Hello there, my name is Mr. Wilshire, and in this lesson we're going to be looking at what plants need.

This is the final review.

The outcome for this lesson is, I can form conclusions about what plants need, based on my observations.

There are some keywords to consider as we work our way through this lesson.

The first one is "question", then it's "compare", after that "conclusion", then it's "explain", and finally "evaluate".

Don't worry if you're not too sure what some of these words mean because you can have a look at the definitions on the screen now, have a quick refresh in your mind, and then restart the video when you are ready.

The first part of this lesson is called conclusions about what plants need.

Aisha and Sofia have been investigating, and they've been having a little look at the requirements of plants.

Hmm, I wonder what that means, "requirements".

Can you remember what plants need to survive and grow? So you need to think about how it stays alive.

Do they need the same as humans? Do they need water and food? Do they need to be in a nice warm house? Hmm, you decide.

See if you can remind yourself.

Have a discussion, restart the video when you've done that.

So what kind of things did you come up with? Did you mention that plants need.

? Hmm, well, they need warmth, don't they? Do they need to be inside though? Let's find out more.

Well, plants need air, they need light, they need water, they need nutrients from the soil, they need room to grow as well.

So there's lots of different things that they need.

The light is gonna give them lots of things that they need to help them to grow.

The soil is gonna give them the nutrients.

I wonder, do they eat food like us? Do plants have mouths that are down below? Hmm.

What did you find out? Let's stop and think.

Which of these is not a requirement for plants to survive and grow? Is it light, water, nutrients from the soil, a plant pot, air, or room to grow? The correct answer here is a plant pot.

Of course, they don't need to grow in a plant pot, you can grow plants anywhere.

Aisha says, "We have been investigating what happens to plants when they have one of their requirements taken away." Sofia says, "I have been investigating the question: How does having no nutrients from soil affect how a plant grows?" Aisha then says, "We have been making observations of our plants for 20 days." Yeah, so if there's no soil, there's nowhere for the roots to ground themself to.

There's nowhere for the plant to start growing, is there? So I wonder if a plant would be able to grow really well if it didn't have any soil at all, how would it get its nutrients? Well, here is Sofia's plants at different points in her investigation.

Maybe you've done an investigation a little bit like this, and you've got some results that are similar.

Here is the start of her investigation.

You can see that she's labelled one with "soil", and the other with "no soil".

Hmm, that looks a bit like sand there, doesn't it? Yeah, definitely sand.

After 10 days the "soil", you can see there's a shoot, and also the "no soil", you can see there's a shoot as well.

Hmm.

After 20 days, you can see that there's a little shoot growing up, and it's nearly got to the top of the paper there, hasn't it? However, the "no soil" section, well, the shoot has kind of stayed the same.

What else do you notice here? I've had a good go at discussing the things that I can see.

What do you notice? And what does this tell you about what plants need? Pause the video here and discuss, restart when you've done that.

So what did you notice? Like me, did you notice that the shoot for the no soil hadn't really grown at all? Actually I can see now that the shoot with soil, that's actually got some leaves on it, hasn't it? So it's grown a lot more than the one that was growing in sand.

Well, we can compare the plant in the soil to the plant in the sand.

We can then use this to help us to understand how having no nutrients from soil affected the plant's growth.

So there you can see the picture again of Sofia's plants after 20 days.

Have a think here again.

How are these plants different to each other? There's a definite difference there, isn't there? I wonder if you can spot it.

You could also think about how they are the same.

Pause the video here and have a discussion, restart when you've done that.

So how did you get on? How were the plants different to each other, and how were they the same? I wonder if the children found similar things to you.

Well, here's Sofia.

Now the differences between the two plants show us how one has been affected by not having any nutrients from the soil.

Sofia says, "I observed that the plant with nutrients is much taller than the one without." In fact, she can even see five leaves on the plant with nutrients, she says.

Now it looks like there might be a leaf starting to grow on top of the plant with no nutrients, so the plant was still able to grow somewhat.

I wonder how because I always thought that without soil that a plant wouldn't be able to grow at all.

How fascinating? Here though are the similarities between the two plants.

Now the similarities show us the things that have not been affected so far by not having any nutrients.

And Sofia says, "Well, both plants are the same shade of green." Oh, yes, that's a good point.

Didn't even think about looking at the type of colour that they were.

Hopefully you can see that in that picture as well, both plants are the same shade of green.

I wonder if you had a go at this experiment, and if you've found the same kind of thing.

