The 42nd Period | STEM Education Hub

🎯 Your Assignment

Drawing your mission assignment…

You must choose exactly one target — a planet, moon, asteroid, or comet — that genuinely fits your assigned science question.
Your mission design must stay within your assigned budget tier.
You may not repeat a science question a real past mission has already fully answered — check what's actually still unknown.
No AI-generated writing. The point of this problem is defending your own reasoning, not reporting someone else's.
Due at the end of Day 3.

Your chosen target, and why it fits your assigned science question.
What's already known vs. still unknown about this target — so it's clear you're not just repeating an old mission.
Why this question requires actually going there, rather than observing from Earth.
A mission design — flyby, orbiter, or orbiter-plus-lander — that realistically fits your assigned budget tier.
At least one real alternative target you considered and rejected, with specific reasoning.

A starting point — adjust weights to fit your class before assigning.

Category	Weight	Exemplary	Proficient	Developing	Incomplete
Target–Question Match	25 pts	The chosen target genuinely fits the assigned science question, correctly applying real content from this unit.	A reasonable target choice with one weak connection to the question.	Target choice doesn't clearly connect to the assigned question.	No clear target chosen.
Justification for Going There	30 pts	Clearly states what's still unknown, what's already been ruled out, and why remote observation from Earth can't answer the question.	Covers most of this; one piece is thin.	Restates general interest in the target without a real evidentiary gap.	No real justification given.
Budget Realism	20 pts	Mission design (flyby / orbiter / orbiter+lander) is realistic and appropriately scoped for the assigned budget tier.	Mostly realistic; one element overreaches the budget.	Mission design ignores the assigned budget constraint.	No mission design described.
Comparative Defense	25 pts	Explicitly names and rejects at least one real alternative target, with specific reasoning.	An alternative is named but the reasoning for rejecting it is thin.	No real alternative considered.	No comparison attempted.

🔭 Problem 3.3.1 · Unit 3 of 6 · Single Semester