Skill companion: Comparing Methods and Conclusions (Year 6)

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

Skill companion · Year 6 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, recognising how a source of error pushed the readings, selecting the evidence that holds up, and posing a sharper question to investigate next. Print the scaffolds once and slot them into the science lessons you are already teaching.

AC9S6I05

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 Habitat Conditions and Survival; Earth, Sun and the Day-Night Cycle; Electrical Circuits and Energy; and Reversible and Irreversible Changes. 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-two-groups sheet and the evidence sheet 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 and next question for every Year 6 topic, and a quick three-level guide. The step up from Year 5 is weighing the differences: children put two groups’ findings on the same scale before comparing them, decide whether an error pushes every reading the same way, scatters them or is a one-off (and so whether repeating can fix it), and turn what the comparison raised into a question for further investigation.

On the board

This pack is the printable half of a free interactive unit. On screen, children switch between “Table” and “Bar chart” in “Two groups’ rust amounts 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/y6/inquiry/AC9S6I05

Aligned to the Australian Curriculum V9 (AC9S6I05). 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 6 topic, a source of error to look for, a question for further investigation, 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	Next question	Scaffold
Habitat Conditions and Survival (AC9S6U01)	Two groups water radish seeds with salty water: 20 seeds counted on day 5, or 5 seeds counted on day 3	Too few seeds; counting before the slower seeds have sprouted	Would the seeds in the saltiest water sprout if we waited longer?	All three: the worked example is this test
Earth, Sun and the Day-Night Cycle (AC9S6U02)	Two groups measure a stick’s shadow every hour, one with a 1 m stick and one with an 80 cm stick	A shorter stick makes every shadow shorter	Is the noon shadow longer in June than in December?	Compare two groups, then the evidence sheet
Electrical Circuits and Energy (AC9S6U03)	Two groups test which materials let a bulb light, one with fresh cells and one with nearly flat cells	Flat cells make a weak conductor look like an insulator	Does a longer piece of pencil lead make the bulb dimmer?	Error cards, then the evidence sheet
Reversible and Irreversible Changes (AC9S6U04)	Two groups weigh rusted nails, one drying them first and one weighing them wet	Water left on the nails adds to every mass	Does a coat of oil stop a nail rusting in salty water?	Compare two groups, then the error cards
Any science topic	Our class’s results beside another group’s	Whatever was not kept the same, or a reading far from the rest	One question that fixes an error, one that goes further	Compare two groups 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’ rust amounts 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-two-groups sheet lines up two groups’ methods, then puts their counts on the same scale, starting with a worked pair of salty-water seed dishes. The evidence sheet checks each piece of evidence before it is kept, builds a conclusion with how sure it is, and asks for three kinds of next question. The error cards sharpen the eye for slips: does each one push every reading the same way, make the readings scatter, or land one reading far from the rest?

Scaffold 1 · Compare two groupsOne per child

Same question, different methods

NameClassDate

Before deciding whose findings to trust, line up what each group did, then put the findings on the same scale. A difference in method can push the numbers the same way every time, or make them scatter.

A. Two groups, one question

Both groups asked: how does salt in the water affect how many radish seeds sprout? Each group set up four dishes: plain water, and water with 1, 2 or 3 level teaspoons of salt in a litre.

Method	Group Wattle	Group Banksia
Seeds in each dish	20 radish seeds on damp paper towel	5 radish seeds on damp paper towel
Where the dishes sat	side by side on a shady bench	along a sunny window sill; some towels dried out by the afternoon
Watering	10 mL of its own salty water each morning, from a measuring cylinder	a splash from its bottle whenever the towel looked dry
Counted on	day 5	day 3
Counted as sprouted	a root at least as long as the seed	any root tip showing

Seeds sprouted	No salt	1 tsp	2 tsp	3 tsp
Group Wattle, out of 20	18	15	9	2
Group Banksia, out of 5	5	3	3	1
Group Wattle, out of 100
Group Banksia, out of 100

1. What do both groups agree on, once the counts are out of 100?

2. Which differences in method could explain the gaps? Which push every count the same way?

3. Whose findings would you trust more? Why?

B. Our findings beside another group’s

	Us	Them
How we measured
How many trials or samples
What we found

The biggest difference in method:

It pushes every reading the same way, or makes them scatter?Same way □Scatter □Not sure □

Scaffold 2 · Evidence and questionsOne per child

Select the evidence, then pose the next question

NameClassDate

A reasoned conclusion rests only on evidence that holds up: measured the same way, with enough repeats or samples to trust. Evidence that fails a check is set aside, with the reason written down. What the comparison raised becomes the next question.

