AC9S6I05 • Year 6 Science

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

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 students learn in AC9S6I05

Learning intention: We are learning to compare investigations, explain specific errors and use relevant evidence to reach appropriately limited conclusions.

Curriculum focus: 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

Success criteria

  • compare questions, variables, samples, methods, repeats and findings
  • explain how a specific error could affect a result
  • select evidence that answers the investigation question
  • write a reasoned conclusion that acknowledges limitations and pose a focused further question
Key vocabulary
finding
a pattern or result identified in collected data
conclusion
a reasoned answer to the investigation question supported by evidence
anomaly
a value noticeably different from the overall pattern
random variation
unpredictable differences among repeated observations or samples
systematic error
a consistent bias that tends to shift measurements in one direction
confounding variable
an uncontrolled factor that changes with the tested factor and offers another explanation
selection bias
sampling that systematically fails to represent the intended group or place
parallax
an apparent scale shift caused by viewing a marker from an angle
limitation
a feature restricting confidence or the scope of a conclusion
Concept model and worked thinking

Reliable routine

  1. Compare the investigation questions and variables.
  2. Compare samples, controls, equipment, measurement rules and repeats.
  3. Describe agreements and differences in findings.
  4. Identify a plausible specific error and explain its effect.
  5. Select all relevant evidence rather than convenient values.
  6. Answer the question with a limited, evidence-based conclusion.
  7. Pose a focused question arising from the finding or limitation.

evidence

Task: Question: Does shade affect soil temperature? Which evidence is relevant?

Model reasoning: Temperatures from the compared light conditions directly address the question.

conclusions

Task: Plants with earthworms averaged 14 tomatoes; plants without averaged 9. Which conclusion fits?

Model reasoning: It states the observed comparison without extending beyond the investigation.

method comparison

Task: Mia waters seedlings with 20 mL daily. Arlo uses “some water sometimes”. What key difference matters?

Model reasoning: Mia specifies volume and timing, making her procedure more consistent and repeatable.

error

Task: A ruler starts at a worn edge before the zero mark. What error may occur?

Model reasoning: Measuring from the edge adds an offset to every reading.

anomalies

Task: Times are 8.1, 8.2, 15.9 and 8.0 s. What should happen first?

Model reasoning: The unusual value should be investigated before any decision about exclusion.

further questions

Task: After testing light on plant growth, which is a focused extension?

Model reasoning: It changes one purposeful factor and identifies a measurable outcome.

findings

Task: Two groups report means of 12.4 cm and 12.6 cm using the same method. Best comparison?

Model reasoning: The means are close, although variation and method quality should still be considered.

error mechanisms

Task: A student reads a liquid scale from above instead of eye level. What is the concern?

Model reasoning: Viewing at an angle can make the level appear aligned with the wrong mark.

Curriculum coverage and elaborations

Compare before you combine

Check that investigations address comparable questions and use equivalent variables, units, samples, timing, controls, measurement rules and repeats. Then compare the direction, size and spread of findings.

Name the error mechanism

Replace “human error” with a specific cause and pathway: what differed, which measurement it affected, and whether it could shift values high, low or unpredictably.

Four useful error patterns

Random variation changes readings unpredictably; measurement or reading errors arise from tools or technique; inconsistent procedures make trials non-equivalent; confounding variables change alongside the intended factor.

Handle anomalies transparently

An anomaly is an unusual value, not automatic rubbish. Check records and equipment, repeat where possible, retain raw data and justify any exclusion using evidence.

Select relevant evidence

Use the measurements that link the changed condition to the outcome. Prefer matched groups, repeats, means and spread where useful. Do not cherry-pick a convenient trial or use evidence for a different question.

Write a reasoned conclusion

Answer the original question, cite the relevant pattern or values, limit the claim to the tested sample and conditions, and acknowledge a method limit. “The hypothesis was correct” is not enough.

Judge the strength of a claim

Small or biased samples, overlapping results, missing controls and systematic error weaken certainty. Imperfection does not make all evidence useless, but it should narrow the conclusion.

Ask what comes next

Pose a measurable question that tests an uncertainty, mechanism or purposeful new factor while preserving controls. A good extension follows logically from the findings or limitation.

