Giáo án Reading

Ss activate prior knowledge about wetlands, birds and the causes of habitat change, and become curious about the reading topic.

T shows a slide with the question: Why do birds disappear from a place? Then T asks Ss: What can change a bird's habitat near a river or a pond? Ss brainstorm in pairs for 2 minutes and write their ideas in their notebooks.

A short list in each pair of 3 to 4 possible causes of fewer birds, for example litter, lost plants, noise, bright lights, or pollution of water. Ss also write one question they want the reading to answer, such as: Is there only one cause?

Ss recognise the meaning and pronunciation of six key words and use them to understand the reading text.

T presents the six words: biodiversity (đa dạng sinh học), habitat (môi trường sống), endangered (có nguy cơ tuyệt chủng), conservation (bảo tồn), pollution (ô nhiễm), restore (phục hồi). T models pronunciation and asks Ss to repeat chorally and individually. Then Ss complete Worksheet 1 by matching each word with its meaning.

Completed Worksheet 1 with correct matches:

• biodiversity = the variety of living things in an area
• habitat = the natural place where an animal or plant lives
• endangered = at risk of disappearing from the Earth
• conservation = the protection of nature and wildlife
• pollution = harmful substances that make air, water or land dirty
• restore = bring something back to a good former condition
  Ss also write one sentence from the text that uses the word 'habitat' or 'restore'.

Ss read the text once for the central question and then locate specific details that support the main ideas.

Ss read the text once quickly and answer: What is the central question of the text? Then Ss read again and complete Worksheet 2 with the key details about how the students investigated, what changes they found, what actions the group proposed and why one quiet morning is not enough.

Completed Worksheet 2:

• Central question: Are fewer birds caused by one thing (litter) or by several changes, and how can we know?
• Changes found: lost patches of reeds; bright lights on all night.
• How the students worked: they mapped changes from a safe public path and compared dated photographs; they did not enter nesting areas or handle wildlife.
• Expert advice: habitat loss, disturbance and pollution could interact.
• Proposed actions: restore native plants with expert advice, reduce unnecessary lighting, improve waste collection, monitor birds at the same place and time each month.
• Why not one quiet morning: it would not prove that the wetland had recovered or failed.

Ss distinguish stated facts, reasonable inferences and unsupported claims, and understand that a pattern of sightings does not by itself prove a cause.

T explains the three categories and reads the key idea: 'A sighting pattern does not by itself establish cause.' Ss then decide whether each statement on Worksheet 3 is a stated fact (F), a reasonable inference (I) or an unsupported claim (U), and quote the sentence from the text that supports their choice.

Completed Worksheet 3 with answers:

• The wetland had lost patches of reeds. = F (stated in the text: 'The wetland had also lost patches of reeds')
• Litter is the only reason the birds left. = U (the text says some people blamed every change on litter, but this is not proved)
• Lost reeds and bright lights may also affect the birds. = I (the text says other pressures could matter)
• The students handled wildlife to count birds. = U, actually false according to the text ('They did not ... handle wildlife')
• One quiet morning shows the wetland has recovered. = U (the text says a single quiet morning would not prove this)

Ss answer multiple-choice questions to check their understanding of details, purposes and inferences in the text.

Ss do exercises 2 to 5 from the lesson. Each question has four options. Ss choose the best answer and write the sentence from the text that supports it. The exercises are:
2. Why investigate beyond litter? A. Other habitat changes could also matter. B. Litter never affects wildlife. C. All birds had moved abroad. D. Photographs are always false.
3. Where did students work? A. Inside nests B. In deep water C. On private roofs D. A safe public path
4. Why use the same time and place for counts? A. To avoid recording dates B. To prove one cause immediately C. To make observations more comparable D. To guarantee more birds
5. Which distinction did they learn? A. Volunteer versus student B. Observation versus explanation C. Bird versus fish only D. Old versus expensive

Answers with reasons:
2. A (Reed loss and lighting provide other plausible pressures.)
3. D (The observation was designed to avoid disturbance.)
4. C (Comparable monitoring reduces some variation.)
5. B (A sighting pattern does not by itself establish cause.)
Ss can justify each answer by quoting one sentence from the text.

Ss apply the idea of separating observation from explanation and the need for repeated monitoring to a local place they know.

Ss imagine a park, pond or river near their home where fewer birds have been seen. In groups of four, Ss discuss: What would you observe? What explanation might be possible? What would you do to check it? Each group writes a three-sentence summary of its plan using only the ideas from the reading text, for example: 'We would count birds from a safe path each month. We would compare photographs. We would not conclude the cause after one morning.'

A group plan containing:

• One observation (for example: fewer birds seen near the pond this month).
• One possible explanation that needs checking (for example: lights or litter might matter, but this is not yet proven).
• One safe way to check it (for example: counting from a public path at the same time each month).
• A three-sentence summary that reflects the reading.