Everyone on the Community Stability Team is responsible for understanding and contributing to the entire project. Roles simply help organize the work.

Basic Needs Assessor

• Identifies which physiological needs are unmet in the case study.
• Ranks those needs by urgency, from immediate danger to longer-term concerns.
• Leads the team's needs-assessment and priority chart.

Resource Researcher

• Locates credible organizations, government programs, services, and community resources connected to each unmet need.
• Compares source types for credibility, relevance, and usefulness.

Barrier and Access Specialist

• Examines transportation, documentation, cost, eligibility, health, family, and communication barriers that could prevent the person from getting help.
• Helps the team design realistic backup options.

Stability Plan Coordinator

• Organizes the immediate (24-hour), short-term (72-hour and 7-day), and longer-term (30-day) action plan.
• Makes sure every recommendation connects clearly to a specific need and resource.

Digital Guide Designer

• Creates and organizes the final Book Creator guide.
• Ensures the guide is visually clear, well-organized, and easy for a real person to follow.

Team Reflection Leader

• Documents team decisions, contributions, feedback, and revisions throughout the project.
• Leads the team's reflection discussion and helps compile the written reflection.

How can we create a realistic and respectful plan that helps a person meet their basic physiological needs and begin building a more stable life?

Your team's supporting research questions are laid out on the Process page, alongside the steps you will use to answer them.

Your Community Stability Team will examine a realistic case study and develop a Basic Needs Stability Plan. To do this, you must:

• Identify the person's unmet physiological needs.
• Determine which needs are most urgent.
• Investigate the causes and barriers connected to those needs.
• Locate credible community and government resources.
• Verify important information before including it in your plan.
• Create immediate, short-term, and longer-term action steps.
• Explain who could assist with each step.
• Identify possible obstacles and backup options.
• Present the plan through a digital Book Creator guide.
• Reflect on what you learned about empathy, dignity, and community support.

Final Product: A Book Creator digital guide titled "Basic Needs Stability Plan," written for a real audience: someone who could hand it to a person in Maria's situation, or to a counselor, social worker, or family member trying to help her. Your team decides how to tell that story. The 17-page outline on the Process page is a starting structure, not a script; you have choice in tone, visuals, and how you sequence the plan, as long as every required piece of information makes it in.

Audience: classmates, school counselors, social workers, community-resource professionals, or family members, anyone who might realistically pick this guide up and use it. You'll present your finished plan to a real audience like this on the Conclusion page.

(This case study is fictional. It is designed to be realistic, respectful, and complex, not a full solution. Your team will use research to fill in the gaps and design a plan. Some details are deliberately left unanswered and require research.)

Maria Alvarez-Reyes, 34, lives with her two children, ages 6 and 10, and her mother, 61, who has mobility difficulties and takes daily medication for high blood pressure. Three weeks ago, the family's apartment building had a major plumbing failure, and the building was condemned by the city until repairs are completed, a process the landlord says could take a month or more. The family has been staying in their car and, on especially cold nights, at a relative's already-crowded apartment two towns away, which isn't a sustainable long-term option.

Maria worked full-time at a retail store, but missing several shifts to manage the housing crisis put her job at risk, and her hours have since been cut significantly. Money is tight, and the family has been relying on gas-station food and whatever the kids' school provides, since there's nowhere to safely store or cook groceries right now. Maria's mother's blood pressure medication ran out four days ago; the pharmacy needs an updated prescription, but her doctor's office requires an in-person visit that Maria hasn't been able to arrange given everything else going on.

The children have been able to attend school, but both have missed showers for several days at a time, and the 10-year-old has mentioned to a teacher that "we don't really have a home right now," which is how the school counselor first learned something was wrong. Maria hasn't sought outside help yet. She's worried about what might happen to her children if she says too much, and she isn't sure what kind of help even exists or how to access it without transportation, since their car, which is currently doubling as shelter, is also their only way to get to work, school, and appointments.

Maria is not neglecting her family. She is a parent under enormous, compounding pressure: a housing emergency, a medical gap, a transportation bottleneck, and a shrinking income, all happening at once. This is exactly the kind of situation your Community Stability Team is being asked to help address.

These are the questions your team's research needs to answer, in roughly the order you'll tackle them:

1. Which basic needs are currently unmet?
2. Which needs require immediate attention?
3. What barriers are preventing the person from meeting those needs?
4. What resources are available?
5. What qualifications or documents may be required to receive assistance?
6. What actions should occur within the first 24 to 72 hours?
7. What actions should happen during the first 30 days?
8. How can the person maintain stability after receiving immediate help?

Full role descriptions are on the Introduction page. Quick reference while you work:

• Basic Needs Assessor: identifies and prioritizes unmet needs.
• Resource Researcher: locates and compares credible resources.
• Barrier and Access Specialist: examines obstacles to getting help.
• Stability Plan Coordinator: organizes the phased action plan.
• Digital Guide Designer: builds the Book Creator guide.
• Team Reflection Leader: documents contributions and leads reflection.

When you're deciding what goes first in the stability plan, use this simple priority system:

Priority 1: Immediate danger or medical emergency Anything involving safety, injury, or urgent medical need comes first, always.

Priority 2: Food, clean water, and safe shelter The most basic survival needs come next.

Priority 3: Medication, hygiene, clothing, and sleep Needs that affect health and functioning over the coming days.

Priority 4: Documentation, transportation, and service access The practical tools needed to reach longer-term help.

Priority 5: Maintaining stability over time Once the emergency has stabilized, focus shifts to keeping it that way.

Important boundary: You are not acting as doctors, therapists, attorneys, or licensed social workers. If your case study (or a real situation) involves serious health, safety, abuse, homelessness, or emergency concerns, the correct response is always to refer the person to qualified professionals and emergency services, not to attempt to solve it yourselves.