Common misconceptions
  • Different results mean someone was dishonest. Natural variation and differences in sampling, equipment or procedure can produce different findings.
  • Every anomaly should be deleted. Investigate, repeat and report it; exclude only with a documented evidence-based reason.
  • More data automatically fixes bias. A larger sample collected by the same biased method may remain unrepresentative.
  • A conclusion repeats the method. A conclusion answers the question using selected evidence and acknowledges scope and limits.
  • Any imperfection invalidates everything. Limitations reduce certainty or scope; they do not necessarily erase every supported observation.
Important questions and answers
  • Can two groups agree if their numbers are not identical? Yes. They may show the same direction or overlapping range while differing slightly in magnitude.
  • Is “human error” a source of error? It is too vague. Name the action, affected measurement and likely consequence.
  • Does an anomaly prove a mistake? No. It may reflect error or genuine variation and should be investigated.
  • What makes a conclusion reasoned? It connects relevant data to the question, uses cautious scope and recognises important limits.
Assessment-style questions and review hints
  • Compare method features before findings.
  • Name a specific error mechanism and its likely effect.
  • Use all relevant repeated evidence and report anomalies transparently.
  • Match the conclusion scope to the sample and conditions.
  • Do not treat a hypothesis statement as a conclusion.
  • Make further questions measurable and purposeful.
Support, core and extend
  • Support: work with one short example, highlighted evidence and a structured response frame.
  • Core: complete an unseen example independently and justify the decisive evidence.
  • Extend: compare plausible alternatives, explain limitations and create a new example within the Year 6 boundary.
Exit ticket and mastery evidence

Evaluate two investigations by comparing methods and findings, explaining an error effect, drawing an evidence-based limited conclusion and posing a focused next question.

Evidence of mastery: The student compares methods and findings, traces specific error mechanisms to their effects, selects relevant evidence, draws a cautious reasoned conclusion and proposes a testable extension.

AC9S6I05 Classroom View

Project the HTML teaching view, with classroom-sized sections drawn directly from this topic guide.

Open Classroom View
How to use this unit

Learn from the Topic Guide and Classroom View, complete the Worksheet, use Practice for supported feedback, then take the separate Test when ready.

🎥 Optional Video Lesson

The SkillrHub lesson remains the primary learning resource. This optional video reinforces the explanation; you can complete the lesson and practice without watching.

Back to the lesson

Before you watch:

  • Pause after each worked example.
  • Try the examples yourself.
  • Return to the SkillrHub lesson before continuing.
Recommended: Try Trials

Crash Course Kids — Use repeated trials to check findings and notice inconsistent results.

As you watch: What might a result that differs strongly from the others tell you?

Load video player Loads YouTube in this lesson. See the video notice below.

Try it: Two groups record different drop times for the same paper helicopter. Suggest a possible measurement error and a fair repeat to investigate it.

Video unavailable, inaccurate or unsuitable for this year? Report a video problem to SkillrHub by email. You can continue with the written lesson and practice resources.

About these videos

Videos are curated from trusted independent educational creators and played through YouTube. Rights remain with their respective owners. Inclusion does not imply that a creator or YouTube endorses SkillrHub.

YouTube’s terms and privacy policy apply to its player. Advertising, recommendations and external links may appear, and videos may change or become unavailable. SkillrHub’s written lessons and practice resources remain available separately.

To report a content, suitability or rights concern, email skillrhublearning@gmail.com with the lesson code and video link. Please do not include personal student information.

Curriculum equivalents: Victoria, NSW and international

Curriculum equivalents for Methods and findings with those of others, recognise possible sources...

Mapped skill: 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

These references identify matching or closely related learning. Curriculum sequence, terminology and depth vary, so teachers should use the mapped skill and lesson difficulty to confirm suitability.

RegionCurriculum frameworkClosest level or code
AustraliaAustralian Curriculum v9.0AC9S6I05 · Year 6
VictoriaVictorian Curriculum F–10 Version 2.0 — ScienceVC2S6I05 · Levels 5–6
New South WalesNSW Science and Technology K–6 Syllabus (2024)ST3-DAT-01 + ST3-PQU-01 · Stage 3
United States (USA)Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)Middle School (Grades 6–8)
Canada (Ontario)Ontario Curriculum — ScienceGrade 6
United Kingdom (England)National Curriculum in England — ScienceYear 7, Key Stage 3
IndiaNCERT / CBSE — ScienceClass 6

Australian Curriculum v9.0 is the canonical source for this SkillrHub lesson. Victoria and NSW entries name the closest published state codes or outcomes; international entries are planning references rather than claims of identical curricula.

Help improve SkillrHub

Questions or feedback?

Ask about this lesson, suggest an improvement or report an error. Facebook opens only when you choose an option below.

Topic reference: AC9S6I05 — 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

💬 Ask a question 💡 Suggest an improvement ⚠️ Report an error

Privacy: Please don’t share personal student or school information. Younger students should ask a parent, guardian or teacher to post on their behalf.

Official curriculum reference
Related Year 6 Science topics