Material Matchmakers

Overview

Lesson 13 of 15 in Playground Physics and Design. Students investigate how material properties affect grip, movement, cushioning and safety, then use evidence to improve a playground design while considering people, place and sustainability.

Learning intentions

• WALT describe and compare material properties using observations and simple tests.
• WALT explain that forces such as friction, air resistance and impacts can transfer energy.
• WALT match materials to playground jobs and justify our choices.
• WALT improve a design by considering safety, weather, maintenance, cost, sustainability and accessibility.

Success criteria

• I can describe a material as grippy, smooth, strong, flexible, cushioned or resistant to movement.
• I can carry out a fair test and record what I observe.
• I can explain how a material choice changes movement or the effect of an impact.
• I can label my playground design and explain why each material is suitable.

Curriculum links

• Material World: observing, describing and comparing the properties and uses of familiar materials.
• Physical World: recognising pushes, pulls, friction, air resistance, impacts and changes in movement.
• Nature of Science: making observations, carrying out simple fair tests, recording evidence and communicating explanations.
• Technology and design: developing and improving a design for a particular user, purpose and setting.

Lesson structure (45 minutes)

1. 0–5 minutes – Hook and recall Open with the playground mystery hook and learning goals. Show two possible playground surfaces, such as smooth plastic and textured rubber, and ask: “Which would be safer for running, climbing or landing? What evidence would we need?” Revisit the previous lesson’s design problem and explain that today’s evidence will improve their playground plans.

2. 5–10 minutes – Model the tests Demonstrate how to test materials safely and fairly. Model a grip test by placing a block on a material and slowly raising one end, a movement test by sliding the same object across each surface, and a cushioning test by dropping a small object from the same height onto different materials. Explain that friction resists movement, air resistance can slow moving objects, and cushioning spreads or reduces the effect of an impact. Avoid describing these as invisible “substances”; focus on what students can observe.

3. 10–27 minutes – Team material investigation Place students in five groups of five, with roles such as equipment manager, tester, recorder, observer and reporter. Give each group a tray containing safe samples such as rubber, fabric, plastic, foam, cardboard, wood and artificial grass. Distribute the material testing and playground design worksheet. Groups rotate through or complete five short tests: grip, smoothness, cushioning, strength and resistance to movement. Students use a simple scale such as low, medium or high and record evidence rather than guessing. Remind them to change one factor at a time and not to test strength by pulling dangerously hard.

4. 27–34 minutes – Match materials to playground jobs Ask groups to choose suitable materials for jobs such as a slide surface, swing seat, climbing handhold, fall zone, ramp or pathway. On the worksheet, students record the material, property, playground job and reason. Prompt with: “Would you want high or low friction here?” and “Where should energy from a landing go?” Groups share one choice and one piece of evidence. Return to the material-matching examples and discussion prompts.

5. 34–41 minutes – Update the design Students retrieve their playground designs from the previous lesson and add labels showing materials and their purpose. They must include at least three material choices and one note about friction, cushioning, air resistance or impact. Add a design note considering at least two of: wet weather, cleaning or maintenance, cost, reducing waste, using renewable/recycled materials, and access for people with different mobility or sensory needs. Encourage students to replace a choice if today’s evidence suggests a safer or more useful option.

6. 41–45 minutes – Share and assess Use the design-share and plenary slides. Invite three pairs to present one improved choice using the sentence frame: “We chose ___ for ___ because it is ___; this helps ___.” Students complete the final reflection on the worksheet: “The most important test result was…” and “One change I made was…”. Briefly explain that the next lesson will compare complete designs against agreed criteria.

Resources

• the complete introduction, testing, discussion and plenary slide deck
• the material testing and playground design worksheet
• Small samples: rubber, foam, fabric, plastic, cardboard, wood and artificial grass
• Small identical blocks or toy cars for sliding and grip tests
• Small soft object for controlled drop tests
• Trays, books or boards to make a gentle slope
• Rulers or measuring strips, pencils and coloured pencils
• Existing playground design drawings
• Safety reminder: no throwing, unsafe climbing or forceful pulling

Assessment

• Observe whether students control variables, use the property vocabulary accurately and record observable evidence.
• Check worksheet matches: material, property, playground job and reason.
• Formatively assess updated designs for three justified material choices and consideration of safety plus at least one wider design factor.

Differentiation

• Provide picture-supported property cards, a word bank and sentence frames: “It feels…”, “It moved…”, and “This material is suitable because…”.
• Allow students to test fewer materials or complete one test at a time with an adult or peer recorder. Use pre-drawn design labels for learners who find writing difficult.
• For EAL learners, demonstrate each property, accept labelled drawings and pair students with a supportive language model.
• Extend confident learners by asking them to compare two suitable materials, identify a trade-off such as cost versus durability, or explain how wet conditions could change friction.