Student Directions: Before researching anything, get precise about the problem. Read the case study closely and figure out exactly what you're trying to solve.

Guiding Questions: - Does the person have safe shelter tonight? - Does the person have access to food and clean water? - Does the person need medical attention? - Does the person have clean clothing and hygiene supplies? - Is the person getting adequate sleep? - Are children, older adults, or people with disabilities involved? - What information is missing? - Which need should be addressed first?

Required Activity: Read the case study. Identify the person's unmet physiological needs. Separate immediate emergencies from less urgent needs. Complete a "What We Know, What We Need to Know, and What We Need to Verify" chart (three columns). Develop research questions. Write a clear problem statement.

Student Deliverable: Needs assessment, priority chart, problem statement, and research questions.

Teacher Checkpoint: Teacher reviews whether students identified the correct needs and prioritized urgent health or safety concerns appropriately before the team moves on.

Suggested Technology Tool: Shared Google Doc or Slide with a three-column chart.

Estimated Completion Time: One 45–60 minute session.

Student Directions: Brainstorm every possible source of assistance, then figure out which are most trustworthy and useful to investigate first.

Possible Source Categories: - Government assistance programs - Food banks and meal programs - Emergency shelters - Housing-assistance programs - Health clinics - Hospitals and urgent-care services - Hygiene and clothing programs - School or college support services - Transportation assistance - Employment services - Faith-based organizations - Nonprofit organizations - Social workers - Community hotlines - Public libraries - Local resource directories

Guiding Questions: Compare Sources Based On Credibility, relevance, location, eligibility, availability, cost, accessibility, hours of operation, documentation requirements, and urgency of services.

Required Activity: Brainstorm source categories as a team, then evaluate them against the comparison factors above.

Student Deliverable: A source strategy chart listing potential sources and explaining which will be investigated first.

Teacher Checkpoint: Teacher confirms the team's source list is realistic and appropriately prioritized before research begins.

Suggested Technology Tool: Shared spreadsheet or table.

Estimated Completion Time: One 30–45 minute session.

Student Directions: Now research the specific information needed to build your stability plan, and verify everything before using it.

Guiding Questions: - What service is provided? - Who qualifies? - What documents are required? - Is there a cost? - Is transportation available? - Are appointments required? - What are the hours of operation? - Is there a waiting list? - Is the service available immediately? - Is the location accessible? - Is language assistance available? - What should the person bring? - What is the backup option if the service is unavailable?

Required Activity: Research the categories of resources identified in Step 2. Verify important details using official websites, direct contact, or another reliable source. Do not invent phone numbers, addresses, schedules, eligibility requirements, or services. Use clearly marked placeholders when local details cannot be verified.

Student Deliverable: A verified community-resource chart with columns for: organization, service, need addressed, contact method, location, hours, eligibility, documents required, cost, transportation considerations, verification date, and backup option.

Teacher Checkpoint: Teacher spot-checks that resource entries are realistic, appropriately sourced, and that unverifiable details are clearly marked as placeholders.

Suggested Technology Tool: Shared spreadsheet with the columns listed above.

Estimated Completion Time: Two 45–60 minute sessions.

Student Directions: Review everything you've gathered and figure out what's actually relevant and useful for this specific case.

Required Activity: - Summarize information in your own words. - Identify the most useful resources. - Remove outdated or irrelevant information. - Compare similar services. - Determine which resource should be contacted first. - Connect each resource to a specific unmet need. - Identify possible barriers. - Develop backup plans. - Record citations. - Avoid copying and pasting large sections of text.

Student Deliverable: A resource-analysis worksheet explaining why each selected resource fits the individual's needs.

Teacher Checkpoint: Teacher reviews the worksheet for original wording, accurate citations, and clear reasoning connecting resources to needs.

Suggested Technology Tool: Shared document organized by need category.

Estimated Completion Time: One to two 45–60 minute sessions.

Student Directions: Combine everything you've learned into the final Basic Needs Stability Plan, built in Book Creator.

Book Creator Page-by-Page Outline:

Page 1: Cover. Title, team members, class, and date.

Page 2: Understanding Basic Needs. A short explanation of physiological needs and why they must be addressed first.

Page 3: Case Study Summary. A respectful summary of the individual's situation.

Page 4: Needs Assessment. A list of unmet needs organized from most urgent to least urgent.

Page 5: Immediate Health and Safety Concerns. Identify any needs requiring emergency or professional assistance.

Page 6: First 24 Hours. Describe the first actions the individual should take.

Page 7: First 72 Hours. A plan for food, water, shelter, health, hygiene, clothing, and rest.

Page 8: First Seven Days. How the individual can begin organizing appointments, applications, documents, transportation, and support.

Page 9: First 30 Days. A plan for maintaining food access, stable shelter, health care, sleep, hygiene, and other necessities.

Page 10: Community Resource Guide. Verified resources connected to each basic need.

Page 11: Barriers and Solutions. Possible obstacles and realistic ways to respond to them.

Page 12: Support Team. Professionals, trusted adults, organizations, or community members who could assist.

Page 13: Backup Plan. What the individual can do if the first option is unavailable.

Page 14: Stability Checklist. A checklist that allows the individual to track their own progress.

Page 15: Dignity and Self-Advocacy. Respectful suggestions for asking questions, requesting help, keeping records, and communicating with service providers.

Page 16: Team Reflection. What the team learned about basic needs, empathy, problem-solving, and community support.

Page 17: References. All sources listed in the required citation format.

For every recommendation in the plan, clearly explain: 1. What action should be taken? 2. Why is it important? 3. Who can help? 4. What is needed to access the service? 5. What barrier might occur? 6. What is the backup plan?