Our question:

A. Check each piece of evidence

Measured the same way?	Enough repeats or samples?	Keep or set aside
yes / no	yes / no	keep / set aside
yes / no	yes / no	keep / set aside
yes / no	yes / no	keep / set aside
yes / no	yes / no	keep / set aside
yes / no	yes / no	keep / set aside

We set aside

because

B. Our conclusion

We conclude that

because

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

What would make us surer:

C. Questions for further investigation

Write one question of each kind. Each should be one you could test next.

Fix itTest again with the source of error removed
Go furtherTest a wider range, or for longer
Something newTest something the findings made you wonder about

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. Sort each slip under the heading that fits, then say whether repeating the test would fix it and how to fix it for good.

Pushes every reading the same wayHeading

Makes the readings scatterHeading

A one-off slipHeading

The kitchen scale showed 3 g before anything was put on it, and nobody pressed zero.Card A

The brightness of each bulb was judged by eye, by whoever happened to be closest.Card B

One seedling’s height was written down as 61 mm instead of 16 mm.Card C

The sugar was timed by hand, and the stopwatch was pressed when someone thought it had all dissolved.Card D

The thermometer read 3 °C in a cup of ice and water, where it should read 0 °C.Card E

On one test, a wire was not pushed fully into its clip, so the bulb did not light.Card F

Each dish of seeds got a splash of water whenever its paper towel looked dry.Card G

The cells used for every test were nearly flat.Card H

Every dish of seeds was counted on day 3, before the slower seeds had sprouted.Card I

Teacher note: the piles are not the same size. Ask of every card, “would doing it three more times fix this?”. The key, with a fix for every slip, is on the answer sheet.

Mini-lesson · Teacher planAbout 30 minutes

More catches will not fix it

Use this stand-alone lesson to teach the skill on its own, before you fold it into a science topic. Every pair answers the same question, how far does a ruler fall before you catch it, but each follows a slightly different method. When the results differ, the class compares the methods, sorts the errors by how they push the readings, and poses a question to test next.

We are learning to

compare our method and findings with other pairs’,
tell an error that pushes every reading the same way from one that makes readings scatter,
select the evidence that holds up, and pose a question for further investigation.

Success criteria

I can say whether doing more catches would fix a difference in method, and why.
I can write a conclusion from the results I kept, and one question to test next.

You need

for each pair, a 30 cm ruler and one of four method cards (below, written on slips of paper),
the compare-two-groups sheet and the evidence sheet (scaffolds 1 and 2), and the error cards (scaffold 3),
the free interactive unit on your board, if you have one (optional).

Card	Thumb and finger level with	Warning from the dropper	Catches
1	the 0 mark	none	five; use the middle value
2	the 5 cm mark	none	five; use the middle value
3	the 0 mark	‘ready, set, go’, then lets go on ‘go’	five; use the middle value
4	the 0 mark	none	one only

On every card, the dropper holds the top of the ruler so it hangs, 0 end down, between the catcher’s open thumb and finger, and the catcher reads the mark at the top of the thumb. Card 1 is the honest method; each other card changes one thing.

Lesson flow (about 30 minutes)

5 min	One question, four methods Each pair gets one method card. Show a single catch at the front first. Ask: “Will every pair get the same answer? Why or why not?”
10 min	Catch and record Pairs follow their card, record every catch, and take turns as catcher and dropper. Ask: “Why use the middle of five catches, not your best one?”
10 min	Compare Pairs write their middle values on the board in four columns, one per card. Show the board (see the box). Ask: “Which difference would five more catches fix? Which would they not fix at all?”
5 min	The next question Tables sort the error cards under the three headings, then each pair writes one question to test next. Ask: “Which of our questions could we test tomorrow, with the method we now trust?”

Running it shorter? Stop after Compare, and sort the error cards at the start of your next science lesson.

On the board

For a worked example, open the unit and choose each option in “Which method difference most likely caused the gap?”: weighing wet nails pushes every mass up, so more weighings would not fix it. Then click the odd reading in “Find the reading with a source of error”, a one-off that measuring again would catch.

seegongsik.com/au/y6/inquiry/AC9S6I05

Watch for these ideas

Thinking that more catches can fix a ruler held at the wrong mark: every catch is pushed the same way.
Deciding the pair with the smallest numbers has the quickest catchers, without checking their method card.
Crossing out a reading only because it looks odd: check it, find the reason, and catch again.

Make it easier, make it bigger

Easier: give out only cards 1 and 2, which differ in one way.
Bigger: before comparing, predict how far above the card 1 results the card 2 results should sit, then check.

