible because they both use heat. If you cool them, they will both return to the way they were. Heat changes can always be undone.
  3. Wax melted when we heated it. Bread turned brown in the toaster. After that, we put them on the counter.
  4. Bread toasting is reversible because toast is crunchy. Wax melting is not reversible because wax is used for candles. So bread can change back but wax cannot.
Explanation: This question assesses the skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are wax melting and bread toasting. REVERSIBLE changes: wax melting because wax can reharden. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: bread toasting because cooling doesn't unbrown bread. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which are reversible and which are not), EVIDENCE (references specific observations from the examples—'it became solid wax again', 'cooling the toast did not make it soft bread again'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'this shows some changes can change back and some cannot'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice B is incorrect because it makes a wrong claim that both are reversible with inaccurate reasoning. This error happens when students get the reversibility wrong and don't connect evidence to claim. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 2

Are both changes reversible? Use evidence to explain which can change back and why.​

  1. Both changes are reversible because they both use heat. Water can freeze, and toast can cool down, so both can change back. Cooling always fixes changes.
  2. Freezing water is reversible because when we warmed the ice, it melted back to water. Toasting bread is not reversible because cooling the toast did not turn it back into soft bread. This shows some changes can change back and some cannot. (correct answer)
  3. We put water in the freezer and it became ice. We toasted bread and it turned brown. Then we cooled both of them.
  4. Toasting bread is reversible because bread is food. Freezing water is not reversible because ice is too cold. That is my opinion.
Explanation: This question assesses the skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are freezing water and toasting bread. REVERSIBLE changes: freezing water because ice can melt back to water. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: toasting bread because cooling doesn't unbrown toast. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is B because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which are reversible and which are not), EVIDENCE (references specific observations from the examples—'it melted back to water', 'cooling the toast did not turn it back'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'this shows some changes can change back and some cannot'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice A is incorrect because it makes a wrong claim that both are reversible with inaccurate reasoning. This error happens when students get the reversibility wrong and don't connect evidence to claim. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 3

Make a claim using evidence: which changes can change back, and which cannot change back?

  1. Ice melting and butter melting are reversible because cooling made them hard again. Cooking an egg is not reversible because cooling the cooked egg did not make it raw again. This shows melting can change back, but cooking cannot. (correct answer)
  2. Ice melting is reversible, butter melting is reversible, and egg cooking is not reversible. These are the answers because my friend said so. I agree with my friend.
  3. Ice melted in the sun and butter melted on bread. The egg cooked in the pan. Then we put things on a plate to cool.
  4. Egg cooking is reversible because it can get cold again. Ice melting is not reversible because water spills. Butter melting is not reversible because it is greasy.
Explanation: This question assesses the skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are ice melting, butter melting, and egg cooking. REVERSIBLE changes: ice melting and butter melting because water can refreeze and butter can reharden. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: egg cooking because cooling doesn't uncook egg. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which are reversible and which are not), EVIDENCE (references specific observations from the examples—'cooling made them hard again', 'cooling the cooked egg did not make it raw again'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'this shows melting can change back, but cooking cannot'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice B is incorrect because it provides claim without evidence, using opinion. This error happens when students state opinion without observations and don't connect evidence to claim. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 4

Look at these changes. Use evidence to argue which changes are reversible and which are not.

  1. Crayon melted into a liquid puddle. When we cooled it, it became a hard crayon lump again. Bread was toasted and turned brown. When we cooled it, it stayed toast. So crayon melting is reversible, but toasting bread is not, because only the crayon changed back. (correct answer)
  2. Crayon melting is reversible because crayons are colorful. Toasting bread is not reversible because toast is crunchy. That is the evidence.
  3. Both changes are reversible because both were heated. Cooling always changes things back to the start. So toast will turn into bread again.
  4. Crayon melting is reversible and toast browning is not reversible. I will not use evidence because it is obvious.
Explanation: The skill is 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An argument has three parts: claim (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), evidence (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), and reasoning (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state; for not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are crayon melting and bread toasting; reversible change: crayon melting because cooling hardens it again; not reversible change: toasting bread because cooling doesn't change it back; a complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: claim (states which are reversible and which are not), evidence (references specific observations from the examples—'it became a hard crayon lump again', 'it stayed toast'), reasoning (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'so crayon melting is reversible, but toasting bread is not, because only the crayon changed back'); the argument uses observations to support the claim. Distractor choice D is incorrect because it has a claim without evidence or reasoning; this error happens when students state opinion without observations or don't connect evidence to claim. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—claim (what I believe), evidence (what I observed), reasoning (why this supports my claim); model argument construction like 'I claim crayon melting is reversible; my evidence is that when we cooled it, it became hard again; this shows it's reversible because we could change it back'; practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not—before multiple examples, using sentence frames like 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]; this shows [reasoning]'; emphasize claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains why); watch for students who give claims without evidence or use 'because it's obvious' instead of reasoning, and require all three parts in every argument.

