SubjectNest resource library

Development draft · local review needed

Day 67 — What did the prediction and two views support?Foundation Science · T2 W13–14 · Day 67 lesson

Prepare this lesson

Foundation / Science / Term 2 / Weeks 13 14

Part of the full two-week lesson sequence. Check the pack guide and taught point before teaching.

Open for this lesson: Pack guide · Sources and materials · Optional practice · Check guide.

Download full sequence

Teacher copy: This page may include teaching prompts or answer keys. Answer keys in this public library can be viewed by anyone. Give learners a clean prompt, use checks as formative evidence, and change a case locally when prior access matters.

Learner choices

Goal: compare a genuinely prior prediction with later actual observation and separate visible difference from inferred growth. Proposed codes: AC9SFI01, AC9SFI03, AC9SFI04. Prepare: actual Day 64 prediction plus Days 62/66 records if complete, Notebook G, Card 67.

  1. Pair gate · 3 min. Confirm same actual plant/feature/view and chronological record. If any missing, say CANNOT COMPARE; G is FICTIONAL.
  2. Read · 4 min. Put actual dated observations beside the exact earlier prediction. A predicted change may not appear; that is useful evidence.
  3. Model · 5 min. Teacher compares G's two story labels only, then shows why changed FRONT/SIDE makes a biological change claim unsupported.
  4. Child try · 7 min. Card 67 routes choose SAME / DIFFERENT / UNCLEAR / CANNOT COMPARE, cite source/date/feature and say whether prediction matched actual later view if available.
  5. Check · 4 min. “My drawing got bigger, so the plant grew” is corrected to a scale/view unknown unless matched actual observations support a bounded visible difference.
  6. Exit · 2 min. Keep one cautious sentence or reason for insufficient evidence.