Student Deliverable: A complete, polished Book Creator guide following the 17-page outline above.

Teacher Checkpoint: Teacher reviews a draft before final publishing, checking for completeness, accuracy, respectful tone, and verified resources.

Suggested Technology Tool: Book Creator.

Estimated Completion Time: Three to four 45–60 minute sessions.

Student Directions: Step back and evaluate both your final plan and the process you used to build it.

Self- and Team-Evaluation Questions: - Did we address every major physiological need? - Did we prioritize urgent needs appropriately? - Are our resources current and verified? - Is the plan realistic? - Is the plan respectful? - Did we consider transportation and eligibility barriers? - Did we create backup options? - Could a real person understand and use the guide? - Did we protect personal information? - Did every team member contribute? - What should be revised? - Did we fully answer the driving question?

Required Deliverable: Self-evaluation, peer evaluation, team reflection, and a revised final guide.

Teacher Checkpoint: Teacher reviews evaluations and confirms a clear revision plan before final presentation.

Suggested Technology Tool: Shared evaluation form (Google Form or document).

Estimated Completion Time: One 30–45 minute session.

How to use this page: the right-hand column below links to real, national starting points, legitimate organizations you can actually click through to right now. But national resources are not a substitute for local ones. Your team still needs to research and verify a real, local resource for each category (left blank for you to fill in) before anything goes into your final guide, and your teacher should review it before it's shared publicly.

Teacher/Student Verification Reminder: National links are a starting point, not a finished citation. Confirm every resource, national or local, is current, accurate, and appropriate to share before it appears in the final guide. Do not include a resource your team hasn't personally verified, and never invent a phone number, address, or eligibility rule.

Students may use artificial intelligence for: - Brainstorming research questions - Organizing notes - Simplifying difficult language - Reviewing grammar - Generating possible categories - Improving the organization of the guide

Students may NOT use AI to: - Invent resources - Invent contact information - Fabricate quotations - Fabricate statistics - Make medical, legal, or professional decisions - Complete the entire project without student thinking - Replace verified research - Include private personal information

Students must verify all facts using credible sources before including them in the plan.

AI-Use Disclosure Statement (complete and include in your final guide if AI was used at any stage)

"I used artificial intelligence to help with ___. I verified the information by ___. The final decisions and explanations in this project were completed by ____."

Team Agreement: Address the Following as a Team

• Assigned responsibilities: Each member takes on one of the six roles from Section 5.
• Communication: Decide how and when you'll check in.
• Deadlines: Agree on internal deadlines that stay ahead of teacher checkpoints.
• Attendance: Agree on what happens if a member is absent during a key work session.
• Respectful disagreement: Listen to each perspective and resolve conflict calmly; bring unresolved disagreements to the teacher.
• Shared decision-making: Major decisions (like final resource choices) should involve the whole team.
• Documentation of contributions: Keep a shared contribution log.
• What happens when a task isn't completed: Agree on a fair, respectful process for addressing missed work.
• How the team will ask the teacher for help: Decide who reaches out and when.

Contribution Log Template — fill this in as a team. Type directly into the boxes below; your entries are saved automatically.

Entries are saved in this browser, so they will still be here if you close the tab and come back. Use "Add another row" for each new task.

Week 1: Understanding the Problem

• Session 1: Entry event; introduction to physiological needs
  • Objective: Understand why this project matters.
  • Activity: Discussion and reflection.
  • Deliverable: Opening reflection.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher confirms understanding of project purpose.
• Session 2: Case study introduction
  • Objective: Understand Maria's situation.
  • Activity: Close reading and discussion.
  • Deliverable: Initial notes.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher checks comprehension.
• Session 3: Big6 Task Definition
  • Objective: Define the problem clearly.
  • Activity: Complete the "Know / Need to Know / Verify" chart.
  • Deliverable: Chart and problem statement.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher reviews chart.
• Session 4: Research questions and source planning
  • Objective: Plan the research approach.
  • Activity: Brainstorm and prioritize source categories.
  • Deliverable: Source strategy chart.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher approves research plan.
• Session 5: Begin research
  • Objective: Start locating resource categories.
  • Activity: Initial research begins (Big6 Step 3).
  • Deliverable: Early resource notes.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher spot-checks sources.

Week 2: Researching and Verifying

• Session 6: Resource research continues
  • Objective: Build out the community-resource chart.
  • Activity: Research and verification.
  • Deliverable: Updated resource chart.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher checks verification progress.
• Session 7: Verification and comparison
  • Objective: Confirm accuracy of resource details.
  • Activity: Cross-check sources and flag unverifiable details.
  • Deliverable: Verified resource chart.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher confirms no invented details remain.
• Session 8: Use of information
  • Objective: Analyze and organize research.
  • Activity: Complete the resource-analysis worksheet.
  • Deliverable: Worksheet.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher reviews reasoning and citations.
• Session 9: Needs prioritization
  • Objective: Apply the decision-making framework.
  • Activity: Rank needs and resources by priority.
  • Deliverable: Priority-ranked plan outline.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher confirms prioritization logic.
• Session 10: Begin the stability plan
  • Objective: Start drafting the Book Creator guide.
  • Activity: Draft early pages, cover through needs assessment.
  • Deliverable: Draft pages 1 through 4.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher reviews early draft.

