Overview

Across three connected 60-minute lessons, students investigate the current playground, identify barriers to participation and research inclusive design ideas. They then develop a labelled floor plan and begin a collaborative prototype for a playground where every student can play, learn, connect and belong.

Learning intentions

Students will:

• investigate user needs through observation, surveys, interviews and research
• generate and communicate inclusive playground design ideas using sketches, labels, scale and digital tools
• consider accessibility, safety, sustainability, engagement and inclusion when making design decisions
• collaborate to plan and develop a prototype, responding to feedback

Success criteria

• I can identify at least five improvements that would make a playground more inclusive and accessible.
• I can explain how features support different users, including students with physical, sensory or social needs.
• I can create a labelled plan that shows purposeful, safe and sustainable design choices.
• I can contribute respectfully to a group prototype and use feedback to improve our design.

Curriculum links

• Design and Technologies: generating, iterating and communicating design ideas using technical terms and graphical representation techniques, including digital tools.
• Design and Technologies: developing project plans that identify resources, roles, milestones and production steps.
• Digital Technologies: designing algorithms involving alternatives and iteration when planning decision-making processes.
• Design and Technologies: considering how managed environments are designed to meet community needs and support sustainable use of resources.

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–8 min · Hook and purpose. Teacher opens with the provocative playground comparison showing an ordinary playground and an inclusive playground, then asks, “Who might be unable to use this space, and why?” Students complete a think-pair-share and identify the project challenge.
2. 8–18 min · Design factors. Teacher uses the accessibility, safety, sustainability, engagement and inclusion slides to explain each factor, modelling examples such as ramps, quiet spaces, shade, sensory equipment and clear pathways. Students record one possible feature for each factor on the playground investigation and design brief.
3. 18–35 min · Investigation. Teacher establishes safe observation areas and assigns groups of up to four roles: observer, interviewer, recorder and photographer or sketcher. Students inspect the playground, noting who uses spaces, what works well, barriers, safety concerns and possible improvements; groups may collect brief peer or staff feedback using agreed questions.
4. 35–47 min · Research and generate. Teacher displays examples of inclusive playground features and models turning evidence into a design response. Students research or discuss examples, then generate at least five possible improvements and explain which users each feature supports.
5. 47–55 min · Group design brief. Teacher conferences with groups, checking that ideas respond to evidence rather than personal preference. Students choose their strongest ideas, identify required materials and write an initial purpose statement in the worksheet.
6. 55–60 min · Exit reflection. Teacher asks students to complete the success criteria exit ticket slips and revisits the project question. Students state one barrier they found and one design response they will investigate next lesson.

Resources

• the inclusive playground investigation deck
• the playground investigation and design brief
• the success criteria exit ticket slips
• Playground observation areas
• Tablets or computers
• Research images or approved websites
• Pencils, clipboards and coloured pencils
• Interview question prompts
• Accessibility and safety checklist

Assessment

• Listen for students linking design features to specific users and evidence from the investigation.
• Check worksheets for five improvements, intended users and consideration of accessibility, safety, sustainability, engagement and inclusion.
• Use the exit ticket to identify misconceptions and groups requiring support before planning.

Differentiation

• Provide a picture bank, feature cards, sentence starters such as “This supports ___ because ___” and preselected research examples for students requiring support or learning English.
• Allow students to record observations through sketches, labelled photographs, speech-to-text or an oral conference.
• Extend capable students to compare two possible solutions and justify which provides the greatest benefit with the fewest environmental or safety risks.
• Use mixed-ability groups with clearly assigned, rotating roles; provide a quiet observation option for students who find busy environments challenging.

---

Plan the Playground

Overview

Students use their investigation evidence to develop, test and communicate a playground design. They first produce a hand-drawn bird’s-eye plan, then refine it digitally before preparing a production plan for the prototype.

Learning intentions

Students will:

• use evidence to select and locate playground features
• communicate a design using a bird’s-eye view, labels, symbols, pathways and approximate scale
• explain decisions about safety, accessibility, sustainability and user experience
• plan resources, roles and production steps collaboratively

Success criteria

• I can create a clear, labelled bird’s-eye plan.
• I can show where people, pathways, equipment, learning, social and quiet spaces belong.
• I can justify my design choices using evidence.
• I can identify materials, roles, milestones and steps for making the prototype.

Curriculum links

• Design and Technologies: generating, iterating and communicating design ideas through graphical representation and digital tools.
• Design and Technologies: developing project plans that consider resources for collaborative production.
• Digital Technologies: using alternatives and iteration to improve a design or solve a problem.

