Olympic Team Ads

Overview

Students analyse an Australian Olympic Team campaign advertisement to understand how visual and language features shape meaning for a specific audience and purpose. The lesson builds toward an assessed oral presentation: groups prepare and deliver a short pitch explaining their analysis.

Learning intentions

Students will be able to:

• WALT analyse how visual features create meaning and perspective in an advertisement
• WALT explain how audience and purpose influence language and design choices
• WALT examine how representation (including values and identities) is constructed through visual and language features
• WALT prepare and deliver an oral presentation that justifies analysis using evidence from the ad

Success criteria

Students can:

• identify key visual features (e.g. salience, colour, angle, proximity/vectors) and describe their effect
• justify why the ad is aimed at a particular audience and how its purpose shapes structure and language choices
• comment on representation by explaining who is shown, how they are shown, and what message that creates
• deliver a clear oral presentation using relevant evidence and appropriate evaluative language

Curriculum links

• Literacy: AC9E7LY03 — analyse ways language features shape meaning and vary according to audience and purpose
• Language: AC9E7LA07 — analyse how visual techniques (e.g. angle, social distance, vectors) create perspective
• Literacy: AC9E7LA05 — use comprehension strategies (visualising, connecting, questioning) to analyse and summarise information
• Language: AC9E7LA02 — recognise evaluative language and substantiate evaluations with reference to the text
• Language: AC9E7LA03 — identify how text structures and language features vary depending on purpose

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Hook & set purpose. Teacher displays the campaign ad (projected or printed) and asks: “What do you think the ad wants you to feel and do?” Students quick-write one feeling + one action they think the ad encourages.

2. 5–15 min · Ad “see-think-wonder” analysis (teacher modelling). Teacher models using sentence starters and a simple checklist: identify, describe, effect, evidence. Students annotate the ad in pairs, focusing on 2 visual features and 1 possible audience cue.

3. 15–25 min · Vocabulary building (ads + analysis language). Teacher introduces a short word bank and reads aloud a model paragraph:

• salience, angle, social distance, vector, proximity
• audience, purpose, representation, persuade, campaign
• evidence, effect, justify, strongly suggests Students complete a quick “match the word to the example” task using phrases from their own annotations.

4. 25–40 min · Group discussion (representation + audience/purpose). Teacher assigns roles (facilitator, evidence finder, language analyst, presenter) and gives guiding prompts. Students discuss and record:

• Who is the most likely target audience and why?
• What is the campaign purpose (e.g. support, inspire, recruit fans/values)?
• How does representation appear (whose stories/identities are highlighted; how are athletes made to seem)? Students must cite visual evidence (e.g. where the viewer’s attention is guided, who is closest/most prominent).

5. 40–52 min · Oral presentation preparation (assessment integrated). Teacher provides a one-minute planning sheet and demonstrates a mini-structure: claim → evidence → explanation → link to audience/purpose. Each group plans a 60–90 second oral pitch using:

• 1 visual feature + effect
• 1 audience/purpose link (how language/design choices fit)
• 1 representation point + justification using evidence Teacher circulates, coaching evaluative phrasing and requiring clear justification.

6. 52–58 min · Oral presentations (delivery). Teacher runs a timed “gallery” routine: 3–4 groups present; others note “evidence used” and “justification strength.” Students present their analysis clearly, using the sentence starters and evidence markers provided.

7. 58–60 min · Exit ticket (evidence check). Teacher collects a final response: “One visual choice and the effect I can justify is…” Students answer individually, ensuring they name a feature and explain its impact.

Resources

• Printed copies or projected image(s) of an Australian Olympic Team campaign advertisement (same version for all)
• Ad analysis sheet with a visual-features checklist and “claim → evidence → explanation” organiser
• Vocabulary card set and sentence starters (analysis stems)
• Highlighters/annotation tools (or digital annotation if using devices)
• Role cards for group work
• Timed oral presentation planning sheet
• Exit ticket slips

Assessment

• Formative: teacher checks annotations and group notes for accurate identification of visual features and evidence use
• Integrated assessment: oral presentation (60–90 seconds) assessed using a simple rubric aligned to analysing audience/purpose, explaining effects of visual features, and justifying representation claims with evidence
• Formative: exit ticket confirms students can make a justified, evidence-based statement

Differentiation

• Support: provide sentence starters for claims and explanations (e.g. “The choice of colour suggests… because…”), plus a reduced checklist focusing on only 2–3 visual features
• Support for EAL: allow students to use a bilingual word bank for key terms; sentence frames emphasise cause (“because”) and audience/purpose (“This is aimed at… so…”)
• Dyslexia-friendly reading options: offer a short text summary of the ad’s key message in large print; allow audio read-aloud of vocabulary models and the ad prompt; reduce reading load by chunking tasks (one prompt per line)
• Extension: challenge groups to compare two versions of the same campaign (if available) or to propose an alternative audience and explain what visual/language changes would be needed

Success criteria for today (at a glance)

• I can identify visual features and explain how they shape perspective and meaning.
• I can justify audience and purpose choices using evidence from the ad.
• I can describe representation and explain what message it creates.
• I can present my analysis clearly using a claim, evidence, and explanation structure.