Week 3: Building, Refining, and Sharing

• Session 11: Continue building the guide
  • Objective: Draft the action-plan pages.
  • Activity: Write the 24-hour, 72-hour, 7-day, and 30-day plans.
  • Deliverable: Draft pages 5 through 9.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher checks realism of the plan.
• Session 12: Complete the guide
  • Objective: Finish all remaining pages.
  • Activity: Draft the resource guide, barriers, backup plan, checklist, and dignity page.
  • Deliverable: Complete first draft.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher reviews full draft.
• Session 13: Peer feedback
  • Objective: Get outside feedback.
  • Activity: Peer-review exchange (see Section 20).
  • Deliverable: Completed feedback forms.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher confirms feedback was thoughtful.
• Session 14: Revision
  • Objective: Improve the guide based on feedback.
  • Activity: Make specific revisions.
  • Deliverable: Revised guide.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher confirms revisions were made.
• Session 15: Final presentation, self-evaluation, and reflection
  • Objective: Share the finished plan and reflect.
  • Activity: Present to an authentic audience; complete evaluation and reflection.
  • Deliverable: Final guide, evaluations, and reflections.
  • Checkpoint: Teacher scores using the rubric.

What this rubric checks: the categories below assess two kinds of standards together. Content standards, health education, social-emotional learning, and information literacy, show up in categories like Identification of Physiological Needs, Case Study Analysis, Empathy and Dignity, and Realism of the Action Plan. Technology and research-process standards (ISTE Standards for Students) show up in Completion of the Big6 Process, Quality of Research, Resource Verification, and Citations and Responsible Technology Use. The full standards list, with each one explained, is in the Planning Document.

Before finalizing your guide, exchange drafts with another team and use these peer-review questions:

1. Are the most urgent needs addressed first?
2. Is the plan realistic?
3. Are the resources verified?
4. Are the directions easy to understand?
5. Does the plan respect the dignity of the individual?
6. Are transportation, eligibility, and documentation considered?
7. Are backup options provided?
8. What is one strength?
9. What is one area needing improvement?
10. What specific revision should the team make?

After receiving feedback, each team should create a short list of specific revisions and update their guide before final submission.

You started this project by looking closely at how unmet basic needs can quietly take over a person's whole life. By now, your team has researched real categories of support, built a realistic and respectful Basic Needs Stability Plan, and thought hard about what it actually takes to help someone move from crisis toward stability.

That work doesn't end when the project is turned in. A well-built stability plan is the kind of resource a counselor, family member, or community organization could genuinely use, and the skills behind it (verifying a resource before trusting it, breaking a huge problem into a first step and a next step, noticing when someone needs help before they ask for it) don't stay inside this class either. As promised back on the Task page, it's time to present what you built to a real audience.

Your Basic Needs Stability Plan deserves a real audience. Present it to an authentic group such as classmates, school counselors, social workers, community-resource professionals, nonprofit leaders, school administrators, health educators, or family-support professionals.

Presentation Requirements:

• Summary of the case
• Most urgent needs
• Research process
• Recommended first actions
• Selected resources
• Barriers and backup plans
• What the team learned
• Time for audience questions

1. What did you learn about unmet basic needs?
2. Which need was most urgent, and why?
3. What barriers surprised you?
4. How did the Big6 process help your team?
5. What did you learn about finding community resources?
6. How did your understanding of people experiencing hardship change?
7. How did your team demonstrate empathy?
8. What part of your plan was strongest?
9. What would you revise?
10. How could this project help someone in the real world?

By the end of this project, students will be able to:

1. Define physiological needs.
2. Identify unmet basic needs in a realistic situation.
3. Prioritize needs according to urgency.
4. Explain barriers that make it difficult to access assistance.
5. Conduct credible research.
6. Evaluate community resources.
7. Verify important information before using it.
8. Develop a realistic action plan.
9. Collaborate with a team.
10. Communicate recommendations clearly.
11. Demonstrate empathy and respect.
12. Create a digital guide.
13. Reflect on the effectiveness of their solution.

ISTE Student Standards - Knowledge Constructor: Students plan and use research strategies to locate, evaluate, and verify credible community resources. - Innovative Designer: Students design a Book Creator guide as a real-world solution, revising it across multiple drafts. - Digital Citizen: Students evaluate source credibility, protect personal information, and use AI tools responsibly. - Empowered Learner: Students seek feedback from peers and revise their guide based on it.

Social-Emotional Learning Competencies - Social Awareness: Students practice empathy and perspective-taking while analyzing a case study without judgment. - Relationship Skills: Students collaborate, communicate, and resolve disagreements within their team. - Responsible Decision-Making: Students design realistic, ethical, evidence-based recommendations.

Health Education Standards - Students analyze how unmet physical needs (nutrition, sleep, hygiene, medical care) affect overall health and functioning, and practice accessing valid health information and services.

Information-Literacy Standards - Students inquire, evaluate, and verify information before using it, a core information-literacy skill emphasized throughout the Big6 process.

Communication Standards - Students write and present clearly for a real, non-academic audience.

Career-Readiness Skills - Students practice research, verification, organization, teamwork, and professional presentation. These skills transfer directly to fields like social work, health care, and community services.

Problem-Solving Skills - Students apply a structured, prioritized decision-making process (see Section 15) to a complex, real-world situation.

Purpose: This project focuses students on the physiological level of human need, not the full theory of Maslow's Hierarchy, through empathetic, verified, real-world research. Students build genuine skills in prioritization, resource verification, collaboration, and respectful communication.

Grade Level: 9–12; adaptable for adult learners.

Subject Areas: Health Education, SEL, Research/Information Literacy, Community Studies, ELA, Career Readiness.

Project Length: 3 weeks (12–15 sessions).

Standards: See Section 7 for full alignment (ISTE, SEL, health education, information literacy, communication, career readiness, problem-solving).

Learning Objectives: See Section 6.

Prior Knowledge: No prior knowledge of Maslow's Hierarchy is required. Basic familiarity with internet research and shared document tools is helpful.

Required Materials: Device with internet access per team (or shared devices), Book Creator access, shared document/spreadsheet tool, printed or digital case study copies, rubric copies.

