Contents
Choose one idea to inspect
Ask pupils to explain an answer, identify the evidence behind it and say what they still cannot tell. Use one of the cards below to inspect reasoning about everyday materials, then choose a tentative next teaching step rather than simply marking an answer right or wrong.
Choose a card according to what pupils already know about materials: Card 1 checks object, material and property language; Card 2 asks pupils to use observations to choose a material for a purpose; Card 3 considers what happens when sugar dissolves. They are alternatives, not a required sequence.
The Department for Education’s national curriculum for England includes distinguishing objects from their materials, describing simple physical properties, and comparing and grouping everyday materials. That is a curriculum-specific reference point, not a universal age or grade assignment for these cards. Department for Education — National curriculum in England: science programmes of study
These are original discussion materials, not a validated diagnostic instrument. All observations and pupil responses labelled hypothetical are invented teaching examples. The cards require no practical testing, heating or tasting. Treat one response as a starting point for further checking, not proof of mastery.
Card 1: separate object, material and property
Copyable question card 1 — What is it, and what is it made from?
Information for this example:
Spoon A is made from metal.
Spoon B is made from wood.
A pupil runs a finger over Spoon A and describes its surface as smooth.
1. What is the object name for A and B?
2. What material is each made from?
3. Which word describes a property: spoon, metal or smooth?
4. Which information came from the pupil’s observation? Which information was supplied in the question?
Explained answer guide:
1. Both objects are spoons.
2. A is metal; B is wood. The question supplies those material names.
3. Smooth describes a property of the surface. Spoon names the object; metal names a material.
4. The pupil’s reported observation is that Spoon A feels smooth. The material names were supplied, not established by that touch observation.
Hypothetical pupil response: “They cannot both be spoons because one is wood.”
What this might show: the pupil may be treating the material name as part of the object’s identity.
Still uncertain: whether the difficulty is with the words, the description of the object or the underlying distinction.
Follow-up: “Could two cups be made from different materials and still both be cups? Explain.”
Try next: sort a small set of familiar object pictures first by object name, then by stated material; ask the pupil to explain what changed between the sorts.
Hypothetical pupil response: “Both are spoons. A is metal because it feels smooth.”
What this might show: the pupil distinguishes object from material but may be using one property as sufficient evidence for a material name.
Still uncertain: whether “because” expresses a genuine inference or simply joins two facts the pupil noticed.
Follow-up: “The question already tells us A is metal. If you only knew that something felt smooth, what could you say for certain?”
Try next: practise separating “the question tells me”, “I observed” and “I think” using another familiar object.
Card 2: connect a material choice to evidence
Copyable question card 2 — Which sample would you choose?
Hypothetical observations supplied for discussion:
A cloth sample and a plastic sample were compared.
Water soaked into the cloth sample.
Water remained on the surface of the plastic sample; no soaking-in was observed.
1. Which sample would you choose to soak up a small water spill?
2. Which observation supports your choice?
3. A pupil says, “This proves every fabric is absorbent.” Does the information justify that claim? Explain.
Explained answer guide:
1. Choose the cloth sample on the evidence given.
2. Water soaked into it, which supports choosing it for a task that requires taking up water.
3. No. The observations describe these samples, not every fabric. They also do not tell us how much water the cloth could take up or how quickly it would do so.
The Department for Education’s England curriculum guidance names absorbent/not absorbent and waterproof/not waterproof among properties pupils may explore. Department for Education — National curriculum in England: science programmes of study
Keep the purpose clear in your discussion: ask pupils to choose a sample for taking up a spill, rather than switching to the different task of keeping water from passing through.
Hypothetical pupil response: “Plastic, because raincoats are plastic.”
What this might show: the pupil may be thinking about keeping water out rather than soaking it up.
Still uncertain: whether the issue is the task wording, the property distinction or the pupil’s use of a familiar example.
Follow-up: “Here the job is to take water into the material. Which observation helps with that job?”
Try next: contrast two purpose statements—“take up water” and “keep water from passing through”—then return to the supplied observations.
Hypothetical pupil response: “The cloth, because water went into it. But we only know about this piece.”
What this might show: the pupil links a choice to relevant evidence and limits the claim to the sample.
Still uncertain: whether the pupil can apply that reasoning to unfamiliar materials rather than repeat the wording.
Follow-up: “If a different sample also took in water, how would that affect your choice?”
Try next: offer a fresh comparison with new sample names and ask for a justified choice before extending the task.
Card 3: distinguish an observation from an explanation
Copyable question card 3 — Not visible, or not there?
Hypothetical observations supplied for discussion:
A teacher adds sugar to water and stirs.
At first, sugar grains are visible.
Later, no sugar grains are visible. The teacher tells you that the sugar has dissolved.
