Analyzing Data

Overview

In this lesson (Lesson 19 of 24), students build on earlier work identifying Australia’s distinctive landscapes and landforms by analysing geographical data from two different sources. They will judge reliability and usefulness, notice patterns, and make justified inferences.

Learning intentions

• Students will analyse geographical data and information to identify similarities and differences between two sources.
• Students will explain patterns or trends suggested by the data.
• Students will infer relationships and propose possible causes for the patterns they observe.
• Students will evaluate the reliability and usefulness of each source for answering a geography question.

Success criteria

• I can identify what each source is showing and what the data represents.
• I can compare similarities and differences between the two sources.
• I can judge whether each source is reliable and explain why using evidence (who, when, how).
• I can decide which source is more useful for a specific geographical question and justify my choice.

Curriculum links

• AC9HG8S03: interpret and analyse geographical data and information to identify similarities and differences, explain patterns and trends and infer relationships.
• AC9HG8S02: collect, organise and represent data and information using appropriate digital tools and geospatial technologies (linking to how sources are gathered and presented).
• AC9HG8K02: locate iconic landscapes and landforms in Australia on a map and describe what makes them iconic (using landform examples as the context for data).
• AC9HG8K04: consider how human activity and geomorphological processes connect to landscape outcomes (used when interpreting what the data might mean).

Lesson structure (45 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Hook (conversation). Teacher displays two quick “mystery data” images (e.g., a map inset and a graph/report excerpt about the same landform region like Central Australia). Students do a quick think-pair-share: “What do you notice? What do you trust more at first glance, and why?”

2. 5–12 min · Mini direct teach: reliability vs usefulness. Teacher models a checklist on the board:

• Reliability: Who made it? When? How was it collected? Is it clear and consistent?
• Usefulness: Does it answer the exact question? Is the scale/map legend clear? Is the measure appropriate? Students copy the checklist and underline the exact question the sources are meant to answer.

3. 12–27 min · Source investigation (independent then pairs). Teacher gives each pair two short source packs:

• Source A: a map or topographic-style image or tourism/park fact sheet with locations (with date/producer info).
• Source B: a graph/table or short excerpt from a research summary or government dataset (with date/method notes). Students complete a “similarities-differences” table and write 1–2 inferences (e.g., “If Source B shows increasing visitors or erosion indicators, it could be linked to…”). Teacher circulates with guided prompts for students who need support (e.g., “What makes you say that?”).

4. 27–37 min · Compare and justify (small-group discussion). Teacher assigns each group a question stem:

• “Which source is more reliable for this task?”
• “Which source is more useful, and why?” Students produce a short oral justification using sentence starters (reliability reasons + usefulness reasons). Teacher calls on groups to share, encouraging respectful debate.

5. 37–45 min · Exit ticket (quick written assessment). Students answer:

• “Name one similarity and one difference between the sources.”
• “Which source would you use for the final answer, and what is your evidence-based reason?” Teacher collects for immediate feedback.

Resources

• Two printed source packs per pair (Source A and Source B) with clear legends/units or collection method notes
• Similarities–differences table printable
• Reliability–usefulness checklist (board + student copy)
• Coloured highlighters (optional) for “methods info” vs “data content”
• Exit ticket slips
• Projector or smartboard for showing the hook images
• Optional: Chromebook/tablet access for viewing a digital version of one source (teacher preloaded, no hyperlinks)
• Sentence starters strip (for support)

Assessment

• Formative during investigation: teacher observes whether students use evidence (not opinions) when judging reliability.
• Formative during discussion: listen for accurate identification of similarities/differences and clear justification.
• Summative for today: exit ticket responses assessed against the success criteria (reliability/usefulness justification with evidence).

Differentiation

• Guided questions for all: provide a “question ladder” (What is this? What does it show? How do we know? What does it help us decide?).
• Support for diverse learners: sentence starters such as “This source seems reliable because…”, “This data is useful for answering…”, “A limitation is…”.
• Scaffold complexity:
• Core: identify similarities/differences and choose the more useful source with one evidence reason.
• Advanced: add a pattern/trend explanation and an inferred relationship with a “because”.
• Dyslexia-friendly reading options:
• Offer the source packs in a readable font, larger size, and with line spacing.
• Provide an audio read-aloud option for Source A and Source B (teacher or built-in device) before students begin writing.
• Allow chunking: students highlight only the “method/when/who” sections first, then complete the reliability judgement.

Differentiation (guided questions) — per source

• For each source, students answer:
• “Who produced this?”
• “When was it made/collected?”
• “How do we know? (method/collection)”
• “What question does it help answer?”
• “What is one limitation?”