Question 5

Use evidence to argue which changes can be reversed by cooling and which cannot be reversed.

  1. Ice turned into water. Chocolate melted into a gooey puddle. Egg cooked in a pan. Wax melted into liquid. We tried cooling all of them.
  2. Ice, chocolate, and wax are reversible because when we cooled them, they became hard again. The cooked egg is not reversible because cooling did not make it raw again. This shows some heating changes can change back, but cooking makes something new. (correct answer)
  3. All four changes are reversible because cooling fixes heating. If you cool the egg long enough, it will uncook. The evidence is that cooling makes things cold.
  4. Ice is reversible, chocolate is reversible, wax is reversible, and egg is not. That is my answer because I said so.
Explanation: The skill is 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An argument has three parts: claim (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), evidence (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), and reasoning (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state; for not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are ice melting, chocolate melting, egg cooking, and wax melting; reversible changes: ice melting, chocolate melting, wax melting because cooling makes them solid again; not reversible change: egg cooking because cooling doesn't make it raw; a complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is B because it includes all three parts of an argument: claim (states which are reversible and which are not), evidence (references specific observations from the examples—'when we cooled them, they became hard again', 'cooling did not make it raw again'), reasoning (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'this shows some heating changes can change back, but cooking makes something new'); the argument uses observations to support the claim. Distractor choice A is incorrect because it lists observations without a claim or reasoning; this error happens when students describe what happened without claiming which are reversible or don't connect evidence to claim. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—claim (what I believe), evidence (what I observed), reasoning (why this supports my claim); model argument construction like 'I claim wax melting is reversible; my evidence is that when we cooled it, it became solid again; this shows it's reversible because we could change it back'; practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not—before multiple examples, using sentence frames like 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]; this shows [reasoning]'; emphasize claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains why); watch for students who list observations without claims or don't explain their reasoning, and require all three parts in every argument.

Question 6

Look at these changes. Use evidence to argue which can change back and which cannot change back.

  1. Wax melted into liquid, and when we cooled it, it became solid wax again. An egg cooked, and when we cooled it, it stayed cooked. So wax melting is reversible, but egg cooking is not, because cooling only changed the wax back. (correct answer)
  2. Wax is reversible and egg is not reversible. Reversible means it can change back. That is the reason.
  3. Wax melted and the egg cooked. We used heat for both. Since they both changed, they are both reversible.
  4. We heated wax and heated an egg. We cooled them both. The wax was shiny and the egg was white.
Explanation: The skill is 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An argument has three parts: claim (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), evidence (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), and reasoning (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state; for not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are wax melting and egg cooking; reversible change: wax melting because cooling solidifies it again; not reversible change: egg cooking because cooling doesn't uncook it; a complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: claim (states which are reversible and which are not), evidence (references specific observations from the examples—'it became solid wax again', 'it stayed cooked'), reasoning (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'so wax melting is reversible, but egg cooking is not, because cooling only changed the wax back'); the argument uses observations to support the claim. Distractor choice C is incorrect because it has a wrong claim with partial evidence but no accurate reasoning; this error happens when students get the reversibility wrong or don't connect evidence to claim properly. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—claim (what I believe), evidence (what I observed), reasoning (why this supports my claim); model argument construction like 'I claim wax melting is reversible; my evidence is that when we cooled it, it became solid again; this shows it's reversible because we could change it back'; practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not—before multiple examples, using sentence frames like 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]; this shows [reasoning]'; emphasize claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains why); watch for students who use wrong claims or list observations without reasoning, and require all three parts in every argument.

Question 7

Are all these changes reversible? Use evidence to support your answer and explain why.

