Science // Scientific Inquiry

Using evidence to answer questions

Identify differences, similarities, or changes related to scientific ideas and use straightforward scientific evidence to answer questions or support findings

Ages
7 to 9
Type
Thinking skill
Builds on
4 topics
Leads to
3 topics
Standards
2 codes

Quick check

When the learner looks at their experiment results, can they spot patterns — like things that are similar, different, or changing — and use the evidence to back up their answer?

Ask this to see whether the topic is secure.

Topic // Mastery

What mastery looks like

What a learner can do once this topic is secure.
  • Identify at least one pattern (similarity, difference, or trend) in a set of scientific data
  • Explain how the pattern relates to the scientific idea being investigated
  • Use specific data points as evidence when answering a scientific question

Topic // Map

Where this fits

What to learn first and what this topic opens up, with the reason for each link. Required links come first.
  • RequiredMust come first
  • HelpfulHelps, but not essential

Before this

4 topics
  • Drawing conclusions from evidenceRequired

    Scientific Inquiry // Ages 7 to 9

    Must draw conclusions before identifying patterns and using evidence to support findings

  • Reading between the linesHelpful

    English // Reading Comprehension // Ages 5 to 10

    Using evidence to answer scientific questions mirrors the skill of asking and answering questions about key details in informational texts in English

  • Spotting PatternsHelpful

    Learning to Learn // Learning to Learn // Ages 7 to 8

    Identifying similarities, differences, and changes in scientific data is the science form of the universal pattern-and-structure recognition habit

  • Could there be another explanation?Helpful

    Scientific Inquiry // Ages 7 to 9

    Identifying similarities and differences in evidence opens up space for alternative explanations — patterns that differ from expectations prompt the habit of seeking alternatives

You are here

Using evidence to answer questions

Ages 7 to 9 // Thinking skill

Leads to

3 topics
  • Reading CladogramsHelpful

    Dinosaurs & Paleontology // Ages 9 to 11

    Identifying differences/similarities (curriculum inquiry skill) supports reading cladograms based on shared features

  • Controlling variablesHelpful

    Scientific Inquiry // Ages 9 to 11

    Pattern identification supports planning targeted enquiries

  • Difficult Ethical ChoicesHelpful

    Personal & Social Development // Responsible Decision-Making // Ages 9 to 11

    The SEL skill of navigating ethical grey areas benefits from scientific thinking: using evidence to identify differences, similarities, and changes before drawing conclusions

Topic // Research-informed

Teaching notes

From the Marble Skill Taxonomy. These notes have not been validated in classrooms, so treat them as a starting point for your own judgement.

The approach

Learners aged 7–9 practise using evidence to answer scientific questions: spotting a similarity, difference or trend in a real dataset, linking that pattern to the question asked, and quoting specific data points ('9 cm in light versus 2 cm in the dark') rather than vague impressions. The core objective is the claim–evidence link — knowing that a scientific answer is a claim you can point to specific evidence for, not what you already believed. Activities span an interactive data-explorer, an open evidence probe on a real dataset, recognition/sorting tasks, an evidence-probing dialogue, and an annotated-chart reference, each with a distinct pedagogical role.

Common misconceptions

  • Answering a scientific question from prior belief or 'what I already thought' rather than from the data collected.
  • Citing evidence vaguely ('because I could tell', 'it just did') instead of quoting specific data points or observations.
  • Confusing the observation with its meaning — stating an interpretation as if it were the raw evidence.
  • Seeing only the single most obvious data point and missing the overall pattern across the set.
  • Thinking any data 'supports' an answer, without checking that the pattern actually relates to the question asked.

Useful representations

  • The frame 'I know ___ because the data shows ___ (specific values)'
  • A simple results table with the answer-bearing pattern highlightable
  • A bar chart where the difference between bars is the evidence
  • A three-pattern lens card (similarity / difference / change over time)
  • A claim card linked by an arrow to the specific data points that support it

Teaching practices

  • Teach the claim–evidence link with a sentence frame that forces specificity: 'I know ___ because the data shows ___' with actual numbers/observations, not 'because I saw it' — the citing of specific data is the assessed skill.
  • Point pupils at the three pattern types explicitly — similarities, differences, and changes over time — so they have a vocabulary for what to look for in a table or chart.
  • Use datasets where the pattern answers a real question the class asked, so evidence-use is purposeful rather than a decontextualised 'find the pattern' exercise.
  • Model distinguishing an observation from what it tells you — quote the data first, then say what it means — planting the observation-vs-interpretation seed developed elsewhere in the domain.
  • Give pupils messy-enough data that the pattern requires looking (not a single obvious pair) so 'using evidence' is genuine interpretation, not reading a label.

Activities to try

  1. 1

    Build your claim from the data (data-explorer)

    Why it works: A scientific answer is a claim built from and backed by the right specific evidence, not a general impression or prior belief; supplying the actual numbers makes the difference between 'because I think so' and 'because the data shows 9 versus 2' concrete.

    1. Read a posed question such as 'Does light help plants grow?' alongside the class results shown as a results table and bar chart.
    2. Examine the table and bar chart to find the pattern first, then state your answer as a claim and select the exact data points or bars that show it (e.g. the light-grown and dark-grown bars), connecting them to your claim.
    3. Attach the specific numbers from your class results to your claim. For example, if the results showed 9 cm in light versus 2 cm in the dark, it would read 'Light helps plants grow because the data shows 9 cm in light versus 2 cm in the dark.' In real trials, seedlings grown in the dark can be taller than those in light but pale and spindly, so make your claim from the results and measures you actually have.
    4. When a vague or irrelevant selection is made, respond to the prompt 'Does that pattern actually answer the question?' and choose again.
    5. Try a second dataset where the pattern needs looking for (several values, not one obvious pair) so you must genuinely interpret rather than read a label.
  2. 2

    Spot the pattern and point to your numbers (open probe)

    Why it works: A strong evidence-based answer identifies the overall trend (far more minibeasts found in the sheltered spots — logs 12, leaves 10, long grass 8 — than on the open path, 1), quotes those specific numbers, and ties the pattern back to the question rather than relying on prior belief or a single cherry-picked figure. The counts fit the idea that minibeasts prefer damp, sheltered places, but only if those spots really were damper and every place was searched in the same way, because the chart itself records counts, not dampness.

    1. Study a chart of minibeasts found in different places: under logs 12, in long grass 8, on the open path 1, under leaves 10.
    2. Answer the question 'Do minibeasts prefer damp, sheltered places?' by stating the pattern you see.
    3. Point to the specific counts you would use as evidence and explain why those numbers do the work.
    4. Explain how the pattern helps answer the question, not just read the numbers aloud.
    5. Consider a what-if: 'If the open path had 15 minibeasts, would that change your answer? Which numbers are doing the work?'
  3. 3

    Claim or evidence? Matching and sorting

    Why it works: Distinguishing an observation from its meaning, and knowing which specific data supports which claim, reinforces the claim–evidence link and plants the observation-versus-interpretation distinction.

    1. Answer 'Which data best answers this question?' by selecting the data point that supports a given claim.
    2. Match several claims to the specific data points that support each one.
    3. Sort statements into two piles: 'claim' (what we conclude) versus 'evidence' (the raw data/observation that supports it).

Topic // Standards

Curriculum standards

Codes for the curriculum statements this topic maps to. Each publisher owns its standard text.
The national curriculum in England: Key stages 1 and 2 framework document
KS2L.Sci.WS.8KS2L.Sci.WS.9

Science // Scientific Inquiry

More in Scientific Inquiry

All 30 topics