Sofia then collected data in a table to compare the height of her plants.

A table is a really good way of collecting results because you are able to lay it out nice and neatly, then it's really easy then to go back and have a look and have a read of everything that you can see.

So the first column there, she's got plants with nutrients and plants without nutrients.

Then each column after that shows the plant height measured in millimetres.

It shows that after five days all the way up to 20 days.

Have a little look at her results.

What do you notice? Pause the video here and discuss with a partner or someone nearby, restart when you've done that.

What did you notice then? Did you have a look at all of the columns next to each other? Did you compare one side to the other side? Or maybe you compared the beginning to the very end.

I wonder if the things that you found were the same as this.

Sofia says, "I can see that the plant with no nutrients from the soil grew a lot slower than the plant with nutrients from the soil.

The plant with nutrients grew 40 millimetres taller than the plant without!" Ah! That's some good working out there, isn't it? So looking at the two end results there after 20 days, we can see that it was 40 millimetres taller.

That's quite a considerable difference.

I wonder if you found anything else out using these results here.

You can see that even after five days, there was going to be some sort of difference.

Although I'm still surprised that the plant without nutrients in the soil was able to grow at all.

Stop and think.

Sofia's results tell us that, plants are not affected by not having any light, plants can't grow as well without nutrients from the soil, or plants need water to be able to grow well.

The correct answer here is B.

Sofia's results tell us that plants can't grow as well without nutrients from the soil.

So when scientists carry out investigations, they make conclusions to explain what their results show or what they mean.

There you can see an image of a plant scientist.

So to make a conclusion, we need to think about our investigation question.

We need to think about how our results might answer that question as well.

That's why it's really important you lay it out on a table.

So stop and think.

In a, blank, scientists explain what their results show or mean.

Is it prediction, conclusion, or plan? The correct answer here is conclusion.

In a conclusion, scientists explain what their results show or mean.

Sofia's question, let's remind ourselves here, was, how does having no nutrients from soil affect how a plant grows? And she says, "Well, my results show that this type of plant grew more slowly and it had fewer leaves when it did not have nutrients from the soil.

That was compared to when it did have nutrients from the soil.

It also did not grow as tall when it did not have nutrients from the soil.

Interestingly, the colour of this plant wasn't affected by not having any nutrients.

My conclusion is that the plant needs nutrients from the soil in order to grow well." And that's right there, isn't it? Both plants did grow, but one of them definitely grew better than the other.

I wonder if you found the same sort of thing, I wonder if you were able to write maybe a more detailed conclusion than this going from some of the results that you found.

Let's stop and think.

A conclusion should, be a list of results from the investigation, include an explanation of what the results show us, try to answer the investigation question, or describe all of the equipment used in the investigation? The correct answer here is B and C.

A conclusion should include an explanation of the results, and it should try to answer the investigation question.

So in the future if you're a bit stuck writing your conclusion, just go back and look at the first question that was asked.

Here is Task A.

Use the data from your own investigation now, or Aisha's, to write a conclusion about what plants need.

Your conclusion should include an explanation of what the results show using scientific language.

Ooh! So you really need to think about your keywords here.

You might want to go back to the beginning slides and just check what words you could use.

It should also try to answer your investigation question.

Of course, don't forget to look at the question again.

Now Aisha's question was, how does having no light affect how a plant grows? And here are her results, you can see both examples there.

The picture on the left is Aisha's plants after 10 days, and the picture on the right is Aisha's plants after 20 days.

You can come back to this slide to compare later.

Here is the data that Aisha collected.

You can use this all your own to start writing your answer to Task A.

So using all of this data all your own, and thinking about that first question, "How does having no light affect how a plant grows?", you can now start writing your conclusion.

Don't forget to track back and check some of the other slides for the keywords and the other important information before.

Restart this video when you are ready.

How did you get on? Well, here is Aisha's conclusion.

I wonder if it sounds a little bit similar to yours, but don't worry if it's not, because you might have found some slightly different things out looking at all those results, or your results.

Aisha's conclusion says, "My results show that the plant I grew in the night had steady growth, and it was green.

The plant I grew in the dark grew very slowly at first, and then it grew much more quickly.

The plant that grew in the dark was also yellow in colour, and it had more leaves than the one in the light, but the leaves were much smaller.

My conclusion is that this plant grew taller when it was grown in the dark compared to when it was grown in the light.

This may be because it was growing in search of light." Oh, well done, Aisha.

Not only has she given her conclusion about what she found, but she's also had to think herself about why she would have found those answers out in the first place.