  1. Yes, all changes are reversible. When we cooled the cooked cookie, it should turn back into dough. Also, melted chocolate can always become a chocolate bar again.
  2. No, not all changes are reversible. Chocolate melted, and when we cooled it, it got hard again. Cookie dough baked into a cookie, and cooling did not turn it back into dough. This shows melting can change back, but baking cannot. (correct answer)
  3. The chocolate was brown and the cookie smelled good. We used an oven and a bowl. That is the evidence for reversibility.
  4. Not all changes are reversible. Cookie dough is not reversible and chocolate is reversible. I think this because cookies are my favorite snack.
Explanation: The skill is 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An argument has three parts: claim (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), evidence (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), and reasoning (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state; for not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are chocolate melting and cookie baking; reversible change: chocolate melting because cooling hardens it again; not reversible change: cookie baking because cooling doesn't turn it back to dough; a complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is B because it includes all three parts of an argument: claim (states not all are reversible), evidence (references specific observations from the examples—'when we cooled it, it got hard again', 'cooling did not turn it back into dough'), reasoning (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'this shows melting can change back, but baking cannot'); the argument uses observations to support the claim. Distractor choice A is incorrect because it has a wrong claim with inaccurate evidence; this error happens when students get the reversibility wrong or state opinion without accurate observations. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—claim (what I believe), evidence (what I observed), reasoning (why this supports my claim); model argument construction like 'I claim chocolate melting is reversible; my evidence is that when we cooled it, it became hard again; this shows it's reversible because we could change it back'; practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not—before multiple examples, using sentence frames like 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]; this shows [reasoning]'; emphasize claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains why); watch for students who give wrong claims without evidence or don't connect to reasoning, and require all three parts in every argument.

Question 8

Look at these changes. Which are reversible? Use evidence to prove your claim.​

  1. Juice freezing is reversible because we can freeze it again. Pancake cooking is not reversible because it tastes different. Crayon melting is not reversible because crayons are colorful.
  2. Crayon melting is reversible because when we cooled the melted crayon, it got hard again. Juice freezing is reversible because when we warmed it, it became juice again. Toast browning and pancake cooking are not reversible because cooling did not make them turn back into soft bread or raw batter. (correct answer)
  3. Juice froze in the freezer. A pancake cooked on a griddle. A crayon melted near a heater. Toast turned brown in a toaster.
  4. All four are reversible because they all changed with heat or cold. If we try hard, we can always change things back. That proves they are reversible.
Explanation: This question assesses the skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are juice freezing, pancake cooking, crayon melting, toast browning. REVERSIBLE changes: juice freezing and crayon melting because juice can thaw and crayon can reharden. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: pancake cooking and toast browning because cooling doesn't uncook pancake or unbrown toast. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is B because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which are reversible and which are not), EVIDENCE (references specific observations from the examples—'it got hard again', 'it became juice again', 'cooling did not make them turn back'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—implicit in connection). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice A is incorrect because it makes partial wrong claims with opinion not evidence. This error happens when students get the reversibility wrong and don't use observations fully. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 9

Which changes are reversible? Use evidence from the tests to explain your answer.​

  1. Frozen juice thawing is not reversible because it turns into liquid. Egg cooking is reversible because eggs can be cold. That proves the egg can change back.
  2. Frozen juice thawing is reversible because when we refroze the juice, it became solid again. Egg cooking is not reversible because cooling the cooked egg did not make it raw again. This shows freezing and melting can change back, but cooking cannot. (correct answer)
  3. We thawed frozen juice on the counter. We cooked an egg in a pan. Then we tried cooling both of them.
  4. Both are reversible because they both changed. If something changes, it can always change back. So juice and egg can both be reversed.
Explanation: This question assesses the skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are frozen juice thawing and egg cooking. REVERSIBLE changes: frozen juice thawing because juice can refreeze. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: egg cooking because cooling doesn't uncook egg. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is B because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which are reversible and which are not), EVIDENCE (references specific observations from the examples—'it became solid again', 'cooling the cooked egg did not make it raw again'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'this shows freezing and melting can change back, but cooking cannot'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice A is incorrect because it makes wrong claims with no evidence. This error happens when students get the reversibility wrong and state opinion without observations. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 10

Three changes happened: chocolate melted, cookie baked, ice melted. Use evidence to argue which can change back.

