Skill companion: Comparing Methods and Conclusions (Year 5)

← Back to the unitTip: in the print dialog choose “Save as PDF”.

Skill companion · Year 5 Science Inquiryseegongsik /au

Comparing Methods and Conclusions: a skill companion

A small set of reusable sheets that grow one inquiry skill: comparing what different groups did and found, spotting what could have pushed a result away from the truth, and drawing a conclusion only from the evidence that holds up. Print the scaffolds once and slot them into the science lessons you are already teaching.

AC9S5I05

compare methods and findings with those of others, recognise possible sources of error, pose questions for further investigation and select evidence to draw reasoned conclusions

What a skill companion is

Inquiry skills are not a topic of their own. They grow inside the science units a class teaches all year, such as Features and Behaviours for Survival; Weathering, Erosion and Deposition; Light, Shadows and Reflection; and Particles in Solids, Liquids and Gases. So this pack is not a full term of lessons. It is three reusable scaffolds, a map of where they fit, and a short stand-alone lesson for teaching the skill on its own first.

Start here: five minutes

Read the pairing map on the next page: it shows which scaffold fits which science lesson.
Print the compare-the-methods sheet and the conclusion builder whenever two groups have tested the same question.
Cut out the error cards once. They are reused all year whenever a class checks its methods.
Open the free interactive unit on your board when you want a worked example of the skill.
Run the one-page mini-lesson first if you want to teach the skill before folding it into a topic.

No science background needed

This pack is written for the busy generalist teacher. Each scaffold explains itself in plain words, and the answer sheet gives the worked comparison, the error-card key with a fix for each, a model conclusion for every Year 5 topic, and a quick three-level guide. The step up from Year 4 is looking at the method behind a result: when two groups disagree, the first question is what they did differently.

On the board

This pack is the printable half of a free interactive unit. On screen, children switch between “Table”, “Bar chart” and “Line graph” in “Two groups’ shadow lengths side by side”, click the odd reading in “Find the reading with a source of error”, weigh three method differences in “Which method difference most likely caused the gap?”, and sort statements with “Supports” and “Does not support” in “Which evidence supports the reasoned conclusion?”. Each scaffold in this pack turns one of those moves into something children do on paper.

seegongsik.com/au/y5/inquiry/AC9S5I05

Aligned to the Australian Curriculum V9 (AC9S5I05). This pack is original material from seegongsik, independently produced and not endorsed by ACARA. Curriculum content descriptors are (c) ACARA, licensed under CC BY 4.0. Free to print and use in class.

Where the skill fitsPairing map

Slot the skill into your science lessons

The same skill fits into every science unit. This map shows two methods groups might use for one question in each Year 5 topic, a source of error to look for, and which scaffold to reach for. You do not run these as extra lessons; you fold them into the science you teach.

When you teach	Two methods	Source of error	Scaffold
Features and Behaviours for Survival (AC9S5U01)	Two groups test whether slaters choose damp soil: one counts after 1 minute, one after 10	Counting before the slaters have settled	Compare the methods, then the conclusion builder
Weathering, Erosion and Deposition (AC9S5U02)	Two groups pour water down a tray of soil at three slopes, one with a marked jug, one with any cup	Water amount and pour height not kept the same	All three: the worked example is this test
Light, Shadows and Reflection (AC9S5U03)	Two groups measure a pole’s shadow, half an hour apart	Measuring at different times of day	Compare the methods, then the error cards
Particles in Solids, Liquids and Gases (AC9S5U04)	Two groups time ice cubes melting in water, one in big cups, one in small	Different amounts of water; judging the end by eye	Error cards, then the conclusion builder
Any science topic	Our class’s results beside another group’s	Whatever was not kept the same	Compare the methods first, every time

The three moves, and the picture that backs each one

When you want a worked example on the board, open the interactive unit and use the picture that matches the move children are working on.

Compare two groups’ findings and methods: “Two groups’ shadow lengths side by side” and “Which method difference most likely caused the gap?”.
Spot a reading pushed off by a source of error: “Find the reading with a source of error”.
Keep only the evidence that holds up: “Which evidence supports the reasoned conclusion?”.