That's a really excellent conclusion.

If you found that you might have missed one or two things of your conclusion, you could use Aisha's conclusion here to help you to rewrite some of yours or add a bit more extra detail.

Well done! The final part of this lesson is called evaluating an investigation.

Well, after carrying out an investigation, scientists often evaluate what they've done, and then they suggest improvements.

But then Sofia says, "What does it mean to evaluate something?" What do you think? Have a quick think, discuss, restart the video when you've done that.

How did you get on? Did you know what the word "evaluate" means? In an evaluation, we think about how the investigation went, and whether we could make any changes, or if anything could have been improved.

Here you can see some scientists evaluating an investigation.

Now an evaluation focuses on whether the results were what we needed to answer our investigation question.

So you must always think back to that first question that you were asked.

What is it that you're trying to find out by doing all this investigating? Let's stop and think.

After an investigation, scientists often carry out an evaluation.

What is an evaluation? Is it an explanation of the results using scientific language? Is it a prediction about what might happen in a different investigation? Or is it an explanation of how well the investigation went? The correct answer here is C.

An evaluation is an explanation of how well the investigation went.

So when you are evaluating your investigation, you need to think about these things.

How well you kept the variables the same? Whether you collected enough data to answer your question? Whether everything went as planned? If there is anything you could have done to improve your results? Sofia has then written a draught evaluation herself, and she says, "Well, I think my investigation went well, but it could have been better if my handwriting was neater on my results table." She says, "I think we did a good job setting the investigation up because we were finished in time before the lesson ended." So what do you think of Sofia's evaluation here? Pause the video and discuss, restart when you've done that.

How did you get on? What did you think of Sofia's investigation? Is there anything else that she could have included maybe? Aisha has some ideas, "Your evaluation does talk about what could have gone better, but those things wouldn't have affected your results or allowed you to collect more data." Ah, okay.

So just because the handwriting didn't look that great, that's not going to affect how we look at the data, unless of course, she's written down the wrong numbers.

Then Sofia says, "I will make sure to include how our results could have been improved in my next draught." So let's just think about the results next time.

So here is Sofia's second draught.

She says, "I think we did a good job of keeping the amount of light the same as both plants were next to each other on the windowsill, and we made sure not to move them.

However, we didn't measure exactly how much water we gave each plant every day.

This might have affected our results.

So next time we would use a measuring jug then to make sure that each plant gets exactly the same volume of water.

We could also try observing our plants for even longer if we wanted to gather more evidence to help answer our question." Wow, that is a really in-depth evaluation there, isn't it? So when you're evaluating something, you're not just thinking about your handwriting, but you're really starting to think about the process, the things you did in your investigation, and how you can improve things to be better next time.

Let's stop and think.

An evaluation of an investigation should explain, how neat your work was, how much you enjoyed the investigation, or what could have been done to improve the investigation? The correct answer here is C, what could be done to improve the investigation? Here's Task B.

Now you need to write your own evaluation.

You can do this for your investigation, or for Aisha's, if you need to.

Your teacher can give you Aisha's plan and results.

When you're evaluating your investigation, you might want to think about these things: How well you kept the variables the same, whether you collected enough data to answer your question, and whether everything went as planned.

You can pause the video here and have a go, evaluate your investigation.

Restart the video when you've done that.

How did you get on? Well, Aisha says, "I wonder if your evaluation is similar to mine?" She says, "I think we did a good job of keeping the amount of nutrients from soil, water, and room to grow the same.

We could have had better data if we had remembered to measure both plants each time.

We could also try investigating different types of seeds to give us more evidence about what happens to other plants with no light." When you're evaluating yourself, it can sometimes be really hard to pick out things from your investigation that went wrong.

It's not always a nice thing to pick out the bad side, but when you're evaluating, you need to think about how you can improve yourself next time.

So let's summarise our lesson.

The requirements of plants for life and growth include air, light, water, nutrients from soil, and room to grow.

In a conclusion, scientists will explain what the results show or mean using scientific language.

Scientists often evaluate a completed investigation and suggest improvements.

Well done for completing the task in that lesson.

Evaluating yourself can be a really hard thing to do because you are looking at all the process and then things that you did in your investigation, and you're telling yourself how you did it badly.

Don't forget, you can also pick out on the good points as well.

When you evaluate, it's a good idea to focus on the experiment, and not on personal things like handwriting.

I'm Mr. Wilshire, thank you very much for listening.