Teacher Preparation: - Set up Book Creator classroom access in advance. - Preview and, if needed, adapt the case study for your student population. - Consider identifying real, local, verified resources ahead of time to share as a vetted starting list. - Arrange an authentic audience for the final presentation if possible.

Grouping Strategies: Groups of five or six work well to fill all roles in Section 5; roles can be combined for smaller groups.

Formative Assessment: Teacher checkpoints at each Big6 stage (Sections 8–13), informal check-ins, and review of the priority chart and resource chart.

Summative Assessment: Final Book Creator guide and presentation, scored with the 100-point rubric in Section 22.

Facilitation Strategies: - Circulate during research to catch unverified or invented resource details early. - Model empathetic, non-judgmental language before students begin analyzing the case study. - Use whole-class check-ins between Big6 steps to keep teams paced together.

Safety Considerations: Remind students they are not acting as licensed professionals (see Section 15). Serious real-world concerns should always be referred to a trusted adult or professional.

Sensitivity Considerations: - This topic may be personal for some students. Do not require students to share their own housing, food, financial, health, or family circumstances. - Students should analyze the fictional case study rather than disclose personal experiences. - Be prepared to privately support any student who discloses a personal connection to this topic, and know your school's counseling referral process. - Preview the case study and adjust tone or details as needed for your specific student population.

Differentiation: - Allow struggling readers to work with a partner on the case study analysis. - Provide sentence starters for reflection and analysis writing. - Allow advanced students to research additional complexity (e.g., a second case study or comparison of resource systems).

Accommodations: - Provide text-to-speech or read-aloud support for the case study and research materials. - Allow extended time for research and writing. - Permit alternative input methods (voice-to-text, assistive technology) for the Book Creator project.

Community Partnerships: Consider partnering with a school counselor, social worker, or local community organization to review student work and/or serve as the authentic audience for final presentations.

Extension Activities: - Invite a social worker or community-resource professional to give feedback on student plans. - Have students research how local policy affects access to housing, food, or health care. - Extend the project to explore Maslow's higher levels once physiological needs are stabilized.

Recommended Professional Boundaries: Students are not expected to act as counselors, case managers, or medical professionals. Their role is to research, organize, and recommend, not to provide direct services. Reinforce this boundary throughout the project.

Support students who face any of the following:

• Limited internet access: Provide printed resource packets and downloaded webpages.
• Limited device access: Use shared classroom devices and pair students strategically.
• Reading difficulties: Provide audio directions, captioned videos, and simplified directions.
• Disabilities: Ensure screen-reader-compatible materials and speech-to-text options.
• Language needs: Provide visual organizers and translated materials where possible.
• Limited technology experience: Pair students with strong tech skills alongside those who need more support; offer teacher conferences as needed.
• Transportation limitations: Provide in-class completion time so work doesn't depend on outside access.
• Difficulty completing work outside school: Build in-class research and drafting time, and offer extended deadlines when needed.

Additional Options: Printed resource packets, downloaded webpages, shared classroom devices, offline research notes, audio directions, captioned videos, screen-reader-compatible materials, speech-to-text, visual organizers, simplified directions, extended time, peer support, teacher conferences, alternative final products (e.g., printed booklet or slideshow instead of Book Creator), and dedicated in-class completion time.

Before launching this WebQuest, confirm it includes:

I didn't fully get why the Big6 mattered until I was several steps into building this thing. On paper, it just looks like a checklist: define the task, find sources, use the sources, put it together, evaluate. Fine. But once I was actually inside Step 1, staring at a blank "what do we know / what do we need to know" chart for the Alvarez-Reyes family, I noticed something I didn't expect. I wasn't being asked to have an opinion about housing insecurity. I was being asked to figure out what I didn't know yet. That's a small shift, but it changes everything about how a student walks into a hard topic. Eisenberg and Berkowitz (1990), who built the Big6 around exactly that premise, that information problem-solving is a learnable, staged process, were right that the structure does the emotional work a lecture can't. You don't need a student to already care about poverty. You need them to define a problem and go looking for an answer, and the caring tends to show up on its own, somewhere around Step 3.

That lines up with something I kept coming back to from Hough's (2015) piece on David Perkins' idea of "lifeworthy learning," content a student will actually use, not just recall for a quiz. I'll be honest: when I first sketched this project, I wasn't thinking about lifeworthiness, I was thinking about the assignment requirements. But partway through building the Resources page, it hit me that a student walking away from this WebQuest with the instinct to verify a resource before trusting it is genuinely useful, whether or not they ever work in social services. That's a life skill wearing a class-project costume. The Buck Institute's PBLWorks blog makes basically the same point about "meaningful work, meaningful learning": you don't get engagement by making something easier, you get it by making it matter. That's why I kept insisting on a real audience for the final Book Creator guide instead of letting it become a worksheet with extra steps.

The digital citizenship piece surprised me a little, honestly. I expected it to be a separate conversation from the Big6 process, something I'd bolt on at the end. It isn't. Turner (2026), reporting on a Brookings study for NPR, found that AI's risks currently outweigh its benefits for kids specifically when nobody's built in a structure for using it well. That's almost word-for-word what Big6 Steps 2 and 3 already do. Every resource in this WebQuest has to be verified before it goes in the guide, and inventing a phone number or a service is explicitly off the table, whether the bad information came from a lazy Google search or a chatbot. I didn't set out to build an "AI safety lesson." It turned out I already had one, because good research practice and safe AI use are asking for the same habit: check before you trust it.

Designing this WebQuest and then actually sitting down and doing it, pretending I was a student with no prior knowledge of what I'd built, turned out to be two completely different experiences. The gap between them taught me more than either one alone.