1. What change was observed?
2. A pupil says, “The sugar is no longer there because I cannot see it.” Do you agree? Explain.
3. Complete both sentences:
“We observed that…”
“Our explanation is that…”
For your answer guide: the observed change is that visible sugar grains are no longer visible. The sugar is still present after dissolving; not seeing it does not mean it has ceased to exist. The New Zealand Council for Educational Research’s Assessment Resource Banks discusses precisely this distinction in its explanation of why dissolving can be difficult to understand. New Zealand Council for Educational Research, Assessment Resource Banks — Why "dissolving" is a difficult idea
Model pupil wording:
“We observed that we could no longer see sugar grains.”
“Our explanation is that the sugar dissolved in the water and is still present.”
The first sentence reports what was seen. The second uses the idea of dissolving to explain it; it is not a further visual observation. New Zealand Council for Educational Research, Assessment Resource Banks — Why "dissolving" is a difficult idea
Hypothetical pupil response: “It disappeared.”
What this might show: do not decide yet. The pupil might mean “I cannot see it” or “it no longer exists”.
Still uncertain: the meaning of the word disappeared in this response.
Follow-up: “Do you mean the grains are no longer visible, or that no sugar remains?”
Try next: if the pupil means only “not visible”, invite more precise wording. If they mean “no sugar remains”, explicitly revisit the difference between visibility and continued presence, then check another example.
Hypothetical pupil response: “It dissolved, so it is still there.”
What this might show: the expected explanation is present, but it might be a remembered phrase.
Still uncertain: whether the pupil can distinguish that explanation from the visible evidence.
Follow-up: “Which part of your answer describes what someone could see, and which part explains it?”
Try next: ask the pupil to compare two explanations—“not visible means absent” and “not visible can still mean present”—using the card’s information.
Use NZCER’s discussion to clarify what dissolving means. It does not establish how common any particular response will be among the primary pupils in your class. Do not use the hypothetical responses as prevalence claims or as fixed labels for pupils. New Zealand Council for Educational Research, Assessment Resource Banks — Why "dissolving" is a difficult idea
Record evidence separately from interpretation
Ask for an initial response before offering the model answer. Accept an established response method such as speech, pointing with explanation, a labelled drawing or writing. Record any vocabulary help or prompting so that an independent answer is not confused with a supported one.
Copyable teacher response record
Pupil/group: __________ Date: __________ Card: __________
Idea about materials being checked: __________
Pupil’s actual words or response: __________
Evidence the pupil cited: __________
Support used, including prompts: __________
My tentative interpretation: __________
What remains uncertain: __________
Follow-up question and response: __________
Tentative next teaching action: __________
Later fresh example/date: __________
Later response and evidence cited: __________
What I will retain or revise in my interpretation: __________
Choose a small next action that addresses the uncertainty: clarify one word, contrast two explanations, revisit a distinction or try a fresh example. If many responses are unexpected, check the wording and information before interpreting the pattern as a science difficulty. For broader help with that decision, use Educators Support’s Formative Assessment Strategies for the Classroom.
If reading or writing is obscuring the science reasoning, use Educators Support’s Plan Science Lessons With Cognitive Load Theory to review the task demands. Keep the explanation requirement, but remove unrelated work rather than turning the card into a simple answer-selection exercise.
Check again with a fresh example
Use the matching fresh example later, without displaying the earlier model answer. Record both the answer and its justification, alongside any support used.
Later check 1 — New object
Information: Cup A is made from metal. Cup B is made from plastic. A pupil describes Cup B’s surface as smooth.
Question: Name each object and material. Which word describes a property? Which detail was reported from observation?
Answer guide: Both are cups; the stated materials are metal and plastic. Smooth is the property, and the smooth surface is the pupil’s reported observation.
Later check 2 — New samples
Hypothetical observations: Water soaked into Sample X. Water stayed on the surface of Sample Y; no soaking-in was observed.
Question: Which would you choose to take up a spill? Explain what you know and one thing you cannot yet tell.
Answer guide: X, because water soaked into it. The observations do not establish how much it can take up, or whether all samples of its material behave the same way.
Later check 3 — A new claim
Information: Sugar has dissolved in a jar of water. No grains are visible.
Question: Someone says, “Looking at the jar proves there is no sugar.” Explain the problem with that claim.
Answer guide: No visible grains is an observation, not proof of absence. The dissolved sugar is still present. New Zealand Council for Educational Research, Assessment Resource Banks — Why "dissolving" is a difficult idea
Compare the later reasoning with the original response. Note whether the pupil used the distinction independently, needed a prompt or gave an answer without evidence. Keep the teaching decision provisional: two similar answers can inform your next step, but they do not establish understanding across every context.
