Water for Schools
Menu

Project Grade 7 Science

Waverton Creek Temperature Study: Runoff From the Parking Lot

A five-session grade 7 science project on whether parking lot runoff warms a creek, ending in a report and one affordable fix for a fictional public works office.

Objectives

  1. Students will write a testable hypothesis about parking lot runoff and creek temperature.
  2. Students will collect and record temperature data on at least three days using a fixed procedure.
  3. Students will support a claim about fish habitat with their own data and propose one fix within stated limits.

Vocabulary

Impervious surface
An impervious surface is any hard surface, like a road, roof, or parking lot, that rain cannot soak through. The more impervious surface a town has, the more stormwater rushes off it.
Dissolved oxygen
Dissolved oxygen is the oxygen gas mixed into water that fish and other underwater animals breathe. Cold, moving water holds more oxygen than warm, still water.

Also: thermal pollution, outfall, independent variable, control

Teacher overview

Asphalt sitting in the sun all afternoon holds a great deal of heat, and the first rain to cross it carries that heat straight into the nearest stream. This project asks students whether the parking lot at their school does that to the creek beside it, and it is built as a science-fair-ready investigation with a hypothesis, one variable being tested, and a fixed data-recording procedure. Over five sessions students gather temperature data on at least three days, then write a monitoring report and a single recommendation for the fictional Waverton Public Works Department, which must describe its stormwater work to the state each year. Teachers replace the Waverton names with their own school and a nearby creek or drainage channel that students can reach safely from the bank.

Waverton Creek Temperature Study: Runoff From the Parking Lot — Grade 7 Science
Name: ____________________________ Date: ______________

Project Brief

Driving question: Does runoff from the Waverton Middle School parking lot raise the temperature of Waverton Creek enough to matter for the fish that live there?

Your client. Waverton Public Works is a fictional office written for this project. It has to report each year on how school and town property affects the creek. It has asked your class for data and for one recommendation it could afford.

Why temperature matters. Warm water holds less dissolved oxygen than cold water. Most fish need dissolved oxygen above 5 mg/L to stay healthy. A creek that warms after every storm can lose the cold-water fish that used to live there, even if nothing else about the water changes.

Your investigation. Your team writes one testable hypothesis. The variable you test is distance from the parking lot outfall, or time since the last rain, and your teacher will assign which one your class uses. The thing you measure is water temperature. Everything else stays the same: the same thermometer, the same time of day, the same depth, and the same three marked spots along the bank.

Constraints. Your team works inside these limits.

  1. Five class sessions, including the presentation.
  2. A materials budget of $75, which is fictional and set for this project. Anything you propose buying must fit inside it.
  3. For the measurements themselves, school thermometers, a stopwatch, and a measuring tape only. No new equipment for the investigation.
  4. Data from the bank at the three marked access points. Nobody enters the water.
  5. At least three sampling days, and one of them within 24 hours of rain.
  6. Every reading goes on the shared class data table on the day it is taken.

Safety. An adult supervises every visit to the creek. Stay back from steep or slippery banks, and skip a sampling day if the water is high or fast after a storm. Runoff and creek water can carry germs, so wear gloves when handling a probe that has been in the water, never taste or drink the water, and wash your hands afterward.

What you turn in. A four-page monitoring report for Waverton Public Works, containing a labeled site map with the three sampling points and the outfall, your hypothesis, your data table, one graph, a claim about the creek supported by your own numbers, and one recommendation that fits the budget. Your team also gives a five-minute presentation to the class acting as the public works staff.

Milestones

  1. Session 1, plan the study. Walk the site, mark the three sampling points, and sketch the site map. Write your hypothesis in an if-then form, and name the variable you are testing, the thing you will measure, and three conditions you will hold the same. Turn in the map and the hypothesis sheet at the end of the session.
  2. Session 2, first data day. Take the first set of readings using the procedure your team wrote. Record the time, the air temperature, the weather, and the water temperature at each point. Turn in the completed data sheet, with any problems in the procedure noted at the bottom.
  3. Session 3, wet-weather data day. Sample within 24 hours of rain, following the same procedure. Add the readings to the shared class table and write two sentences comparing this day with the dry day. Turn in the data sheet and the comparison.
  4. Session 4, third data day, analyze and draft. Begin with a third set of readings at the three points, using the same procedure, then build one graph from the class table. Write your claim, list the evidence from your own data that supports it, and explain how the evidence connects to the fish habitat information in the brief. Draft the recommendation and price it against the budget. Turn in the graph and the draft report.
  5. Session 5, report and present. Turn in the finished four-page report. Give the five-minute presentation, then answer two questions from the class acting as public works staff.

From Water for Schools (waterforschools.org). This material is in the public domain (CC0) and may be copied, edited, and shared freely.

Rubric
Criterion Emerging Developing Proficient Advanced
Investigation design No testable hypothesis, or variables are unnamed Hypothesis stated but the variable tested is unclear Testable hypothesis with the variable tested, the measurement, and at least three held conditions named All of proficient, plus an explanation of how a held condition could have been broken and what that would do to the results
Data quality Fewer than three sampling days, or readings are missing conditions Three days recorded but the procedure changed between them Three or more days recorded with the same procedure, times, weather, and locations noted All of proficient, plus repeated readings at a point to show how much the measurement itself varies
Evidence-based claim Claim is stated with no data behind it Claim refers to the data in general terms Claim is supported by specific numbers from the team's own table and linked to fish habitat Claim is supported by specific numbers, linked to habitat, and states what result would have disproved it
Recommendation within constraints No recommendation, or one that ignores the limits Recommendation given but not priced or not feasible One recommendation that fits the budget, the equipment limit, and the site Recommendation fits every constraint and names what the office should measure to see whether it worked
Report and presentation Missing required parts; hard to follow Most parts present but the map or graph is unlabeled All required parts present, labeled, and organized for the client All parts present and polished, with the presentation answering questions using the data

Differentiation

Support

Provide a pre-drawn site map with the outfall marked and the three sampling points numbered, plus a data sheet with the columns already labeled. Give a hypothesis frame: "If runoff from the parking lot warms the creek, then the temperature at point ___ will be ___ than at point ___."

Extension

Have students add a second measurement, such as the temperature of the pavement surface itself at the same times, and analyze whether pavement temperature predicts the size of the temperature change at the outfall. Ask them to state one question a second season of data could answer that a single season cannot.

ELL supports

Pre-teach "runoff," "outfall," "upstream," and "downstream" at the site itself, pointing to each feature before the first data day. Provide the data sheet with picture cues for weather conditions and allow team members to record numbers while a partner reads the thermometer aloud.

Extensions

Invite a stormwater staff member from the local public works or conservation district to hear the presentations and respond to the recommendations. Students who continue the work can repeat the sampling in a different season and compare the two data sets in a science fair entry.