  1. Chocolate melting and ice melting can change back, but cookie baking cannot. When we cooled melted chocolate, it hardened, and when we froze water, it became ice again. Cooling the baked cookie did not turn it back into dough, so it cannot change back. (correct answer)
  2. All three can change back because they all used heat. If we cool them, they will return to the start. A cookie will become dough again if it gets cold.
  3. Chocolate melted when heated, cookie dough baked in the oven, and ice melted in the sun. These are the observations we wrote down. That is the whole argument.
  4. Cookie baking is reversible because cookies can be softened in milk. Chocolate melting is not reversible because it gets messy. Ice melting is reversible because ice is water.
Explanation: This question tests skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are chocolate melting, cookie baking, and ice melting. REVERSIBLE changes: chocolate melting, ice melting because evidence—cooled melted chocolate hardened, froze water and it became ice again. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: cookie baking because evidence—cooling baked cookie didn't turn it back into dough. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which can and cannot change back), EVIDENCE (references specific observations—'cooled melted chocolate, it hardened', 'froze water, it became ice again', 'Cooling the baked cookie did not turn it back into dough'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'so it cannot change back'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice C is incorrect because it only lists observations without making claims about reversibility or providing reasoning—describes what happened but doesn't argue which can change back. This error happens when students report data without analyzing or interpreting it to answer the question. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 11

Are both changes reversible? Use evidence to explain which can change back and why.

  1. Both changes are reversible because they both use heat. Water can freeze, and toast can cool down, so both can change back. Cooling always fixes changes.
  2. Freezing water is reversible because when we warmed the ice, it melted back to water. Toasting bread is not reversible because cooling the toast did not turn it back into soft bread. This shows some changes can change back and some cannot. (correct answer)
  3. We put water in the freezer and it became ice. We toasted bread and it turned brown. Then we cooled both of them.
  4. Toasting bread is reversible because bread is food. Freezing water is not reversible because ice is too cold. That is my opinion.
Explanation: This question assesses the skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are freezing water and toasting bread. REVERSIBLE changes: freezing water because ice can melt back to water. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: toasting bread because cooling doesn't unbrown toast. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is B because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which are reversible and which are not), EVIDENCE (references specific observations from the examples—'it melted back to water', 'cooling the toast did not turn it back'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'this shows some changes can change back and some cannot'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice A is incorrect because it makes a wrong claim that both are reversible with inaccurate reasoning. This error happens when students get the reversibility wrong and don't connect evidence to claim. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 12

Which changes are reversible? Use evidence from the tests to explain your answer.

  1. Frozen juice thawing is not reversible because it turns into liquid. Egg cooking is reversible because eggs can be cold. That proves the egg can change back.
  2. Frozen juice thawing is reversible because when we refroze the juice, it became solid again. Egg cooking is not reversible because cooling the cooked egg did not make it raw again. This shows freezing and melting can change back, but cooking cannot. (correct answer)
  3. We thawed frozen juice on the counter. We cooked an egg in a pan. Then we tried cooling both of them.
  4. Both are reversible because they both changed. If something changes, it can always change back. So juice and egg can both be reversed.
Explanation: This question assesses the skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are frozen juice thawing and egg cooking. REVERSIBLE changes: frozen juice thawing because juice can refreeze. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: egg cooking because cooling doesn't uncook egg. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is B because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which are reversible and which are not), EVIDENCE (references specific observations from the examples—'it became solid again', 'cooling the cooked egg did not make it raw again'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'this shows freezing and melting can change back, but cooking cannot'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice A is incorrect because it makes wrong claims with no evidence. This error happens when students get the reversibility wrong and state opinion without observations. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 13

Use evidence to argue which changes can change back: crayon melting, ice melting, and pancake cooking.​

