Safety boundary
Capstone work must use data, simulation, paper models, or teacher-approved low-risk materials only. Do not synthesize hazardous substances or improvise chemical processes.
Explicit capstone instruction
A strong defense explains the chemistry mechanism, quantitative evidence, lifecycle tradeoffs, and why the solution satisfies constraints.
Sustainability is multi-dimensional; acknowledge what the chosen solution improves and what it does not solve.
Include one future test that could change the recommendation.
Vocabulary: design defense; lifecycle; tradeoff; evidence; uncertainty.
Worked example
A lower-impact material may still be rejected if it fails a required durability or safety constraint; optimization balances priorities rather than maximizing one metric.
Guided question
Write a CER defending the selected candidate against the strongest alternative.
Independent work
- Submit criteria/constraints.
- Submit model prediction.
- Submit evidence/decision matrix.
- Write a defense with one remaining limitation and one next test.
Spiral retrieval bridge
- From Week 34: use lifecycle evidence across more than one stage.
- From Week 33: distinguish voltage from total energy capacity.
- From Week 24: compare evidence quality between measured and estimated energy data.
Misconception check
There is rarely a universally best sustainable material independent of use case and priorities.
Formative check
What makes a capstone recommendation credible?
Reveal response
Explicit criteria, valid chemistry, quantitative evidence, tradeoff analysis, and honest uncertainty.
Mentor evidence conference
Ask Archaemenes to challenge criteria, chemistry models, evidence quality, tradeoffs, and uncertainty.
Teacher guidance
Foundation: Use a structured defense template.
Core: Integrate chemistry and lifecycle data.
Extended: Evaluate sensitivity to changed priorities.