Answers and look-fors

The next sheet has the worked comparison, the error-card key with fixes, what the four method cards should show, a model conclusion and next question for each Year 6 topic, and a quick three-level guide.

Answers · For the teacherModel responses

Answers and look-fors

Compare two groups: the salty-water seeds

Out of 100, for no salt, then 1, 2 and 3 tsp: Group Wattle 90, 75, 45, 10; Group Banksia 100, 60, 60, 20. 1. Both groups found that the saltier the water, the fewer seeds sprouted: plain water sprouted the most and 3 tsp the fewest. 2. Group Banksia counted on day 3, which pushes every count down, but counted any root tip showing, which pushes every count up: two errors pushing opposite ways. Its towels dried unevenly on a sunny sill and got a splash of water when they looked dry, which makes the counts scatter, and with only 5 seeds one seed moves a count by 20 out of 100, so chance alone can flatten a step, as in its 1 tsp and 2 tsp dishes. 3. Group Wattle: more seeds, the same water and place for every dish, a clear rule for sprouted, and a longer wait. A question for further investigation: would the seeds in the saltiest water sprout if we waited 10 days?

Error cards

Same way: every repeat is pushed the same way too, so repeating does not fix it; change the method. Scatter: some readings land high and some low, so repeats and their middle value help. One-off: one reading lands far from the rest, so measuring again catches it.

Card	Pile	Why	Fix
A	Same way	Every mass reads 3 g too heavy.	Press zero with the scale empty before each weighing.
B	Scatter	Different eyes, from different spots, judge some bulbs brighter and some dimmer.	One judge for every bulb, or a light meter.
C	One-off	One reading lands far from the rest.	Check any reading far from the others, then measure it again.
D	Scatter	Some runs are stopped a little early and some a little late.	One person times every run, the class agrees when the sugar counts as dissolved, and the middle of three runs is used.
E	Same way	Every temperature reads 3 degrees too high.	Check each thermometer in iced water first, and swap any that do not read 0 °C.
F	One-off	That one test wrongly shows the material does not let electricity through.	Check every connection before each test, and test again.
G	Scatter	Some dishes got more water than others, so the counts vary for reasons that have nothing to do with salt.	Give every dish the same amount, such as 10 mL each morning.
H	Same way	Every bulb is dimmer than it should be, and a weak conductor may not light it at all.	Use fresh cells, and check them first with a bulb and wire that you know work.
I	Same way	Every count is too low.	Count every dish on the same later day, such as day 5.

Mini-lesson: what the four method cards should show

1. 0 mark, no warning, five catches	The honest results that the others are compared with.
2. 5 cm mark	About 5 cm above card 1: every catch is pushed the same way, so more catches do not fix it.
3. ‘Ready, set, go’	Below card 1: the warning lets catchers time the drop, so every catch is pushed the same way.
4. One catch only	Spread more widely than the middles of five: one catch can be lucky or slow, so it scatters.

What a good conclusion and next question sound like

Topic	A conclusion at standard	Evidence set aside	A next question
Habitat Conditions and Survival	The saltier the water, the fewer radish seeds sprouted, in both groups.	The exact counts from 5-seed dishes counted on day 3.	Would the seeds in the saltiest water sprout if we waited longer?
Earth, Sun and the Day-Night Cycle	In both groups the shadow was shortest around the middle of the day and longest early and late.	Number-by-number comparisons between the 1 m stick and the 80 cm stick.	Is the noon shadow longer in June than in December?
Electrical Circuits and Energy	Metals such as copper wire, a metal key and aluminium foil let the bulb light; plastic, wood and rubber did not.	Tests run with nearly flat cells, where weak conductors did not light the bulb at all.	Does a longer piece of pencil lead make the bulb dimmer?
Reversible and Irreversible Changes	Iron nails rusted most in warm salty water and barely at all in dry air.	Masses taken while the nails were still wet.	Does a coat of oil stop a nail rusting in salty water?

A quick three-level guide

Move	Working towards	At standard	Beyond
Compare methods and findings	compares the raw numbers only	puts findings on the same scale, such as out of 100, and links a gap to a difference in method	says whether a gap is bigger than chance could explain, such as with only five seeds
Recognise sources of error	names a slip with help	sorts a slip as same way, scatter or one-off, and says whether repeating fixes it	spots two errors in one method that push opposite ways
Select evidence, pose questions	uses every result, fair or not	keeps evidence measured the same way, sets the rest aside with a reason, and poses a question to test next	says how sure the conclusion is and plans a next test that removes the error

A child at standard compares methods as well as findings on the same scale, says how an error pushes the readings and whether repeating fixes it, and concludes only from evidence that holds up. The skill grows all year, so keep the scaffolds coming back in every science topic.