Sustainable Esky Showcase

Overview

In this final lesson of the “Sustainable Esky Design Unit”, students present their finished “eco-esky” designs to the class, evaluate peer solutions against established design criteria (including sustainability), and reflect on how well the process met those criteria.

Learning intentions

Students will:

• present a designed solution clearly, using evidence from testing and/or user feedback
• evaluate peer designs using agreed design criteria that include sustainability considerations
• justify design decisions by referring to material/system properties and how they affect performance
• reflect on how they iterated their design during the unit and what they would improve next

Success criteria

Students can:

• describe the eco-esky purpose, key features, and how sustainability was considered
• use design criteria to judge whether a solution meets the required functions
• provide respectful, specific feedback to peers and explain why it matters
• summarise at least one improvement they would make using evaluation evidence

Curriculum links

• Develop design criteria independently including sustainability to evaluate design ideas, processes and solutions
• Analyse and make judgements on how characteristics and properties of materials, systems, components, tools and equipment can be combined to create designed solutions
• Evaluate designs against design criteria, user stories, possible future impact and opportunities for enterprise
• Generate, modify, communicate and critically evaluate alternative designs (through presenting and comparing final iterations)

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Settle & purpose check. Teacher introduces the lesson flow: presentations, peer evaluation, and reflection, linking back to the class design criteria. Students collect their materials (presentation notes, prototype display) and review the peer-evaluation sheet.

2. 5–15 min · Rapid “how to present” modelling. Teacher models a short, structured presentation (Problem → Design criteria → Evidence → Sustainability → Future improvements) using an anonymised example. Students add missing prompts to their own presentation planning sheet.

3. 15–35 min · Student presentations (Part A). Teacher runs a timed rotation (e.g., 2–3 minutes per student) and enforces respectful listening and note-taking. Students present their eco-esky, pointing to what they designed and referencing evaluation evidence (e.g., test results, user observations, comparison to criteria).

4. 35–49 min · Peer evaluation sprint. Teacher explains and clarifies expectations: judgments must reference criteria and include at least one sustainability comment and one performance/material comment. Students complete structured feedback for 2–3 peers, using evidence from those presentations and prototype observation (where available).

5. 49–57 min · Whole-class evaluation discussion. Teacher facilitates a guided conversation: “Which design criteria were met best and why?” and “What sustainability improvements could be prioritised?” Students share one claim with supporting justification, and one idea they would borrow or adapt for their own design.

6. 57–60 min · Exit reflection. Teacher collects a short written reflection (2–3 sentences) and checks for completion of peer feedback. Students submit: (1) one success against criteria, (2) one evidence-based reason, (3) one next-step improvement.

Resources

• Student eco-esky prototypes and any labelled components
• Peer evaluation sheets (criterion-by-criterion grid with space for evidence and justification)
• Individual presentation cue cards or planning sheets (Problem, Criteria, Evidence, Sustainability, Improvements)
• Timer (visible) and teacher rotation plan
• Class copy of final design criteria (displayed or printed)
• Markers, sticky notes, and a “feedback to action” sentence starter strip
• Optional: photo sheet for prototypes (for students who finish quickly)

Assessment

• Formative assessment during presentations using teacher checklist: clarity, evidence of meeting criteria, sustainability justification
• Formative peer assessment: quality of judgments (criterion-linked, evidence-based, specific, respectful)
• Exit reflection: identifies one met criterion with evidence and one improvement based on evaluation feedback

Differentiation

• Support for structure: provide sentence starters for presentations and feedback (e.g., “My design meets the criterion of… because…”, “A sustainability strength is…”, “To improve performance, I would…”)
• Support for language/EAL: allow brief dot-point presentations; peer feedback can be completed with reduced text requirements but must still include evidence and a criterion reference
• Extension: students can add an extra sustainability or materials-property justification (e.g., trade-offs between insulation performance, durability, cost, and end-of-life disposal)
• SEN considerations: offer a role option during presentations (speaker + component explainer) and provide a simplified evaluation sheet for students needing reduced cognitive load

Extension (optional)

• N/A (unit final lesson—focus remains on presentation, evaluation, and reflection).