Peer Testing a Procedure

Overview

Students test a partner’s procedure by following the instructions exactly as written, then give specific feedback about clarity, missing information and sequence. They revise their own procedure using reader questions, practise words with the -ble spelling pattern, and proofread punctuation while maintaining fluent, legible handwriting.

Learning intentions

• WALT test a procedure for clarity and usability.
• WALT use a reader’s questions to clarify ambiguous instructions and add useful details.
• WALT spell common -ble words accurately.
• WALT proofread punctuation and present fluent, legible handwriting.

Success criteria

• I can follow my partner’s procedure without guessing what to do.
• I can identify a breakdown and explain what caused it.
• I can revise instructions using precise verbs, sequence words and helpful details.
• I can check -ble spellings, punctuation and handwriting before sharing my work.

Curriculum links

• English — Writing to inform: organise information clearly, develop a topic with related examples and use precise, topic-specific vocabulary.
• English — Oral Language / Communicating and Presenting: use words such as because, so and this means that to explain reasons, results and links between ideas.
• English — Reading comprehension: recognise that procedures organise information in a logical sequence for a specific purpose and audience.
• English — Writing processes: plan, compose, revise, edit and publish for a reader.

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–7 min · Hook and retrieval. Display a deliberately unclear instruction: “Put it there and do it carefully.” Open with the hook and retrieval slides and ask, “What would a reader need to know?” Students identify missing details, then recall procedure features: purpose, equipment, ordered steps, precise verbs and safety information.

2. 7–15 min · Model peer testing. Teacher demonstrates testing a short procedure, intentionally stopping at an ambiguous step and thinking aloud: “I am unsure which piece ‘it’ means, so I will ask a question rather than guess.” Students suggest useful reader questions and practise explaining a breakdown using because, so or this means that. Refer to the modelling and questioning slides.

3. 15–20 min · Explain the testing routine. Teacher models the roles: the reader follows the procedure silently and asks questions; the writer observes, listens and records the point of difficulty without taking over. Students read the success criteria on the procedure testing and revision worksheet and use the peer feedback sentence stem cards to rehearse constructive feedback.

4. 20–35 min · Partner test. Pair students and have them exchange their procedures. Each reader follows the instructions literally, using available classroom materials where appropriate; the writer records questions, skipped steps, confusing words and useful additions. Students use feedback stems such as “One step that worked was…” and “A question I have is…” Teacher circulates, checking that partners test rather than simply praise or rewrite for one another.

5. 35–47 min · Revise for usability. Students return to their own writing and revise at least two places revealed by the test. They replace vague language with precise verbs and nouns, add missing information, improve sequence words, and clarify punctuation or sentence boundaries. Students complete the revision section of the procedure testing and revision worksheet and explain one change to a partner using because or so.

6. 47–55 min · Spelling and proofreading workshop. Teacher briefly revisits the -ble pattern with examples such as comfortable, possible, sensible and reliable, discussing how spelling must be checked rather than assumed. Students proofread their revised procedure for -ble words, capitals, full stops, commas where needed and consistent step numbering, then copy or rewrite one improved section in fluent, legible handwriting. Use the spelling and proofreading slides.

7. 55–60 min · Share and exit reflection. Invite two or three students to share a before-and-after sentence and explain how the revision helps the reader. Students complete the final reflection on the procedure testing and revision worksheet: “One breakdown was…”, “I fixed it by…”, and “Next time I will…”. Close by reinforcing that successful writers use reader feedback to make instructions usable.

Resources

• the peer-testing slide deck
• the procedure testing and revision worksheet
• the peer feedback sentence stem cards
• Students’ procedures from the previous lesson
• Pencils, coloured pencils and erasers
• Classroom materials needed to carry out the procedures
• Whiteboard and markers
• Timer

Assessment

• During partner testing, listen for students identifying the exact point of breakdown and explaining why it caused difficulty.
• Check revisions for precise language, added information, logical sequence and evidence that feedback was acted upon.
• Review the exit reflection, -ble spellings, punctuation and handwriting to identify students needing a further editing conference.

Differentiation

• Provide a partially completed procedure, a word bank of precise action verbs and oral rehearsal before writing for students needing support.
• Pair students thoughtfully and allow readers to highlight the exact word or step that caused confusion rather than requiring lengthy written feedback.
• Support EAL learners with visual demonstrations, gestures, vocabulary cards and sentence stems; accept oral feedback before written recording.
• Extend confident writers by asking them to test whether their procedure works for a reader unfamiliar with the task and to improve efficiency without removing necessary detail.
• Offer pencil grips, a sloped writing surface, additional copying time or speech-to-text for students with fine-motor or writing difficulties, while still requiring proofreading of the recorded text.