The part that went well was Synthesis, and it went better than I expected. By the time I'd nailed down the research categories and the case study, turning all of it into a 17-page, phased stability plan felt almost automatic, because the Big6 steps before it had already done the hard thinking. Dodge (1995) talks about a good WebQuest scaffolding a learner toward "transformation," not just a pile of links, and I didn't really understand what he meant until I watched it happen with my own project. March (n.d.), who built the format alongside Dodge, pushes it further: the task has to be transformative, meaning the learner has to do something with the information, not just repeat it back. That's the difference between a report and a plan. Maria's case study isn't a book report on her situation. It's a set of decisions the research has to actually justify. The moment that stuck with me was watching the raw research turn into the 24-hour, 72-hour, and 30-day sections and realizing: okay, this actually holds together as something a real person could use.

Where I struggled was earlier, in Location and Access, and I'll be honest about why. I got to the resource-verification chart and had to admit, in writing, that I couldn't verify a specific local shelter or clinic, because none of the placeholders in this project are real organizations. That's an uncomfortable thing to sit with. It means the entire usefulness of a real version of this WebQuest depends on a teacher or student actually doing that legwork in their own town, and no amount of clean design fixes that gap. I thought about just glossing over it. Instead I built the placeholder-and-verification system directly into the Resources page, so the gap is visible instead of hidden. It felt more honest to show the seams than to pretend they weren't there.

I went into the standards-mapping part of this assignment expecting it to feel like paperwork, bolting labels onto a project I'd already built. It didn't, mostly. On the student side, this project leans hardest on Knowledge Constructor, indicators 3a and 3b: plan and use effective research strategies, then actually evaluate whether the information is accurate and relevant (International Society for Technology in Education, 2016). Every single Big6 step is basically a scaffolded version of that one standard, which I didn't plan on purpose, it just happened, because Big6 and Knowledge Constructor are describing the same skill from two different angles. Innovative Designer (4a, 4b) shows up in Synthesis specifically, where the Book Creator guide goes through actual revisions instead of a single first-and-only draft.

On the educator side, Designer (5a, 5b) is pretty much a description of what I spent three weeks doing: building authentic, learner-driven activities tied to real content standards (International Society for Technology in Education, 2017). Facilitator (6b) matters just as much on the practical side, since it's about managing technology and learning strategies across platforms, which is exactly what juggling shared docs, Book Creator, and a verification spreadsheet for three weeks straight actually feels like. Palmer's (2015) list of 21st-century teacher traits gets at the same idea in plainer language: moving away from being "the sole expert in the classroom" toward facilitating work the students are actually doing. It's the same standard, just said the way a teacher would say it instead of the way ISTE writes it.

What surprised me, laying the Big6 and the ISTE standards side by side, is how little daylight there is between them. I went in assuming I'd have to force-fit one framework onto the other. Instead, a project that genuinely demands research, verification, and revision just satisfies most of the ISTE Standards on its own, without extra effort. Good project design and good standards alignment turned out to be nearly the same exercise wearing two different names.

I came into this project thinking of educational technology as basically a delivery truck: a better way to get content to a student's desk. I didn't leave thinking that. The technology in this WebQuest, the shared docs, the verification spreadsheet, Book Creator, even the site itself, isn't delivering anything. It's holding together a process that would otherwise be too big and too emotionally loaded for a student to organize by themselves. That's a different job than I thought technology's job was.

That shift kept showing up in the AI and tech-integration readings from this course, which honestly surprised me, since I expected those readings to be more about tools and less about philosophy. EdTech Magazine's (2018) piece on the state of education technology was already describing this same move years ago, away from technology as a bolt-on extra and toward technology embedded in how the work actually gets done. HMH (2026) reports AI use in classrooms has grown sixfold since 2023, and the reason isn't flashier content, it's that it's giving teachers time back. Gamby et al. (2025), in EDUCAUSE Review, take it further and argue AI should push education away from "broadcasting" content altogether and toward something more human. ISTE's (2024) practical guidance lands on the same note: the tools worth using are the ones that free up time for the relationships and thinking a machine can't replace.

I'll admit I'm less starry-eyed about this than I might sound. Turner's (2026) reporting kept me honest while I was writing this section: AI and ed-tech aren't automatically good for kids just because they're new, and the Brookings research behind that NPR piece is blunt that the benefits only outweigh the risks when there's real structure around how the technology gets used. That tracks with what I actually experienced building this project. I care less, now, about whether a tool makes information available and more about whether it makes a hard process navigable, whether the difficulty is "too much information" or something heavier, like a student who recognizes more of Maria's situation than they'd want to admit in class. What this project actually taught me is that the real design question was never how fast or new the tool is. It's whether it hands a student a clear next step when the problem in front of them feels too big to start. Turns out a good WebQuest is just a good sequence of next steps, and that's true whether the "technology" is a shared spreadsheet or a language model.

This isn't a new argument, either, which I found weirdly reassuring. Education Week's (2010) panel on 21st-century learning was already saying, back in 2010, that the real question was never content versus skills, it was how you fuse them. Slapik's (2017) Atlantic piece backs that up from the other direction: when you actually ask students what school is for, they don't say "more content." They say they want to feel ready for something real. That's the bar I'm holding educational technology to now. It earns its place in a classroom when it gets a student closer to a real next step on a real problem, and it doesn't when it's just a nicer-looking version of the same worksheet.

In building the companion website for this WebQuest, I used Claude, an AI assistant made by Anthropic, to help with the technical development of the site: structuring the HTML, CSS, and JavaScript, building the tabbed navigation and interactive checklist, and generating the page illustrations. I directed the content, the pedagogical structure, the case study, the standards alignment, and every decision about what the WebQuest should teach and how; Claude assisted with implementing those decisions in code. The planning, the reflection you are reading now, and the instructional design choices throughout this project are my own work.