How the scaffolds build the skill

The compare-the-methods sheet lines up two groups’ methods and results side by side, starting with a worked pair of sediment trays. The conclusion builder walks from what both groups found, through the evidence set aside, to a conclusion with its reason and a question for next time. The error cards sharpen the eye for slips: does each one make a reading too big, too small, or could it go either way?

Scaffold 1 · Compare the methodsOne per child

Same question, different methods

NameClassDate

When two groups get different results, line up what each group did before deciding whose results to trust. A difference in method often explains a difference in results.

A. Two groups, one question

Both groups asked: how does the slope of a tray of soil affect how far the sediment travels when water is poured down it?

Method	Group Red	Group Blue
Water	500 mL from a marked jug	a cupful, from whichever cup was nearest
Pouring	from 10 cm above the tray, every time	from as high as the pourer could reach
Trials	three runs at each slope; the middle value	one run at each slope
Distance (cm)	1 book: 12 · 2 books: 21 · 3 books: 34	1 book: 15 · 2 books: 19 · 3 books: 41

1. What did both groups find, even though their numbers differ?

2. Which differences in method could explain the different numbers?

3. Whose numbers would you trust more? Why?

B. Our results beside another group’s

	Us	Them
How we measured
How many trials
What we found

One difference that might explain the gap:

Scaffold 2 · Conclusion builderOne per child

Build a reasoned conclusion

NameClassDate

A reasoned conclusion answers the question using only evidence that holds up. Evidence collected in an unfair way is set aside, and the reason is written down.

Our question

What the evidence shows (the pattern every group or trial agrees on)

Evidence we set aside, and why

Our conclusion

We conclude that ______________________________________________________

because ___________________________________________________________

How sure are we?Very sure □Fairly sure □Not sure yet □

A question for further investigation

A good next question tests something the comparison raised, such as a source of error.

Scaffold 3 · Error cards (cut out)Reuse all year

Which way does the error push?

Cut out the cards. Lay down the three grey heading cards. For each slip, decide whether it makes the reading too big, too small, or could push it either way, then say how to fix it.

Makes the reading too bigHeading

Makes the reading too smallHeading

Could push it either wayHeading

The ruler was laid with the end of the shadow at the 1 cm mark, not at 0.Card A

The stopwatch was started a moment after the paper helicopter was let go.Card B

A gust of wind caught the paper helicopter as it fell.Card C

The thermometer was read the moment it went into the warm water.Card D

Different people judged by eye when the ice cube had finished melting.Card E

The shadow was measured half an hour later than planned, in the afternoon.Card F

The stopwatch was stopped a moment before the car crossed the line.Card G

The water had cooled down before the ice cube was dropped in.Card H

The tape measure sagged across the gap instead of being pulled straight.Card I

Teacher note: the piles are not the same size. The key, with a fix for every slip, is on the answer sheet.

Mini-lesson · Teacher planAbout 30 minutes

Why did we get different answers?

Use this stand-alone lesson to teach the skill on its own, before you fold it into a science topic. Every group answers the same question, how far does the car roll, but each follows a slightly different method. When the results differ, the class compares the methods, finds the sources of error, and agrees on what the evidence really shows.

We are learning to

compare our method and findings with another group’s,
recognise a source of error and say which way it pushes a result,
draw a conclusion from evidence that holds up, and pose a question to test next.

Success criteria

I can explain how a difference in method changed a result.
I can write a conclusion and say which evidence I set aside.

You need

for each group, a toy car, a ramp (a board resting on two books) and a tape measure,
three method cards written on the board or on slips of paper (below),
the compare-the-methods sheet and the conclusion builder (scaffolds 1 and 2), and the error cards (scaffold 3),
the free interactive unit on your board, if you have one (optional).

Method cards: 1. Let the car go from the top of the ramp; measure from the end of the ramp to the back wheels. 2. Give the car a little push from the top; measure from the end of the ramp to the back wheels. 3. Let the car go from halfway down the ramp; measure from the end of the ramp to the front of the car.

