Rationale

The main focus for this unit of work is on economics and business in how we as
consumers can make more informed choices to satisfy our needs and wants to ensure
we preserve earths resources for present and future generations. To develop
conceptual understanding of this main idea a key inquiry question was developed to
drive this unit of work - what is the relationship between the environment and my role
as a consumer?

The unit content is based on the Australian Curriculum content descriptors at the year
five level, and focusses specifically on the HASS Economics and Business curriculum,
the difference between needs and wants (ACHASSK119) when children define the
terminology and debate examples in lesson 1 & 2 (Australian Curriculum Assessment
and Reporting Authority, (2017). This is further elaborated on by introducing the term
consumer in lesson 1, which will help build and connect students conceptual
understanding in the coming lessons on why choices need to be made about how
limited resources are used (ACHASSK119) when they discuss the different types of
resources (ACHASSK120) and how we use them to satisfy our needs of present and
future generations (ACHASSK120) in lesson 3. Understanding is then deepened in
lesson 4 when students reflect on what influences consumer choice (ACHASSK121).
The HASS content descriptors are enhanced and made authentic by integrating Visual
Arts and Literacy through the planning, drafting and publishing of persuasive text
(ACAVAM116) on a local environmental issue in lesson 5, 6, 7 and 8. This leads them
to create a piece of art using waste material which enhances the meaning to the
audience (ACAVAM116) on their chosen issue relating to how consumerism is
affecting the local environment in lessons 8 and 9. As the unit of work is designed as an
inquiry unit students are required to conduct research, locate and collect data and
generate responses to an issue, possible effects and propose action, as per the year
five achievement standards. The unit is based around group work, collaboration and
discussions, where it is expected students contribute actively as per the achievement
standards.
The unit of work is designed using the backward design approach which begins with
what students are expected to learn as a result of the unit, followed by deciding on
acceptable evidence and finally learning experiences (Readman & Allen, 2013). This is
an effective approach to designing as opposed to traditional methods such as the
content-focussed design, which can lead students to be grasping for the purpose when
completing unrelated lessons and assessments (Wiggins & McTighe, 2008). Backward
design offers a solution to this by identifying the intended learning outcomes at the
beginning and working backwards from there, ensuring all assessments, content,
methods and activities support the intended learning goal (Readman & Allen, 2013). It is
like Thomas Carlyle, a Scottish philosopher once said, A man without a purpose is like
a ship without a rudder. Using this approach encourages conceptual understanding in
that it requires teachers to think of the big picture first, which is evident in how the
planning of this unit is based around a key inquiry question that leads students to
investigate the bigger picture, and then consider the smaller concepts that need to be
built up in order to reach the intended learning goals (Brady & Kennedy, 2010; Wiggins
& McTighe, 2008). The unit of work utilised Kathy Murdochs inquiry model as it
provided an effective support for student in working through an inquiry process
(Murdoch, 2017).

I have utilised a range of assessment types within this unit as the role of assessment is
different depending on the stage of the unit. The unit begins with diagnostic assessment
as McMillan (2011) states it is good approach to evaluating students knowledge and
skills before beginning a series of lessons. By designing the diagnostic assessments to
allow for whole class/group discussion and assigning no grades, students see them as
non-threatening which encourages participation (McMillan, 2011). Furthermore, the
addition of a concept cartoon was included as it allows for different interpretation and
deeper conceptual understanding. Readman and Allen (2013) refer to this idea as
constructive alignment, which is built on the understanding that students develop and
internalise knowledge in their own ways, a view reflective of constructivist theorist
Piaget and Vygostky (McDevitt & Ormrod, 2010). By including such strategies as a
concept cartoon diagnostic, which aligns with the learning outcomes, but will allow for
unintended learning outcomes to place, it can take learning beyond what the teacher
has expected and help inform future planning (Readman & Allen, 2013).

This is well suited to this unit of inquiry as the summative assessment itself is designed
in a way that is open ended in that students are able to make choices relating to their
topic, based on their understandings they have built throughout the unit. However, they
must still follow a criteria rubric to ensure students stay on track with learning outcomes
and allow the teacher to make reliable judgements on the learning. The summative
assessment task is reflective of an authentic task that goes beyond simple recall as
students apply their understanding from the unit of work to highlight a local environment
issue. In doing this students see the meaning in what they are learning and are apply to
their understandings in context. This is further enhanced by the prospective that it will
be on display to an audience to teach them about what they have been learning.

