Landscape Comparison Prep

Overview

This lesson is the final project preparation step in the unit “Exploring Landscapes: Australia vs Peru”. Students begin research and planning to compare landscapes using evidence and ideas from earlier lessons about environmental change and Aboriginal connection to Country (Australia) and landscape pressures and management responses (Peru).

Learning intentions

Students will:

• identify key similarities and differences between an Australian and a Peruvian landscape case study using geographic evidence
• describe how Aboriginal Peoples’ custodianship, care and management relate to the Australian landscape
• demonstrate ways to manage and protect a place or environment in both case studies
• plan a project structure that includes inquiry questions, evidence, and an approach for presenting findings

Success criteria

Students can:

• create a clear project question and outline the case study pairings (Australia + Peru)
• list credible evidence sources and explain how each evidence piece supports a claim
• explain Aboriginal Peoples’ care/management of Country using at least two examples from their Australian case study
• propose at least two realistic management/protection actions for each place and justify them
• use geographic thinking (cause/effect and change/management) to compare both landscapes

Curriculum links

• Geography Stage 4: thinking and working geographically, environmental change, environmental management, and investigating environments
• GELS-APC-02: Students identify ways in which Aboriginal Peoples care for and manage Country
• GELS-MAN-01: Students demonstrate ways to manage and protect a place or environment
• GE4-APC-01: Students explain Aboriginal Peoples’ Custodianship, care and management of Country

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Entry routine. Teacher displays the project task overview slide (no links) and revisits success criteria as class read-through; students unpack the two case studies required: one Australian landscape and one Peruvian landscape.
2. 5–15 min · Modelling the “comparison plan”. Teacher models a simple two-column comparison scaffold (Australia vs Peru) with headings: landscape features, environmental changes/pressures, impacts, management responses, and evidence. Students annotate the model with one improvement idea they would use for their own plan.
3. 15–30 min · Research sprint (Australian case study). Teacher circulates with a checklist: students choose an Aboriginal-connected Australian landscape they can investigate (e.g., river systems, coastal environments, desert/land management) and record notes under: custodianship, care practices, and local management/protection actions. Students capture at least two evidence notes that can be cited in their project (e.g., statistics, mapped features, descriptions of practices, agency/program information).
4. 30–40 min · Research sprint (Peruvian case study). Teacher provides guiding prompts: “What environmental changes/pressures are happening?” and “What management responses exist?” Students find at least two evidence notes for Peru and decide which comparison categories they will use to align both case studies.
5. 40–50 min · Evidence-to-claim mapping. Teacher explains that each management/protection action must be linked to evidence and a geographic “reason why”. Students complete a quick mapping: Evidence → Claim → Why it matters for landscape protection/management (one line for each of 2 actions per place).
6. 50–58 min · Build the final project structure. Teacher shows a recommended project outline (intro/inquiry question, case study 1, case study 2, comparison table, management recommendations, conclusion). Students write a brief plan: their inquiry question, headings, and a list of sources they will use.
7. 58–60 min · Exit ticket. Students submit a half-page check: their chosen landscapes, their inquiry question, and one sentence each answering:

• “How do Aboriginal Peoples care for/manage Country here?”
• “What management actions will protect this landscape?”

Resources

• Project overview and scaffold sheets (comparison table, evidence-to-claim organiser, project outline template)
• Research packs (printed articles/excerpts, atlas maps, teacher-provided summaries for Australia and Peru)
• Note-taking sheets and highlighters (different colours for evidence, claims, and actions)
• Student devices (optional) for word processing only; ensure content is teacher-approved/curated
• Source credibility checklist (e.g., author/organisation, date, purpose, whether it includes data or qualitative description)
• Timer and teacher checklist for conferencing

Assessment

• Formative during research sprints: teacher checks students’ notes using a quick rubric-style checklist (evidence recorded, comparison headings used, Aboriginal custodianship captured appropriately, management actions justified).
• Evidence-to-claim mapping review: teacher provides immediate feedback on whether claims are supported by notes.
• Exit ticket: verifies students have an inquiry question, at least two evidence items per place, and at least one Aboriginal care/management statement.

Differentiation

• Sentence starters for GELS-APC-02/GE4-APC-01 responses (e.g., “In this landscape, Aboriginal Peoples care for Country by…”, “This helps protect… because…”).
• Graphic organisers with reduced options (provide pre-filled comparison categories and a word bank: pressure, impact, management, protection, custodianship, sustainability).
• For students needing extension support: provide a curated set of 2–3 reliable evidence extracts per case study and fewer decision points.
• For advanced students: require a cause–effect chain (pressure → impact → response) for both landscapes and a comparison conclusion that weighs trade-offs.
• Language support: allow responses in short paragraphs or bullet points; offer bilingual support where available; pre-teach key terms on the board.
• SEN considerations: provide chunked tasks with timers and frequent teacher check-ins; allow oral rehearsal of inquiry question before writing.

Extension (for advanced learners)

• Add a “choose and justify” challenge: students select one Aboriginal-informed management approach (from their Australia case study) and one Peru management response, then propose a combined recommendation and justify feasibility, benefits, and risks.
• Include a mini-method section: describe one way they could validate their evidence (e.g., compare two data sources, triangulate with a map plus text description).