Presentation & Impact

Overview

Students present their final Esky prototypes and explain how recycled material choices influenced performance and sustainability outcomes. This lesson consolidates analysis, justification and evaluation of designed solutions, with a focus on community impact.

Learning intentions

• Students will present a designed solution clearly, using evidence from testing and material selection.
• Students will analyse and make judgements about how material properties and system choices support the Esky’s function.
• Students will develop and apply design criteria, including sustainability, to evaluate design decisions.
• Students will communicate practical improvements based on peer and teacher feedback.

Success criteria

• I can explain the purpose of my Esky and how it meets agreed design criteria.
• I can justify my material and component choices using properties (e.g. insulation, durability, weight, sourcing).
• I can describe sustainability impacts of recycled materials (e.g. waste reduction, longevity, trade-offs).
• I can evaluate feedback and clearly state at least one improvement I would make next.

Curriculum links

• AC9TDE10K06: analyse and make judgements on how characteristics and properties of materials and systems can be combined to create designed solutions.
• AC9TDE10P04: develop design criteria independently including sustainability to evaluate design ideas, processes and solutions.
• AC9TDE10P05: develop project plans for intended purposes and audiences, managing time/cost/risk to produce designed solutions (refer to planning choices when explaining outcomes).
• Cross-curriculum: communication skills through structured presentations and peer critique.

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Set-up & expectations. Teacher places a simple presentation rubric on the board (clear purpose, evidence, justification, sustainability, communication) and revisits respectful critique rules; students prepare their materials and place one proof item on their table (test result sheet or data photo).

2. 5–12 min · Quick modelling (think-aloud). Teacher models a 60–90 second presentation using one example: “What problem we solved → what we chose → why those choices → what testing showed → community impact”; students note 3 sentence starters for later use.

3. 12–37 min · Peer presentations (Round 1). Teacher divides the class into 5 groups (about 5 students each) with timed turns of ~3 minutes per student/team. Students present their final Esky, while peers complete a short feedback sheet aligned to design criteria: “Meets / Partly meets / Needs work” plus one piece of evidence and one suggestion.

4. 37–42 min · Feedback synthesis. Teacher prompts a whole-class discussion: “What patterns of success and trade-offs are emerging across the class?” Students choose the single most important peer suggestion and write it as an “If we improved… then we expect…” statement.

5. 42–53 min · Peer presentations (Round 2: improvements). Teacher runs a shorter round for any students not yet ready or for follow-up questions. Students deliver a 60-second “reflection update” focusing only on: (1) one judgement about materials or system performance, and (2) one sustainability impact claim they can justify.

6. 53–58 min · Quality checks against criteria. Teacher leads a checklist activity: teams hold their Esky and verbally confirm key criteria (insulation effectiveness, fit/finish, durability, recycled sourcing, usability/safety). Students update their final evaluation note: “Currently meets because… / doesn’t meet because…”

7. 58–60 min · Exit ticket. Students submit a brief written response: “One material property choice that made the biggest difference was… because… One community impact benefit/trade-off was…”

Resources

• Final Esky prototypes (student-built)
• Presentation feedback sheets (design criteria + evidence prompts)
• Class rubric or teacher checklist (1 page)
• Test evidence (photos, temperature readings, weight/handheld durability notes)
• Timer or visible countdown slide
• Clipboards/pens, sticky notes for quick suggestions
• Whiteboard/markers for sentence starters and class patterns
• Safety reminders for handling prototypes

Assessment

• Formative: teacher observes presentations for clarity, use of evidence, and alignment to design criteria during the peer rounds.
• Formative: peer feedback sheets—students must provide at least one evidence-based comment and one improvement suggestion.
• Summative (lightweight): exit ticket evaluating each student’s ability to make a judgement about material/system properties and sustainability impact.

Differentiation

• Support: provide sentence starters for justification (“We chose… because it has…”, “Our testing showed…”, “This reduces waste by…”); allow students to use notes or cue cards.
• Support: offer a “evidence menu” (temperature change, fit of lid, handling/durability, sourcing notes) so students can select appropriate proof.
• Extension: challenge students to include a trade-off analysis (e.g. insulation vs weight, durability vs recyclability) and propose a specific next iteration using the criteria.
• EAL/SEN: allow responses to be partly planned with icons (property, evidence, impact, improvement) and provide one-on-one clarification during feedback synthesis.

Extension (optional)

• N/A for this lesson.