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–7 min · Retrieve and focus. Teacher uses the evidence-to-design retrieval slides to revisit the investigation and models how a finding such as “some students avoid crowded areas” can lead to a quiet zone. Students share one evidence-based design requirement.
2. 7–17 min · Model floor plans. Teacher demonstrates a bird’s-eye view, simple symbols, labels, a legend, pathways and approximate scale using the floor-plan modelling slides. Students identify features that must appear in a useful plan.
3. 17–30 min · Draft on paper. Teacher distributes the floor-plan and production planner and reminds groups to include at least five inclusive improvements, equipment, learning or social spaces, quiet areas and safe pathways. Students collaboratively sketch and label an A4 draft.
4. 30–43 min · Critique and iterate. Teacher runs a two-minute peer review: groups check another plan for accessibility, safety, sustainability, clarity and alignment with evidence. Students give “I like…”, “I wish…” and “What if…” feedback, then revise their draft.
5. 43–55 min · Digital plan. Teacher demonstrates the approved digital floor-planning tool and explains that the digital version must match the agreed draft. Students create a labelled digital plan, adding a legend, zones, pathways and key features.
6. 55–60 min · Production planning. Teacher models a simple task sequence and checks resource realism. Students record roles, materials, milestones and the first three making steps in the worksheet, then save or screenshot the plan for the project folder.

Resources

• the inclusive floor-plan design deck
• the floor-plan and production planner
• A4 paper and pencils
• Rulers and coloured pencils
• Tablets or computers
• Approved digital floor-planning tool
• Project resource list
• Peer feedback prompts

Assessment

• Confer with groups about whether each feature has a clear purpose and supports a stated user need.
• Assess drafts for labels, pathways, zones, safety and evidence-based decisions.
• Check production planners for realistic materials, roles, milestones and ordered steps.

Differentiation

• Provide a partially completed plan, symbol bank, scale guide and a model legend; accept a carefully labelled non-digital plan where required.
• Pair students strategically and offer speech-to-text or scribing for explanations.
• Extend students to include a scale calculation, alternative layout or environmental impact comparison.
• Explicitly teach plan vocabulary and use colour coding for pathways, activity zones, quiet areas and accessible features.

---

Build and Improve

Overview

Students use their approved plan to construct a physical or digital prototype. They practise safe material use, collaborative problem-solving and iterative improvement, then prepare evidence for their final proposal and presentation.

Learning intentions

Students will:

• select and use appropriate, sustainable materials or digital components
• follow and adapt a project plan while working safely and collaboratively
• test the prototype against accessibility, safety, sustainability, engagement and inclusion criteria
• use feedback to improve and explain the design

Success criteria

• I can make a prototype that matches our plan and includes inclusive features.
• I can share responsibilities, listen to others and solve problems respectfully.
• I can test our design and make at least one purposeful improvement.
• I can explain how the design helps every student play, learn and belong.

Curriculum links

• Design and Technologies: experimenting with materials, tools and equipment to refine design decisions and processes.
• Design and Technologies: communicating design ideas, decisions and processes using technical terms and graphical representations.
• Design and Technologies: developing and using models to iterate and improve design ideas.
• Design and Technologies: planning collaborative production and considering resources.

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–8 min · Safety and success check. Teacher opens the prototype safety and criteria slides and reviews tool rules, sustainable material choices and the assessment checklist. Students assign roles and identify the plan feature each person will help construct.
2. 8–35 min · Prototype construction. Teacher circulates, questioning groups about scale, stability, accessible routes and the purpose of each area. Students construct a physical or digital model using their plan, documenting changes when problems arise.
3. 35–45 min · User testing. Teacher introduces a structured test: Can a user enter, move through, choose activities, find a quiet space and participate safely? Groups inspect another prototype and record two strengths and one concern on the prototype testing and proposal planner.
4. 45–53 min · Iterate and improve. Teacher prompts groups to prioritise feedback and make at least one change. Students modify their prototype, then annotate the plan or worksheet to explain what changed and why.
5. 53–60 min · Proposal rehearsal. Teacher uses the proposal and presentation rehearsal slides to model a concise explanation using evidence. Students prepare three statements: the problem, key design choices and how the design supports belonging; they identify evidence needed for the final proposal.

Resources

• the prototype development and presentation deck
• the prototype testing and proposal planner
• Recycled cardboard, paper, boxes and bottle tops
• Craft sticks, string, fabric and natural or reused materials
• Scissors, glue, tape and rulers
• Tablets or computers for digital prototypes
• Prototype assessment checklist
• Peer feedback notes

Assessment

• Observe safe tool use, equitable collaboration and purposeful problem-solving during construction.
• Check that the prototype matches the plan and includes features linked to accessibility, safety, sustainability and engagement.
• Review testing notes and the documented improvement for use in the final proposal and presentation.

Differentiation

• Offer pre-cut materials, templates, adapted tools, a digital construction option and explicit role cards for students requiring support.
• Permit oral recording, labelled diagrams or speech-to-text instead of extended handwriting.
• Extend groups to calculate approximate scale, evaluate material sustainability or propose a second iteration.
• Provide frequent check-ins, visual task sequencing and a quiet workspace for students affected by noise or sensory overload.