Lesson flow (about 30 minutes)

5 min	One question, three methods Each group gets one method card and rolls the car three times, recording the distances. Ask: “Before you start: do you think every group will get the same answer?”
10 min	Compare Groups write their results on the board. Children fill Part B of the compare-the-methods sheet with another group’s results. Show the board (see the box). Ask: “Which difference in method made the biggest change? Which made almost none?”
10 min	Conclude The class agrees on one fair method. Children fill the conclusion builder, setting aside the results that came from an unfair method. Ask: “What could we test next, now that we know the push matters?”
5 min	Which way? Tables sort the error cards under the three headings. Ask: “Which slip could we fix most easily? Which is hardest to avoid?”

Running it shorter? Stop after Compare, and build the conclusion at the start of your next science lesson.

On the board

For a worked example, open the unit and switch to “Line graph” in “Two groups’ shadow lengths side by side”: both lines dip in the middle, but the numbers differ. Then choose each option in “Which method difference most likely caused the gap?” and read what it gains and what it costs.

seegongsik.com/au/y5/inquiry/AC9S5I05

Watch for these ideas

Deciding that the biggest number, or one’s own group, must be right.
Calling every difference a source of error, even ones that cannot change the result, such as the colour of the car.
A conclusion that uses every result, including those from an unfair method.

Make it easier, make it bigger

Easier: give only two method cards, differing in one way (a push or no push).
Bigger: predict, before rolling, which method will give the longest and shortest distances, and why.

Answers and look-fors

The next sheet has the worked comparison, the error-card key with fixes, a model conclusion for each Year 5 topic, and a quick three-level guide.

Answers · For the teacherModel responses

Answers and look-fors

Compare the methods: the sediment trays

1. Both groups found that the steeper the slope, the further the sediment travelled (1 book: 12 and 15 cm; 2 books: 21 and 19 cm; 3 books: 34 and 41 cm). 2. Group Blue did not keep the water the same (a cupful, from whichever cup was nearest) or the pour height (from as high as the pourer could reach), and ran each slope only once, so each of its numbers could be pushed up or down. 3. Group Red: it kept the water and the pour height the same and used the middle of three runs. A good question for further investigation: does pouring from higher make the sediment travel further?

Error cards

Card	Pile	Why	Fix
A	Makes the reading too big	Every reading includes an extra centimetre.	Start at the 0 mark.
B	Makes the reading too small	The first part of the fall was not timed.	One person says go and lets go; the timer starts on go.
C	Could push it either way	Wind can hold it up or push it down faster.	Test indoors, away from fans and doors.
D	Makes the reading too small	It had not finished rising.	Wait until the reading stops changing.
E	Could push it either way	Some stop early, some late.	Agree on the end point first, and one person judges every cube.
F	Makes the reading too big	The Sun was lower, so the shadow was longer.	Measure at the planned times.
G	Makes the reading too small	The last part of the run was not timed.	Stop the watch as the car crosses the line, with eyes level with it.
H	Makes the reading too big	Cooler water melts the ice more slowly, so the time is longer.	Add the ice as soon as the water is poured.
I	Makes the reading too big	A sagging tape reads more than the straight distance.	Pull the tape straight and flat.

Conclusion builder: what a good conclusion sounds like

Topic	A conclusion at standard	Evidence set aside
Features and Behaviours for Survival	Most slaters chose the damp side once they had settled, in every group that waited 10 minutes.	Set aside the counts taken after 1 minute, before the slaters had settled.
Weathering, Erosion and Deposition	The steeper the slope, the further the sediment travelled.	Set aside the exact distances of runs with unmeasured water; keep the pattern both groups found.
Light, Shadows and Reflection	A pole’s shadow is shortest near the middle of the day and longer when the Sun is low.	Set aside number-by-number comparisons of readings taken half an hour apart.
Particles in Solids, Liquids and Gases	Ice melted faster in warmer water, in both groups.	Set aside comparisons between big and small cups, which held different amounts of water.

A quick three-level guide

Move	Working towards	At standard	Beyond
Compare methods and findings	compares the numbers only	lines up the methods and explains how one difference changed the findings	says which findings to trust, and why, for each difference
Recognise sources of error	names a slip with help	names a source of error and the way it pushes a result	plans a fix that removes the error in the next test
Conclude and question	uses every result, fair or not	draws a conclusion from the evidence that holds up and poses a question to test next	says how sure the conclusion is, and what would make it surer

A child at standard compares methods as well as findings, names a source of error, and concludes only from evidence that holds up. The skill grows all year, so keep the scaffolds coming back in every science topic.