Giáo án Project

Ss activate prior knowledge about ecosystems and wetlands and understand the project brief and the product they will create.

Ss look at a photo of a wetland (from a public information board or a reliable source, with the source labelled) and answer three questions:

• What living things can you see or think might live here?
• What could harm this wetland?
• What is one safe thing people could do to protect it?
  Then Ss read the project brief on the slide and find the four required features: ecosystem summary, two threats, one safe action, and a labelled source for every non-original fact.

A short list of wetland living things (e.g., birds, fish, reeds, water lilies, frogs) and two possible threats (e.g., pollution, rubbish, drainage) written on the board.
Ss state the project brief in their own words, for example: 'We will make a one-page display and a two-minute talk about one wetland. We must check our facts and label our sources. We must not disturb wildlife.'

Ss distinguish observation, inference and a fact supported by a reliable source, and use these words to build a small evidence table with a source column.

Ss work in groups of four using Worksheet 1. They read six statements about a wetland and classify each as O (observation from a public path), I (inference), or S (a fact from a reliable source with a named source and date). Then each group completes a three-column evidence table: claim or observation / evidence / source and date.
Sample statements:

• 'Several ducks were swimming near the reeds this morning.'
• 'The wetland is home to many fish.'
• 'Plastic bottles are floating near the shore.'
• 'Water quality is poor, so the frogs will disappear.'
  The fourth statement is an inference; the second is a claim that needs a source.

Answers to Worksheet 1:

• 'Several ducks were swimming near the reeds this morning.' – O (observation, with date and time)
• 'The wetland is home to many fish.' – S (needs a named reliable source and date; if none, it is unverified)
• 'Plastic bottles are floating near the shore.' – O (observation, with date and location)
• 'Water quality is poor, so the frogs will disappear.' – I (inference; it goes beyond what was observed)
• 'Reeds provide shelter for small animals.' – S (a general fact to be checked in a reliable source)
• 'We saw one heron, so the bird population is growing.' – I (one visit cannot prove a long-term change)
  A completed evidence table with at least two relevant claims, evidence and a source/date for each, and one honest note about a gap or uncertainty.

Ss explain the form and use of non-defining relative clauses with which, who and whose, set off by commas, and use them to add information about a wetland.

T presents the language focus: a non-defining relative clause adds extra information about a noun that is already identified and is set off by commas. Example: 'This wetland, which stores floodwater, needs protection.' Ss study the rules: use which for things, who for people, whose for possession; do not use that; do not omit the relative pronoun; the sentence still identifies its subject if the clause is removed.
Ss complete the gap-fill: 'This wetland, ___ shelters birds, needs clean water.' Then they combine two sentences: 'The reeds are important. They protect the shore.' → 'The reeds, which protect the shore, are important.'

Key rule written in notebooks: 'Non-defining relative clause = extra information, set off by commas; which (things), who (people), whose (possession); never that; the relative pronoun cannot be omitted.'
Answers:

• This wetland, which shelters birds, needs clean water. (which – things; not 'that')
• The ranger, who checks the water every week, works for the park.
• The wetland, whose water is polluted, has fewer fish.
• The reeds, which protect the shore, are important.

Ss practise the project tasks: a focused question, a claim-checking method, a display heading, and a 90–110-word explanation, while avoiding fabricated evidence.

Groups work through Worksheet 2 with the following tasks:

1. Write one focused question for the project.
2. Choose one important claim and explain how to check it (dated note, reliable identification guide or a reliable source).
3. Draft a display heading that matches the evidence.
4. Write a 90–110-word project explanation for classmates, with a note on limitations.
   Groups check their work against the feedback criteria: relevant content, honest evidence, clear English.

Answers and sample products (assessed on the group's own work, not on agreement with a sample):

1. Focused question: 'How can our wetland summary connect observed living things with a realistic protection action?'
2. Claim-checking method: 'A particular bird was observed at the wetland.' → Use a dated note and a reliable identification guide; if the sighting is uncertain, label it as uncertain.
3. Display heading: 'Wetland Life: Evidence, Threats and Safe Action' (use only if the finished display supplies these elements).
4. Explanation (model, 90–110 words): 'Our project will explain one wetland ecosystem without disturbing wildlife. From a public path or reliable sources, we will identify examples of flora and fauna, two possible threats and one safe action. Our evidence table will separate what we observed from what a source explains or what we infer. We will not claim that a single visit proves a long-term population change. The summary will connect living things with their habitat and explain why water quality matters. After presenting, we will use feedback to make one recommendation more precise and realistic for pupils.'
   Each group records its own version in the project folder.

Ss present their project to another class in two minutes, give constructive feedback to a peer, and record one revision based on feedback.

Each group presents its project for about two minutes. The talk must: introduce the project question; present two checked details; explain the conclusion; acknowledge one limitation; invite one question from the audience. Peers use a feedback checklist: one specific success, one concrete change, and one benefit explained respectfully. After feedback, each group records one revision (before and after) and explains how the feedback changed its work.
Example feedback: 'Your heading clearly identifies the project. Please add the source and date beside the main claim.'
Example revision: 'This is true for everyone' → 'This account describes one example from our source.'

• A two-minute presentation with the project question, two checked details, a conclusion, one limitation and one audience question.
• A feedback form completed for a peer with: one specific success (e.g., 'The evidence table clearly separates observation from inference.'), one concrete change (e.g., 'Add the date to the bird observation.'), and one benefit explained respectfully (e.g., 'This helps classmates check the fact.').
• One recorded revision with a before-and-after sentence and an explanation of the improvement in accuracy or clarity.
• Ss reflect: 'We used the relative clause to add extra information, for example: The wetland, which is near our school, needs protection.'