The unit was designed to allow for many opportunities to reflect, track and provide
feedback to support students learning before the summative assessment. Readman
and Allen (2013) refer to this as front loading feedback, where students are given
consistent feedback throughout the learning experience so that when the summative
task is due there are no surprises and have benefited from multiple opportunities for
feedback. This ranges from a formative assessment checklist to track and apply
differentiation where needed through verbal communication, to a written formative
assessment rubric to support students in drafting their persuasive text, no grades are
allocated, merely comments. The student is then able to act upon this information prior
to submission of the summative assessment which is reflective of what Kivunja (2015)
states, children learn as they are assessed and use assessment results to learn. This
approach is also supported by McMillan (2013) in that he believes formative
assessment is the most powerful when the student has an opportunity to do something
with it. A whole class general discussion has also been incorporated into the
subsequent lesson to discuss the main points that came up in the formative
assessments as this gives students the opportunity to discuss and learn from each
other in a timely fashion, individual results will be kept confidential due to ethical
reasons (McMillan, 2013).

Self assessments are integral to the unit as they help ensure students track their
learning towards the learning outcomes, identify any gaps and can be a form of
motivation as students realise they have reached a target and push to reach more
(Kivunja, 2015). McMillan (2013) suggests it develops students metacognitive
awareness of the quality of their work and how it correlates to effort, and where it needs
to be targeted. Peer assessment is also incorporated as a form of feedback, and
supported by McMillan (2013) in that he believes feedback should be collaborative. It is
conducted via two methods, one being a checklist, and the other using the two star and
one wish strategy which is an effective means of feedback allowing for a two way
communication to occur, as students learn from the feedback but also apply what they
have found when giving feedback (McMillan, 2013). Furthermore, it emphasises
positives over negatives which is important for motivation and students self-esteem
(McMillan, 2013).

The unit of work builds from lower cognitive skills to higher demanding skills such as
those seen in Blooms Taxonomy. Lesson one, two and three require students to
remember and understand terminology such as a need, want, consumer and non-
renewable, enough to apply it in context and provide examples. Whereas, lessons four,
five, six, seven and eight, require students to analyse and evaluate through the
identification of a local issue, consider cause and effects of consumerism, possible
solutions and justification. This is supported by De Bonos six thinking hats to ensure all
students benefit from the effort they put in (Readman & Allen, 2013). Finally lesson nine
culminates into students taking action through the careful planning and design of an art
piece. The unit in whole supports the theory of constructivism in that students, with the
help of scaffolding, build and connect their learning to prior understanding as seen in
strategies such as the concept cartoon diagnostic, to careful planning of lower to higher
cognitive tasks such as identifying a local issue of their choice, researching and then
planning a persuasive text based on those understandings, a truly student-centred
approach (Kivunja, 2015).

Individual student progress will be reported to parents in various ways. As part of

preparation for the sustainability parent night where students will display their work,
students will take home their HASS books with which they have been recording the
knowledge they have taken away from this unit of work. As part of the process there will
be a self evaluation checklist that students must complete aligning with the learning
outcomes which must be signed off by a parent. Reporting this way allows for feedback
and progress to be given and acted upon in a timely manner. As Readman & Allen
(2013) suggest this is a possible way forward to ensure parents, teacher and student
can take action in an efficient manner similar to that seen in feed forward. Once the
parents night has taken place, a copy of the summative assessment rubric will be
included with feedback and sent home to parents to be signed off. Reporting to parents
in ongoing and various ways means teachers are being proactive and in doing so
reduce the risk of reactive parents if they receive surprising results about their childs
progress (Readman & Allen, 2013).

In addition to this, a final reporting method will be the end of term school report whereby
results will be provided alongside evidence of obtainment of clearly outlined learning
outcomes, keeping to performance based comments, as opposed to personal unless
positive. Parent-teacher, and student if preferred, conferences will be offered at the end
of the report if parents wish to discuss further, as a two-way line of communication is
encouraged (Readman & Allen, 2013)
References

Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2017). HASS. Retrieved

from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/humanities-and-
social-sciences/hass/

Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2017). English. Retrieved

from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/english/

Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2017). Visual Art.

Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/the-
arts/visual-arts/

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2012). National Professional
Standards for Teachers. Retrieved from
http://www.teacherstandards.aitsl.edu.au/Standards/AllStandards

Brady, L., & Kennedy, K. (2010). Curriculum Construction. Frenchs Forest, NSW:
Pearson Australia.

Kivunja, C. (2015). Teaching learning & assessment: steps towards creative practice.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

McDevitt, T., & Ormrod, J. (2010). Child Development and Education. New Jersey,
USA: Pearson Education, Inc.
McMillian, J. H. (2011). Classroom Assessment: Principles and practice for effective
standards-based instruction. Boston, USA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Murdoch, K. (2017). Kath Murdoch Education Consultant. Retrieved from

http://www.kathmurdoch.com.au/

Readman, K. & Allen, B. (2013). Practical planning and assessment. South Melbourne,
Victoria: Oxford University Press.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2008). What is backwards design? Understanding by design.

Woolfolk, A., & Margetts, K. (2010). Emotional Psychology. Frenchs Forest, NSW:
Pearson