  1. Crayon melting and ice melting are reversible because cooling made them hard again. Pancake cooking is not reversible because cooling the pancake did not turn it back into batter. This shows melting can change back, but cooking cannot. (correct answer)
  2. All three are reversible because we can cool them. A pancake can become batter again if we put it in the freezer. So all changes can change back.
  3. Crayons are for coloring, ice is cold, and pancakes are breakfast. That is evidence that crayons and ice are reversible. Pancakes are not reversible because they are yummy.
  4. The crayon melted, the ice melted, and the pancake cooked. We tried to cool them after. Those were our observations.
Explanation: This question assesses the skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are crayon melting, ice melting, and pancake cooking. REVERSIBLE changes: crayon melting and ice melting because crayon can reharden and water can refreeze. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: pancake cooking because cooling doesn't uncook pancake. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which are reversible and which are not), EVIDENCE (references specific observations from the examples—'cooling made them hard again', 'cooling the pancake did not turn it back into batter'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'this shows melting can change back, but cooking cannot'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice B is incorrect because it makes a wrong claim that all are reversible without accurate evidence. This error happens when students get the reversibility wrong and don't use observations. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 14

Make a claim using evidence: which changes can change back, and which cannot change back?​

  1. Ice melting and butter melting are reversible because cooling made them hard again. Cooking an egg is not reversible because cooling the cooked egg did not make it raw again. This shows melting can change back, but cooking cannot. (correct answer)
  2. Ice melting is reversible, butter melting is reversible, and egg cooking is not reversible. These are the answers because my friend said so. I agree with my friend.
  3. Ice melted in the sun and butter melted on bread. The egg cooked in the pan. Then we put things on a plate to cool.
  4. Egg cooking is reversible because it can get cold again. Ice melting is not reversible because water spills. Butter melting is not reversible because it is greasy.
Explanation: This question assesses the skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are ice melting, butter melting, and egg cooking. REVERSIBLE changes: ice melting and butter melting because water can refreeze and butter can reharden. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: egg cooking because cooling doesn't uncook egg. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which are reversible and which are not), EVIDENCE (references specific observations from the examples—'cooling made them hard again', 'cooling the cooked egg did not make it raw again'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'this shows melting can change back, but cooking cannot'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice B is incorrect because it provides claim without evidence, using opinion. This error happens when students state opinion without observations and don't connect evidence to claim. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 15

Sort these changes as can change back or cannot. Use evidence: juice froze, pancake cooked, crayon melted.

  1. Juice freezing and crayon melting can change back, but pancake cooking cannot. We warmed the frozen juice and it became liquid again, and we cooled melted crayon and it became hard again. Cooling the cooked pancake did not turn it back into batter, so it cannot change back. (correct answer)
  2. All three can change back because we can heat or cool them. Pancakes can become batter again if we mash them. That proves the change is reversible.
  3. Juice froze in the freezer, pancake cooked on the pan, and crayon melted near a heater. We tried heating and cooling. Those are the steps we did.
  4. Juice freezing is not reversible because it is sticky. Pancake cooking is reversible because it is flat. Crayon melting is not reversible because crayons are colorful.
Explanation: This question tests skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are juice freezing, pancake cooking, and crayon melting. REVERSIBLE changes: juice freezing, crayon melting because evidence—warmed frozen juice became liquid again, cooled melted crayon became hard again. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: pancake cooking because evidence—cooling cooked pancake didn't turn it back into batter. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which can and cannot change back), EVIDENCE (references specific observations—'warmed the frozen juice and it became liquid again', 'cooled melted crayon and it became hard again', 'Cooling the cooked pancake did not turn it back into batter'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'so it cannot change back'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice D is incorrect because it uses irrelevant characteristics instead of evidence—'sticky', 'flat', 'colorful' have nothing to do with reversibility and shows no experimental observations. This error happens when students make up random reasons instead of using evidence from testing. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 16

Look at these changes. Use evidence to argue which are reversible: water froze, pancake cooked, wax melted.

  1. Water freezing and wax melting are reversible, but pancake cooking is not. When we warmed the ice, it melted back to water, and when we cooled melted wax, it became solid again. Cooling the cooked pancake did not turn it back into batter, so it cannot change back. (correct answer)
  2. Pancake cooking is reversible because it can be cut into pieces. Water freezing is not reversible because ice is different from water. Wax melting is not reversible because wax is used for candles.
  3. Water froze, pancake cooked, and wax melted. We tried to reverse them by heating or cooling. Some changed and some did not.
  4. All three are reversible because we used temperature. Water can melt, pancakes can cool, and wax can melt. That proves they can all change back.
Explanation: This question tests skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are water freezing, pancake cooking, and wax melting. REVERSIBLE changes: water freezing, wax melting because evidence—warmed ice and it melted back to water, cooled melted wax and it became solid again. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: pancake cooking because evidence—cooling cooked pancake didn't turn it back into batter. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which are reversible and which are not), EVIDENCE (references specific observations—'warmed the ice, it melted back to water', 'cooled melted wax, it became solid again', 'Cooling the cooked pancake did not turn it back into batter'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'so it cannot change back'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice D is incorrect because it makes wrong claims with faulty reasoning—says all are reversible just because temperature was used, ignoring that cooling pancakes doesn't turn them back to batter. This error happens when students assume all temperature changes work the same without considering the actual evidence. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 17

