Collaborative Workshop

Overview

In this lesson (15 of 16), students will build on their research from earlier lessons to design and present a collaborative proposal addressing a specific liveability issue. They will practise explaining how contextual factors influence people’s attitudes and behaviours, then propose practical strategies to improve safety, health and wellbeing in their community.

Learning intentions

Students will:

• WALT develop a group proposal to address a liveability issue using evidence from prior lessons.
• WALT collaborate to design solutions that consider contextual factors affecting safety, health and wellbeing.
• WALT present a clear, persuasive proposal and respond respectfully to feedback.
• WALT evaluate how well their solution supports safer, healthier, more inclusive community participation.

Success criteria

Students can:

• I can identify the liveability issue and state the target impact (e.g. safety, health, inclusion).
• I can explain how contextual factors influence attitudes/behaviours and link these to my group’s solution.
• I can propose realistic, evidence-informed strategies and identify who benefits.
• I can present and justify our proposal clearly and respond to questions using respectful language.

Curriculum links

• PH4-SHW-01 — Students assess the influence of contextual factors on attitudes and behaviours to propose strategies that enhance safety, health and wellbeing.
• HI4-APP-01 / HILS-EPC-01 — Students explain and identify Aboriginal Peoples’ experiences and perspectives of colonisation, using evidence and respectful language where community histories/legacies are relevant to the issue.
• GELS-SAF-01 — Students identify ways to stay safe when interacting with people and places (applied to the proposed solution).
• GELS-MAN-01 — Students demonstrate ways to manage and protect a place or environment if the issue involves environments or shared spaces.

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Starter: recap and focus

• Teacher displays the unit goal and the lesson task: “Create a collaborative solution proposal for a liveability issue.”
• Students do a quick “thumbs check” and write one sentence: “Our issue affects… because…”

2. 5–12 min · Model: strong proposal structure

• Teacher shows a simple four-part structure on the board (no examples needed): Issue → Context & impact → Strategy → Why it works.
• Students underline the key words in their own notes and add two “because” statements linking context to behaviours (e.g. fear, access, rules, norms).

3. 12–22 min · Group planning: solution canvas

• Teacher forms/uses groups of 4–5 and distributes a Solution Canvas template (printed or digital) with prompts aligned to success criteria.
• Students complete sections:
• Liveability issue (specific location/audience if relevant)
• Contextual factors (what shapes attitudes/behaviours?)
• Proposed strategies (2–3 actions)
• Safety/health/wellbeing impact (who, how, when)
• Inclusion considerations (who might be left out, and how we reduce barriers)

4. 22–34 min · Design sprint: make it practical

• Teacher circulates, prompts “realism and safety,” and checks for respectful, evidence-informed claims.
• Students turn strategies into action steps:
• Who is responsible (students, council, local services, community groups)
• Resources needed (time, space, materials, communication channels)
• Safety measures and “stay safe” actions
• Optional environment-management step if the issue relates to shared places (e.g. shade, cleanliness, safe routes, maintenance)

5. 34–45 min · Link to community perspectives (teacher-guided check)

• Teacher reminds students to be accurate and respectful when including community histories or lived experiences; if Aboriginal perspectives are relevant, they must be handled carefully and without stereotypes.
• Students add one brief line to their proposal: “Our solution considers how different communities may be impacted,” and (if applicable) “We respect Aboriginal Peoples’ experiences and perspectives by…” Students choose a respectful action such as consulting appropriate voices, acknowledging local connection, or avoiding assumptions.

6. 45–55 min · Present: gallery or mini pitch

• Teacher sets up a short “mini pitch” cycle (or gallery walk) with group presentations of 60–90 seconds each.
• Students present their proposal and use a question-stem sheet:
• “What contextual factor most influenced the behaviour?”
• “How does your strategy improve safety/health/wellbeing?”
• “How will you include people who might face barriers?”

7. 55–60 min · Exit ticket: justify and refine

• Teacher collects a quick exit ticket with two prompts.
• Students complete individually:
• “One strength of our group proposal is…”
• “One improvement we would make next time is…” (must relate to safety, health, wellbeing, or inclusion)

Resources

• Solution Canvas template (paper or editable document)
• Group question-stem cards for feedback
• Student prior-lesson notes (issue cards, evidence summaries, maps if used)
• Markers/coloured pens or digital collaboration tools
• Timer visible to class
• Exit ticket slips

Assessment

• Formative during group work: teacher checks for clear links between contextual factors, attitudes/behaviours, and strategies.
• Formative feedback during presentations: teacher uses a brief checklist aligned to success criteria (issue clarity, contextual link, practicality, safety/health/wellbeing, inclusion).
• Exit ticket: identifies one strength and one improvement tied to the proposal criteria.

Differentiation

• Provide sentence starters and a word bank for contextual factors (e.g. access, rules, norms, fear, convenience, support) and wellbeing outcomes (safety, health, inclusion, belonging).
• Allow multimodal presentation options (spoken pitch, annotated poster, digital slide with captions) for students with writing or speaking anxiety.
• For students needing support: reduce to two strategies and provide a “choose from” list; teacher can conference briefly with each group.
• For advanced students: require one “trade-off” statement (e.g. “This might affect… but we reduce the impact by…”) and a clearer justification using evidence from earlier lessons.
• EAL support: use visuals on the canvas prompts and permit translation/first-language brainstorming before drafting the final proposal in English.
• SEN support: assign clear roles within groups (timekeeper, evidence reader, safety checker, presenter) and chunk tasks into short timed intervals.