Buck Institute for Education / PBLWorks. (n.d.). PBL: Meaningful work, meaningful learning. bie.org

Dodge, B. (1995). WebQuests: A technique for Internet-based learning. Distance Educator, 1(2), 10–13.

Education Week. (2010, October 12). How do you define 21st-century learning? edweek.org

EdTech Magazine. (2018, December 10). The current state of education technology and where it is going [Infographic]. edtechmagazine.com

Eisenberg, M. B., & Berkowitz, R. E. (1990). Information problem-solving: The Big Six skills approach to library and information skills instruction. Ablex.

Gamby, T., Kil, D., Koblic, R., LeBlanc, P., Moldoveneau, M., & Siemens, G. (2025, September 18). The AI tsunami is here: Reinventing education for the age of AI. EDUCAUSE Review. er.educause.edu

HMH. (2026). Latest trends in educational technology for 2025. hmhco.com

Hough, L. (2015, January 10). What's worth learning in school? Harvard Graduate School of Education, Ed. Magazine. gse.harvard.edu

International Society for Technology in Education. (2016). ISTE standards for students. ISTE.

International Society for Technology in Education. (2017). ISTE standards for educators. ISTE.

ISTE. (2024, February 28). 5 tips for using AI in the classroom. iste.org

March, T. (n.d.). What WebQuests are (really). Tom March. tommarch.com

Palmer, T. (2015, June 6). 15 characteristics of a 21st century teacher. Edutopia. edutopia.org

Slapik, M. (2017, October 1). The purpose of education, according to students. The Atlantic. theatlantic.com

Turner, C. (2026, January 14). The risks of AI in schools outweigh the benefits, report says. NPR. npr.org

Students will participate in a problem-based learning WebQuest focused on the first level of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs: physiological needs. Students will work as a Community Stability Team and examine a realistic family situation involving unmet basic needs such as food, water, shelter, clothing, transportation, and access to essential services.

Using the Big6 Information Problem-Solving Process, students will identify the family's most urgent needs, conduct research, locate credible community resources, evaluate the information they find, and develop a realistic plan for helping the family move toward physical stability.

Students will use Book Creator to organize their research and create a Basic Needs Stability Plan. They will then transform their research and plan into a short digital story that communicates the family's situation, the team's research, the solutions they identified, and the impact those solutions could have.

The project allows students to demonstrate research, critical thinking, problem solving, collaboration, technology skills, communication, and reflection.

Driving Question: How can we use research, community resources, and technology to help a person or family meet their basic physiological needs and move toward stability?

Essential Question: What does a person need to achieve physical stability, and how can we use information and available resources to help meet those needs?

The project focuses on the first level of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Students will explore basic human needs including:

• Food
• Water
• Shelter
• Clothing
• Sleep
• Personal safety related to basic living conditions
• Access to essential services
• Transportation when necessary to obtain basic needs

Students will understand that a person may have difficulty addressing higher-level goals when basic physiological needs remain unmet.

By the end of the project, students will be able to:

• Identify and explain basic physiological needs.
• Analyze a realistic situation involving unmet basic needs.
• Define a specific problem that needs to be addressed.
• Apply the Big6 Information Problem-Solving Process.
• Locate credible information and community resources.
• Evaluate sources for credibility, accuracy, and usefulness.
• Identify barriers that may prevent a person from accessing resources.
• Develop a realistic stability plan.
• Use Book Creator to organize and communicate information.
• Create a digital story based on their research and solution.
• Collaborate with team members to solve a real-world problem.
• Reflect on the research, problem-solving, and creation process.

This project qualifies as Project-Based Learning because students:

• Investigate a real-world problem.
• Begin with a meaningful driving question.
• Conduct research.
• Make decisions about possible solutions.
• Work collaboratively.
• Use technology to create an authentic product.
• Develop a solution based on evidence.
• Present their work to an audience.
• Reflect on their learning.

The final product is not simply an assignment. Students create a practical Basic Needs Stability Plan and communicate their solution through a digital story.

Step 1: Task Definition

Students identify the problem. Students determine:

• What basic needs are not being met?
• Which need is most urgent?
• What information do we need?
• What is our team being asked to accomplish?

Student question: What is the problem we need to solve?

Step 2: Information-Seeking Strategies

Students determine where they can find reliable information. Possible sources include:

• Government agencies
• Local nonprofit organizations
• Food assistance programs
• Housing resources
• Community organizations
• Educational institutions
• Transportation resources
• Health and human service organizations
• Credible websites
• Interviews and community resources

Student question: Where can we find reliable information?

Step 3: Location and Access

Students locate and access the resources they identified. Students document:

• Organization name
• Service provided
• Eligibility requirements
• Location
• Website/contact information
• Hours of operation
• How to access the service
• Documentation that may be required

Student question: How can the person or family access this resource?

Step 4: Use of Information

Students examine the information they collected and determine what is useful. Students ask:

• Does this resource actually address the need?
• Is the information current?
• Is the resource accessible?
• Does the family qualify?
• What barriers could prevent access?
• What other information is needed?

Student question: How can we use this information to help?

Step 5: Synthesis

Students organize their information into a Basic Needs Stability Plan. The plan should include:

• Identified needs
• Immediate priorities
• Available resources
• Short-term actions
• Long-term actions
• Potential barriers
• Backup resources
• Self-advocacy strategies
• Expected outcomes

Students then use Book Creator to turn their research into an organized digital product.

Student question: How can we turn our research into a realistic plan?