Do you agree that all heating changes can reverse? Use evidence from: crayon melted, egg cooked, juice froze.

  1. I disagree. Crayon melting is reversible because cooling made it hard again, and juice freezing is reversible because warming made it liquid again. Egg cooking is not reversible because cooling the cooked egg did not make it raw again, so not all heating changes reverse. (correct answer)
  2. I agree because we can always undo heating with cooling. The crayon got hard again, so the egg will too. Juice freezing also shows all changes can reverse.
  3. The crayon melted, the egg cooked, and the juice froze. We used a heater, a pan, and a freezer. Those are the tools we used.
  4. I disagree because eggs are gross. Crayons are fun, so they can change back. Juice is my favorite drink, so it can change back too.
Explanation: This question tests skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are crayon melting, egg cooking, and juice freezing. REVERSIBLE changes: crayon melting, juice freezing because evidence—cooling made crayon hard again, warming made frozen juice liquid again. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: egg cooking because evidence—cooling cooked egg didn't make it raw again. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (disagrees that all heating changes can reverse), EVIDENCE (references specific observations—'cooling made it hard again', 'warming made it liquid again', 'cooling the cooked egg did not make it raw again'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows not all changes reverse—'so not all heating changes reverse'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice D is incorrect because it uses personal preferences instead of evidence—'eggs are gross', 'crayons are fun', 'juice is my favorite' are opinions, not experimental observations. This error happens when students use feelings instead of data to support claims. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 18

Four materials were heated. Use evidence to argue which changes can be reversed by cooling.

  1. Ice and chocolate melted, egg cooked, and wax melted. We cooled them after heating. Ice, chocolate, and wax became solid again, but the cooked egg stayed cooked, so only those three can change back. (correct answer)
  2. All four changes can be reversed by cooling. We can cool anything and it will go back. Eggs will become runny again if they get cold enough.
  3. Ice, chocolate, and wax are reversible, and egg is not. I claim this because ice is cold and eggs are breakfast foods. That shows which ones can change back.
  4. Ice melted to water, chocolate melted, egg cooked, and wax melted. When we cooled them, some got hard. That happened after we did the test.
Explanation: This question tests skill 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An ARGUMENT has three parts: CLAIM (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), EVIDENCE (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), REASONING (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state. For not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are ice melting, chocolate melting, egg cooking, and wax melting. REVERSIBLE changes: ice melting, chocolate melting, wax melting because evidence—cooling made them solid again. NOT REVERSIBLE changes: egg cooking because evidence—cooked egg stayed cooked when cooled. A complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: CLAIM (states which can change back), EVIDENCE (references specific observations—'We cooled them after heating. Ice, chocolate, and wax became solid again, but the cooked egg stayed cooked'), REASONING (explains why this evidence shows reversibility—'so only those three can change back'). The argument uses observations to support the claim. Choice C is incorrect because it makes claims without proper evidence—uses irrelevant reasons like 'ice is cold and eggs are breakfast foods' instead of observations from the experiment. This error happens when students state opinions or unrelated facts instead of using experimental evidence. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—CLAIM (what I believe), EVIDENCE (what I observed), REASONING (why this supports my claim). Model argument construction: 'I claim ice melting is reversible. My evidence is that when we put the water back in the freezer, it became ice again. This shows it's reversible because we could change it back.' Practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not reversible—before multiple examples. Sentence frames: 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]. This shows [reasoning].' Emphasize: Claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains WHY). Use comparison: Show ice melting (observe melting, observe refreezing, conclude reversible) vs egg cooking (observe cooking, try cooling, observe it doesn't uncook, conclude not reversible). Watch for: Students who give claims without evidence, list observations without claims, use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, or don't explain their reasoning. Require all three parts—claim, evidence, reasoning—in every argument.

