Smarter Water Use

Overview

Lesson 6 of 8 focuses on applying Year 5 scientific understanding of matter to an engineering-style investigation: reducing dam evaporation. Students use planning skills for fair testing, apply safety and permission awareness for any local data collection, and prepare a project presentation that explains community benefits.

Learning intentions

Students will:

• plan and conduct repeatable, fair investigations to test how different factors affect evaporation
• identify variables to change, measure, and control, and record a method that others could repeat
• describe risks and plan safe use of equipment and materials
• use evidence from investigations to draw reasoned conclusions and compare with others’ findings
• explain how scientific knowledge can support community decisions about water use

Success criteria

Students can:

• state a clear investigable question and a reasoned prediction
• label the independent (changed), dependent (measured), and controlled variables in a fair test plan
• record observations/data in an organised way and explain sources of possible error
• present findings with a recommendation that links to community benefits

Curriculum links

• Science: AC9S5I02 plan and conduct repeatable investigations (variables, fair tests, risks, permissions for Country/Place)
• Science: AC9S5I01 pose investigable questions and make reasoned predictions
• Science: AC9S5I05 compare methods/findings, recognise possible sources of error, pose questions, and draw reasoned conclusions
• Science: AC9S5H02 investigate how scientific knowledge is used by individuals and communities to make decisions

Lesson structure (80 minutes)

1. 0–10 min · Hook & scenario

• Teacher displays a short prompt: “A local community wants to reduce dam water loss to evaporation during hot, windy days.”
• Students think-pair-share: What could we test to slow evaporation (e.g., surface cover, airflow, temperature)?

2. 10–22 min · Project planning (fair test)

• Teacher models how to write a method that can be repeated, emphasising variable control and clear measurements.
• In pairs, students complete an Investigation Plan template: investigable question, prediction, equipment list, and the variables (changed/measured/controlled).

3. 22–35 min · Safety and permissions check

• Teacher leads a quick safety briefing: safe handling of liquids, tripping hazards, label/clean-up routines, and supervision during measurement.
• Students complete a “Risk & Safety” checklist for their setup and confirm whether any local field observations would require school permission and appropriate consultation with relevant First Nations community knowledge where needed.

4. 35–60 min · Build and run the investigation

• Teacher distributes materials and sets up stations (e.g., covered vs uncovered water containers; different airflow conditions; consistent starting volume).
• Students build their test rig and begin timed measurements of water loss (e.g., mass change or water level change) at set intervals, recording data immediately.
• Teacher circulates to check: only one variable is changed, all other conditions are controlled, measurements are consistent.

5. 60–72 min · Quick analysis & compare

• Teacher guides students to calculate simple differences (e.g., total loss over time) and identify patterns.
• Students swap results with another pair and discuss: Was it a fair test? What errors might explain differences? What new questions arise?

6. 72–80 min · Presentation preparation (exit evidence)

• Teacher explains that tomorrow/next lesson presentations will need: question, method, evidence, conclusion, and recommendation for a community.
• Students draft a 4–5 sentence “Findings so far” statement and submit an exit ticket with: one key result and one possible source of error.

Resources

• Investigation Plan and Risk & Safety checklist printables
• Materials per group/pair: clear containers, water, measuring jugs (if needed), digital scales or measuring rulers, stopwatch/timer
• Covers/materials for prototypes (e.g., plastic film, mesh, lid, shade card) and optional “wind” simulation method (e.g., fan with controlled distance)
• Labels, data recording sheets, pencils/markers
• Cleaning wipes/bins, PPE as required by school policy (e.g., safety glasses)
• Timer visible to students (board/teacher device)
• Reference cards: “variables” and “fair test checklist”

Assessment

• Formative: teacher checks investigation plans for correct variable identification and controlled conditions
• Formative: during measurement, teacher observes accuracy of recording and consistent timing
• Formative: pair-to-pair comparison discussion notes—students identify at least one possible source of error
• Exit ticket: statement of one key result plus one error/limitation

Differentiation

• Support
• Sentence starters for predictions (“I predict that… because…”), methods (“We will keep constant…”) and conclusions (“Our evidence shows…”)
• Provide a partially completed variables table to reduce cognitive load
• Teacher checks and re-teaches “fair test” criteria at station start
• Extension (for students ready to go further within the same lesson)
• Ask students to propose a second follow-up test that keeps the first result in mind (e.g., change cover material type while keeping airflow constant)
• Challenge them to estimate uncertainty (e.g., “measurement could vary by ± …”) and discuss how it might affect conclusions
• EAL/SEN considerations
• Use visuals for independent/dependent/controlled variables (icon cards)
• Allow verbal recording of observations with later teacher-assisted transcription if needed
• Keep language consistent: “measure how much water is lost” rather than “evaporation rate” unless taught explicitly