Forces in Action

Overview

Across six 30-minute sessions, students investigate how pushes and pulls affect an object’s motion. They build from everyday observations to a controlled investigation, collect measurements, identify patterns, and communicate a conclusion using evidence.

Learning intentions

Students will be able to:

• Describe a push and a pull as forces that can affect an object.
• Follow a multistep investigation procedure safely and precisely.
• Compare how different pushes and pulls affect an object’s motion.
• Organize investigation results in a table and explain a conclusion using evidence.

Success criteria

• I can identify whether a force is a push or a pull.
• I can follow each investigation step in the correct order.
• I can record measurements accurately and fairly.
• I can state how changing a push or pull affected an object and support my claim with data.

Curriculum links

• Reading science and technical texts: follow a multistep procedure precisely when carrying out an investigation.
• Reading science and technical texts: determine central ideas and accurately summarize information about forces.
• Reading science and technical texts: analyze how headings, diagrams, tables, and procedure sections organize technical information.
• Writing in science and technical subjects: introduce a topic, preview the investigation, and organize information using headings, tables, and diagrams.

Lesson structure (6 sessions, 30 minutes each)

1. Week 1, 0–5 min · Hook and predict. Teacher opens the force hook slides with a visual comparison of a ball being gently and strongly pushed, then asks, “What changed?” Students silently predict how the force might affect the object before sharing with a partner.

5–15 min · Build understanding. Teacher introduces push, pull, force, motion, direction, and strength using examples such as opening a door, kicking a ball, and pulling a backpack. Students sort examples orally and explain whether each force is a push or pull.

15–25 min · Observe and record. Teacher demonstrates a toy car receiving a push and a pull and models a simple observation table. Students complete the first section of the forces investigation journal by recording the force, direction, and observed motion.

25–30 min · Check. Students answer: “How can a push or pull change an object’s motion?” Teacher collects responses to identify misconceptions.

2. Week 2, 0–5 min · Review. Teacher revisits the force hook slides and displays student examples from Week 1. Students use the words push, pull, direction, and motion in a quick partner explanation.

5–15 min · Read a procedure. Teacher displays a short investigation procedure for using a toy car, ramp, string, and measuring tape. The teacher models how headings, numbered steps, equipment lists, and diagrams help a reader complete a technical task.

15–25 min · Sequence the method. In pairs, students use the experiment procedure card template to arrange the investigation actions in a logical order, then compare their sequence with another pair.

25–30 min · Summarize. Students write a two-sentence summary of the procedure in the forces investigation journal, distinguishing information from personal predictions.

3. Week 3, 0–5 min · Plan a fair test. Teacher introduces the investigation question: “How does the strength of a push or pull affect an object’s motion?” Students identify what will change, what will be measured, and what must remain the same.

5–12 min · Demonstrate safety and method. Teacher models the complete method: place the car at the same starting line, apply a gentle or strong force, measure the distance traveled, record the result, and repeat each trial three times. Students identify one possible error and one safety expectation.

12–25 min · Conduct trials. Groups of three assign roles: force-applier, measurer, and recorder. Students complete gentle-push and strong-push trials, following the numbered directions in the forces investigation journal.

25–30 min · Pause and check. Groups check that all trials have been recorded and explain how repeating trials improves confidence in the results.

4. Week 4, 0–5 min · Reconnect to the question. Teacher uses the investigation directions and data slides to review the independent variable, dependent variable, and controlled variables. Students predict whether a stronger pull will produce a similar pattern.

5–22 min · Compare push and pull. Groups repeat the investigation with a string attached to the car, comparing a gentle pull with a stronger pull. Students use the same surface, car, starting position, and measuring method, recording three trials for each condition.

22–27 min · Verify data. Teacher conferences with groups, asking, “Did you change only the strength of the force?” Students calculate or identify the typical distance for each condition and circle any unusual result.

27–30 min · Quick response. Students complete: “A stronger force usually caused the car to ___ because ___.”

5. Week 5, 0–5 min · Analyze results. Teacher models how to read the class data table and compare typical distances for gentle and strong pushes and pulls. Students identify the greatest, least, and most consistent results.

5–18 min · Organize evidence. Students complete the tables and simple comparison graphic in the forces investigation journal. They label the force condition and use units when recording distance.

18–25 min · Discuss patterns and exceptions. Groups compare results and discuss why data may differ, including uneven surfaces, inconsistent force, or measurement errors. Students distinguish a conclusion supported by data from an unsupported opinion.

25–30 min · Central idea check. Students write a brief summary: “The investigation showed that…” Teacher checks whether the summary accurately reflects the data.

6. Week 6, 0–5 min · Revisit learning. Teacher displays the conclusion and communication slides and asks students to explain the investigation question, method, and main pattern without looking at their notes.

5–18 min · Communicate findings. Students complete a concise science report in the forces investigation journal using the headings Question, Method, Results, and Conclusion. They include a table or graphic and preview what the report will explain.

18–25 min · Peer review. Partners check whether the report includes an accurate procedure summary, organized results, a clear comparison of push and pull, and evidence-based reasoning. Students revise one statement for precision.

25–30 min · Exit assessment. Students answer: “How did the strength of a push and pull affect the object? Use one piece of evidence from your data.” Teacher collects the response and reviews investigation journals.

Resources

• the force hook slides
• the forces investigation journal
• the experiment procedure card template
• Toy cars or similar small wheeled objects
• Smooth floor or low ramp
• String
• Measuring tapes or metersticks
• Masking tape for starting lines
• Pencils and classroom data chart
• Optional tablets or camera for recording trials

Assessment

• Formative questioning checks students’ understanding of push, pull, direction, strength, variables, and fair testing.
• Teacher observes whether groups follow the multistep method, maintain controlled variables, measure consistently, and record complete data.
• The Week 6 report and exit response assess accurate procedure summary, organized information, central ideas, and a conclusion supported by evidence.

Differentiation

• Provide a procedure with numbered steps, icons, and key terms; read directions aloud and model each step before group work.
• Assign structured roles and provide sentence starters such as “The stronger force caused…” and “My evidence is…”
• Allow students who need support to dictate observations, use a word bank, or record data with a partner.
• Challenge students to explain an anomalous result, compare consistency between trials, or propose a revised investigation testing surface type or object mass.
• Provide enlarged tables, clear visual contrast, and repeated directions for students with visual, attention, or processing needs; pair multilingual learners with supportive peers and explicitly model academic vocabulary.