A town map surrounded by liveability factor cards — housing, transport, health, safety, parks, environment
Year 7 · Unit 03 · Lesson 01

What Makes a Place Good to Live?

One idea must land: liveability is real — but it depends on who is looking.

The judgment unit opens by overruling the experts. “Perth keeps landing near the top of world liveability lists — but who decided that? Nobody asked you.” Students become Liveability Inspectors: a sixty-second solo brainstorm, a partner merge, a class harvest that builds the factor families from their own words — then the honest inspection of the suburb they actually live in, and a real field-research mission that walks out the door with them. No tables. Lots of talk.

Spark

The 60-second storm

The hook lands, then hangs: who decided Perth was liveable — did anyone ask you? Then the storm: sixty seconds, solo, pens never stopping — everything that makes a place good to live in. Partner merge (steal the best two ideas you missed), then the class harvest builds the master list on the board — or as a live word cloud if devices are out.

Write their words verbatim — kid language, not yours. Loop the clusters at the end and let the class NAME each family. The factor families should feel discovered, not delivered.
Core

Three people, one suburb

Same streets, same parks — so why would a 13-year-old, a night-shift nurse, and an 80-year-old rate it differently? Partners talk each person through, then the word lands: perception — how a place looks depends on who is looking. Students write their own version.

That sentence in their own words IS the descriptor. The nurse and the 80-year-old do the teaching; you just introduce them.
Workshop

The inspection

Set the norm before pens move: “an inspector who gives everything 10 out of 10 gets fired — a 4 with a sharp reason beats a fake 10.” Each student picks their three factors from the master list, marks an X on each score line with a written reason, then sketches the best corner and the corner that needs work. Labels beat art.

Circulate for reasons, not scores. “Why a 6 and not an 8?” is the question that does the teaching.
Land it

Top five + the mission

The personal top-five ranking, then the mission slips go home: interview two adults (“what made you choose to live where we live?” — their real words) and hunt one checkable online fact about the suburb, source included. Exit question 2 plants Lesson 2: a mine opens 3 km from your house — circle the factor it touches first.

Teacher intel

Why a 6 and not an 8? What would your suburb need to do to earn the 8?
Whose top five would be most different from yours — someone older, younger, a different job?
Is there a factor money can’t fix?
Would your number 1 survive if you moved 400 km inland? (The quiet seed for the whole unit.)
Watch for“Liveable means rich or fancy” (a safe park beats a marble foyer) · “everyone wants the same things” (the nurse just disproved it) · “my suburb is boring so there’s nothing to write” (boring IS data — what’s missing, exactly?).
Running shortCut the sketch, keep everything else. Protect the storm-and-harvest, the perception box, two honest score strips, and the mission slips going home.
SupportThe storm can be spoken before written — pair a talker with a scribe; sentence starters are printed on the handout.
ExtendThe rank-flip: rebuild your top five as the 80-year-old. Which factors swap in — and what does that prove about perception?