Questioning Consumption

Overview

Students investigate how materialism and social expectations could become a viable Extended Investigation topic. They examine competing perspectives, identify a researchable problem, and draft a rationale and research plan suitable for VCE Unit 3 assessment.

Learning intentions

Students will:

• define materialism and social expectations in an academically useful way
• distinguish a broad social issue from a focused, researchable question
• evaluate possible sources, perspectives and ethical considerations
• develop a preliminary rationale and research plan
• understand the expectations of timed, mainly in-class coursework

Success criteria

• I can explain why materialism and social expectations are significant issues.
• I can turn a broad topic into a focused research question.
• I can justify a proposed investigation using relevant evidence and perspectives.
• I can identify an appropriate method, scope, timeline and ethical considerations.

Curriculum links

• Written rationale: developing a justified explanation of the investigation’s significance, focus and approach.
• Written research plan: establishing a feasible research question, method, sources, timeline and ethical safeguards.
• Unit 3 assessment conditions: completing coursework mainly in class and within a limited timeframe.
• Assessment preparation: planning for written tasks of approximately 1000 words and a 12–16 minute presentation timeframe.

Lesson structure (180 minutes)

1. 0–15 min · Provocation and positioning. Open with the provocative opening slides showing a curated social-media shopping feed, a luxury advertisement and a “buy now, pay later” message. Students respond privately: “What are people being encouraged to want, and who benefits?” They then position themselves on a continuum from “mostly personal choice” to “mostly social pressure” and explain their placement.

2. 15–35 min · Concept clarification. Use the concept and vocabulary slides to clarify materialism, consumer culture, status consumption, social comparison, identity, advertising, peer influence and social expectations. Model the difference between a claim (“teenagers are materialistic”) and an investigable issue (“How do social-media trends influence perceptions of status among young people?”). Students annotate the concept and question-development worksheet with definitions, examples and one misconception they want to test.

3. 35–65 min · Perspectives and evidence carousel. Display four short, teacher-selected stimulus extracts on the slides: an advertising perspective, a youth wellbeing perspective, an economic perspective and a critical social perspective. Students work in five groups of four, rotating through the extracts and recording each author’s claim, evidence, assumptions and possible bias on the worksheet. At each rotation, one student acts as evidence checker, one as summariser, one as questioner and one as recorder; roles change between extracts.

4. 65–80 min · Debrief and question quality. Facilitate a whole-class comparison using the perspectives and discussion prompt slides. Students identify where the perspectives agree, conflict or leave gaps. Model testing questions against focus, feasibility, significance, access to evidence and ethical safety. Students improve two weak questions, such as “Why do people buy things?” and “Is social media bad?”, into questions with a defined population, context, relationship or comparison.

5. 80–90 min · Break. Students save their work and return promptly with one preferred investigation direction.

6. 90–125 min · Research design workshop. Introduce a planning pathway through the research-plan instruction slides: question, sub-questions, rationale, method, likely sources, limitations, ethics and timeline. Students complete the planning section of the worksheet for one proposed investigation. Suitable directions might include social-media influencers and perceived status, school uniform and identity, fast fashion and peer expectations, or buy-now-pay-later advertising and young consumers. Confer with groups, checking that proposed surveys or interviews avoid sensitive financial disclosure and protect anonymity.

7. 125–155 min · Rationale drafting and peer review. Students draft a 250–300-word rationale explaining the issue’s significance, the knowledge gap or tension, the proposed question and why the investigation is worthwhile. Use the rationale structure and model paragraph slides to show a concise model and highlight evidence-based justification. Partners use the worksheet checklist to give feedback on clarity, focus, significance, evidence, feasibility and ethical awareness. Students revise one paragraph in response.

8. 155–172 min · Research plan sprint. Students complete a concise research plan: working question, three sub-questions, proposed method, five source types or search terms, risks and safeguards, and a six-stage timeline. Students must identify one likely limitation and one adjustment that would keep the project manageable within the available timeframe.

9. 172–180 min · Exit reflection. Finish with the plenary and exit-ticket prompt. Students submit three responses: their current research question, the strongest reason the topic matters, and the first source or action they will pursue. Invite two students to share how their question changed during the lesson.

Resources

• the Materialism and Social Expectations investigation deck
• the question, rationale and research-plan worksheet
• Four teacher-selected stimulus extracts
• Projector or interactive display
• Timer
• Highlighters and pens
• A3 paper or whiteboard space for group synthesis
• VCAA assessment and ethical guidance available in the classroom

Assessment

• Check worksheet annotations during concept clarification and question refinement; provide immediate feedback on scope and wording.
• Use group explanations and peer-review checklists to assess students’ ability to identify evidence, assumptions, perspectives and limitations.
• Collect the exit reflection, draft rationale and research-plan outline. Check that each includes a focused question, significance, feasible method, sources, timeline and ethical safeguards.

Differentiation

• Provide sentence starters: “This issue is significant because…”, “A limitation of this approach is…” and “The evidence suggests…, however…”.
• Offer a question bank and a partially completed planning template to students who need support; allow speech-to-text, typed responses or recorded rehearsal where appropriate.
• For EAL students, pre-teach key terms, pair each term with a concrete example, and permit bilingual dictionaries or translated brainstorming before drafting.
• Extend confident students by requiring comparison of two methods, a more explicit knowledge gap, and a discussion of reliability, validity or researcher bias.
• Avoid requiring students to disclose personal family income, purchasing habits or financial circumstances; permit fictionalised or general examples in discussion.