Question 19

Look at these changes. Which are reversible? Use evidence and reasons to explain your claim.

  1. Butter melted on warm bread, and when we cooled it, it became solid again. Bread toasted and turned brown, and cooling did not make it bread again. So butter melting is reversible, but toasting bread is not, because only butter changed back when cooled. (correct answer)
  2. Both are reversible because both changes happened with heat. If we cool the toast, it will un-toast. The butter will also get hard.
  3. Butter is reversible and toast is not reversible. I claim this because my teacher said so, not because of the test.
  4. The butter was yellow and the toast was brown. Brown means it is not reversible. Yellow means it is reversible.
Explanation: The skill is 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An argument has three parts: claim (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), evidence (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), and reasoning (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state; for not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are butter melting and bread toasting; reversible change: butter melting because cooling solidifies it again; not reversible change: toasting bread because cooling doesn't un-toast it; a complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: claim (states which are reversible and which are not), evidence (references specific observations from the examples—'it became solid again', 'cooling did not make it bread again'), reasoning (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'so butter melting is reversible, but toasting bread is not, because only butter changed back when cooled'); the argument uses observations to support the claim. Distractor choice C is incorrect because it has a claim without evidence, relying on authority instead of observations; this error happens when students use opinion not evidence or don't address all examples. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—claim (what I believe), evidence (what I observed), reasoning (why this supports my claim); model argument construction like 'I claim butter melting is reversible; my evidence is that when we cooled it, it became solid again; this shows it's reversible because we could change it back'; practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not—before multiple examples, using sentence frames like 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]; this shows [reasoning]'; emphasize claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains why); watch for students who use 'because teacher said' instead of evidence or give partial arguments, and require all three parts in every argument.

Question 20

Look at these changes. Explain using evidence which changes are reversible and which are not reversible.

  1. Water froze into ice in the freezer. When we warmed it, it melted back to water. Bread was toasted and turned brown. When we cooled it, it stayed brown toast. So freezing water is reversible, but toasting bread is not, because only the water changed back. (correct answer)
  2. The ice was cold and the toast was warm. Ice is from water and toast is from bread. That is why ice is reversible.
  3. Both changes are reversible because they both used heat. If we put the toast in the freezer, it will become bread again. The ice can also become water.
  4. Freezing is reversible and toasting is not reversible. I know because my family does it at home.
Explanation: The skill is 2-PS1-4: Constructing an argument with evidence that some temperature changes are reversible and some are not. An argument has three parts: claim (what you believe—which changes are reversible?), evidence (observations and test results—what happened when we tried to reverse?), and reasoning (why evidence supports claim—this shows it's reversible because...). For reversible changes, evidence shows applying opposite temperature returns material to original state; for not reversible changes, evidence shows even with opposite temperature, material stays changed. The examples are water freezing and bread toasting; reversible change: freezing water because ice can melt back; not reversible change: toasting bread because cooling doesn't unbrown toast; a complete argument includes claim about each, evidence from observations, and reasoning explaining why. The correct answer is A because it includes all three parts of an argument: claim (states which are reversible and which are not), evidence (references specific observations from the examples—'it melted back to water', 'it stayed brown toast'), reasoning (explains why this evidence shows reversibility or not—'so freezing water is reversible, but toasting bread is not, because only the water changed back'); the argument uses observations to support the claim. Distractor choice D is incorrect because it has a claim without evidence, using personal experience instead of observations; this error happens when students state opinion without observations or don't connect evidence to claim. To help students construct evidence-based arguments: Teach the three-part structure explicitly using graphic organizer—claim (what I believe), evidence (what I observed), reasoning (why this supports my claim); model argument construction like 'I claim freezing water is reversible; my evidence is that when we warmed it, it became water again; this shows it's reversible because we could change it back'; practice with clear examples first—one reversible, one not—before multiple examples, using sentence frames like 'I claim [change] is [reversible/not reversible] because [evidence]; this shows [reasoning]'; emphasize claims need evidence (not 'I think'), evidence must be observations (not opinions), reasoning connects evidence to claim (explains why); watch for students who give claims without evidence or use 'because I said so' instead of evidence, and require all three parts in every argument.