Step 6: Evaluation

Students evaluate their solution and the process they used. Students ask:

• Did we address the most urgent need?
• Did we use credible sources?
• Are our resources realistic?
• Did we identify possible barriers?
• Does our plan provide practical steps?
• Did our digital story clearly communicate the problem and solution?
• What would we change?

Student question: Did our solution work, and how could we improve it?

Students will assume the role of a Community Stability Team. Their mission is to examine a family's situation and develop a realistic plan to help the family meet its immediate physiological needs. Students are not expected to personally solve the family's problems. Instead, they will use research, critical thinking, and community resources to develop an evidence-based plan.

Students will analyze the Alvarez-Reyes family case presented in the WebQuest. The case provides students with a realistic situation involving unmet physiological needs. Students will identify:

• Immediate needs
• Short-term needs
• Long-term needs
• Available resources
• Barriers
• Possible solutions

Students will use the case study as the foundation for their research.

Students may work in teams with assigned responsibilities. Possible roles include:

• Researcher: finds credible information and community resources.
• Resource Verifier: checks whether resources are current, legitimate, and appropriate.
• Needs Analyst: identifies and prioritizes the family's needs.
• Solution Designer: helps develop the stability plan.
• Digital Creator: organizes the final project in Book Creator.
• Storyteller/Presenter: helps communicate the team's solution through the digital story.

Students may rotate roles throughout the project.

Students will use Book Creator as the primary digital creation tool. The Basic Needs Stability Plan should contain approximately 17 pages or sections.

After completing the Basic Needs Stability Plan, students will create a short digital story based on their project. The digital story should explain:

• Who is the person or family?
• What problem are they experiencing?
• What physiological needs are not being met?
• What did the team discover through research?
• What resources were identified?
• What solution did the team develop?
• What barriers could occur?
• What impact could the plan have?
• What did the students learn?

Suggested story structure:

• Beginning: introduce the family and the problem.
• Middle: explain the research and discovery process.
• Turning point: present the most important resource or solution.
• Ending: explain the stability plan and potential impact.
• Reflection: explain what the students learned from the experience.

Digital story requirements. The digital story should:

• Be approximately 2–4 minutes.
• Include narration.
• Include meaningful visuals.
• Include information from the team's research.
• Clearly explain the problem.
• Clearly explain the proposed solution.
• Include appropriate citations or credits.
• Demonstrate the Big6 process.
• Communicate a clear message.
• Demonstrate thoughtful technology use.

The digital story should not simply read the Book Creator pages. Instead, students should use the information they created to tell a meaningful story about the problem, research, solution, and potential impact.

• ISTE 1.1, Empowered Learner: students use technology to take ownership of their learning and demonstrate their understanding through a digital product.
• ISTE 1.3, Knowledge Constructor: students research, evaluate, organize, and synthesize information from multiple sources.
• ISTE 1.4, Innovative Designer: students use a design process to develop a solution to an authentic problem.
• ISTE 1.6, Creative Communicator: students communicate their research and solution through Book Creator and digital storytelling.
• ISTE 1.7, Global Collaborator: students work collaboratively, share ideas, evaluate perspectives, and develop a solution as a team.

English Language Arts

• W.9-12.2: students develop informative/explanatory writing that communicates complex information clearly and accurately.
• W.9-12.7: students conduct research based on focused questions.
• W.9-12.8: students gather relevant information, evaluate sources, and integrate information appropriately.
• SL.9-12.4: students present information and supporting evidence clearly and logically.

Health / Life Skills Connection

Students examine how access to basic physiological needs can affect an individual's ability to achieve stability and pursue additional personal, educational, and social goals.

Students will be assessed on: understanding of physiological needs, Big6 application, research quality, source credibility, problem analysis, resource identification, solution development, collaboration, Book Creator design, digital storytelling, ISTE technology integration, and reflection.

Students will submit:

• Completed Big6 research documentation.
• Basic Needs Stability Plan created in Book Creator.
• Digital Story based on the team's research and solution.
• Written reflection.
• Research/reference page.

The teacher will serve as a facilitator rather than simply providing answers. The teacher will:

• Introduce Maslow's physiological needs.
• Introduce and model the Big6 process.
• Explain the WebQuest challenge.
• Provide guidance during research.
• Help students evaluate sources.
• Monitor group collaboration.
• Provide feedback on storyboards.
• Support students using Book Creator.
• Assess the final products.
• Facilitate reflection.

Students will serve as researchers, problem solvers, collaborators, designers, digital creators, communicators, and reflective learners. Students are responsible for making decisions about their research, resources, solutions, and final digital story.

The entire project follows this learning pathway:

This project was designed because students need opportunities to use technology for more than simply finding information or completing assignments.

The Big6 provides students with a structured process for solving information-based problems. Maslow's physiological needs provide an authentic context for applying that process. Project-Based Learning allows students to investigate a realistic problem and develop a meaningful solution. Book Creator provides students with a digital environment where they can organize, synthesize, and communicate their learning. Digital storytelling allows students to transform their research into a narrative that can be shared with an audience.

Together, these elements create a student-centered learning experience that combines research, critical thinking, problem solving, creativity, collaboration, technology, and reflection.

The purpose of this project is not simply to teach students about Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. The purpose is to teach students how to recognize a problem, find reliable information, evaluate resources, develop a solution, create something meaningful, and communicate what they have learned.

The Big6 provides the process. Maslow provides the context. PBL provides the learning experience. Book Creator provides the creation tool. Digital storytelling provides the voice. ISTE provides the technology-learning framework.

The final goal is to help students move: from information, to understanding, to creation, to action, to impact.

This is the completed digital guide, built in Book Creator following the 17-page outline from the Process page. It is the actual student-facing product this WebQuest is designed to produce.

Open the Book in Book Creator →

If the book does not display above, use the button to open it directly in a new tab.