Energy, forces and evidence: explain a lower rebound without saying that gravity becomes weaker or that energy disappears.
Why does a bouncing ball lose height? For Primary 6 Science, the explanation must connect the falling motion, the collision with the surface and the next upward movement. In an ordinary passive bounce, not all the energy associated with the initial height returns as upward motion. Some is transferred into other forms and to the surroundings, leaving less available for the next rise.
This Primary 6 Science tuition lesson uses the bouncing ball as a focused application of gravitational potential energy, kinetic energy, temporary deformation, energy transfer and experimental reasoning. Original worked cases examine rebound heights, fair comparisons and misleading conclusions. The aim is not merely to name energy forms, but to explain why a particular sequence of events produces a lower rebound.
At eduKate Sengkang, a small-group discussion can reveal the difference between an incomplete phrase and a scientific explanation. “The ball loses energy” needs qualification: which energy, from which system and into what forms or surroundings? “Gravity stops at the top” is a different misconception. A learner who knows the vocabulary can still need help connecting the stages.
Use the Primary 6 Science Learning Hub for the wider route, the open-ended answering guide for written explanations and the graphs, tables and data guide for interpreting measurements. Current class arrangements can be confirmed through the centre.
Unless stated otherwise, the examples assume a ball released from rest, moving approximately vertically, with no deliberate spin, no further push and a stationary surface. All numerical data are invented for teaching. These are not copied examination questions or measured results from actual students.
A More Important Sequence Than “Down, Up, Down”
A bouncing ball passes through several different situations. Before release it is held above the surface. During the fall it gains speed. On contact it deforms and interacts with the surface. During the rebound it rises and slows. At the top of the rebound it momentarily stops moving upwards before falling again.
Each stage asks a different scientific question. What energy is associated with the initial height? What changes during the fall? What happens during contact? Why is the upward motion smaller afterwards? What force still acts at the top? A single energy label cannot answer all these questions at once.
The OpenStax explanation of mechanical energy connects falling motion with changes between gravitational potential and kinetic energy. It also distinguishes idealised motion from real situations involving energy transfers. The Primary 6 task can use that qualitative structure without requiring the textbook’s calculations.
A good explanation therefore follows the event in order. It does not jump from “gravity pulls down” directly to “the second bounce is lower”. Gravity helps explain the downward acceleration and the slowing of upward motion, but the reduced rebound also requires an account of what happens to the energy during the real bounce.
The Hidden Science Problem: Total Energy and Rebound Energy Are Not the Same Claim
Energy conservation does not mean that a ball must return to its original height after every collision. The energy may remain accounted for across the ball, surface and surroundings while less remains available as the ball’s organised upward motion. Mechanical energy and total energy are different descriptions.
During a real impact, the ball and surface deform. Some energy can be stored temporarily in elastic deformation and returned as they recover. Some can become thermal energy, sound and other motions or deformation that do not return to the ball’s upward rebound. Air resistance can also transfer energy during the flight.
The OpenStax discussion of nonconservative effects explains that mechanical energy can be reduced through transfers involving thermal energy, sound and deformation. The important Primary 6 distinction is that a lower rebound does not demonstrate energy being destroyed. It demonstrates that less energy is available in the part of the motion being compared.
Avoid saying that all the missing rebound energy became sound. Hearing the bounce establishes that sound was produced; it does not measure the whole energy distribution. Likewise, a barely noticeable temperature change does not prove that no thermal energy was produced. Observability and quantity are separate issues.
For a concise answer, say that some of the ball’s mechanical energy is transferred to other forms and the surroundings during the real bounce, so less returns as upward kinetic energy and the ball reaches a lower height. The exact wording should follow the question’s demand, but the destination and consequence should not disappear from the explanation.
Why 3-Pax Science Tutorials Help With Energy Questions
Ask three learners to explain the same bounce before giving a model answer. One may focus only on gravity, another may say energy vanished, and a third may list potential, kinetic and sound energy without connecting them. All three may choose the correct statement in a multiple-choice item, yet need different teaching to produce an independent explanation.
A small group allows the tutor to ask each learner about a different stage. What happens while falling? What happens at contact? What happens while rising? Then everyone explains the complete sequence. The exercise reveals whether a missing stage or an incorrect relationship is causing the weak answer.
The advantages of three students
Students can rotate between describing observations, accounting for energy and checking the conclusion. The observer states what the ball did without inventing a cause. The energy explainer connects the stages. The checker asks whether the answer implies energy was destroyed or gravity disappeared. Afterwards, each learner writes alone.
This arrangement keeps discussion focused while preserving individual responsibility. A group explanation is not enough evidence that every student understands the distinction. A new question about a different surface or a ball at its highest point can test whether the reasoning transfers beyond the first demonstration.
The Primary 6 Learning Boundary
The main lesson concerns energy forms and transfers, the effect of gravity on motion and the interpretation of a simple investigation. It uses the bouncing ball to connect concepts already encountered in Primary Science. Follow the child’s current school sequence rather than treating every extension in this article as a separate examination requirement.
The optional numerical comparisons use simple height relationships under stated assumptions. Students do not need to memorise a coefficient of restitution, calculate impact forces or use advanced mechanics equations to explain the central phenomenon. Those calculations require further information and belong to later study.
A useful boundary is to ask what a height record can establish. It can compare release and rebound positions. With appropriate assumptions, it can support comparisons of gravitational potential energy. It cannot by itself tell us the exact impact force, temperature rise, sound energy or time spent in contact with the floor.
What We Teach in This Bouncing-Ball Lesson
1. Before release: height and gravitational potential energy
A ball held above a reference level has gravitational potential energy associated with the ball-Earth system. In primary-level language, students commonly say that the raised ball has gravitational potential energy. The important comparison is that, for the same ball near Earth’s surface, a greater height above the same reference corresponds to more of this energy.
The held ball need not be moving to have potential energy. Conversely, being stationary does not mean it has no energy of any kind. State which kind the question asks about. A learner who writes “zero energy because it is not moving” has confused kinetic energy with all energy.
2. During the fall: decreasing height and increasing speed
After release, gravity acts downwards and the ball falls. Its gravitational potential energy decreases as its height decreases, while its kinetic energy increases as it speeds up. In a simple model that neglects air resistance, these changes can be treated as a conversion between the two mechanical forms.
For a real ball, some energy can also be transferred through air resistance. Do not use an idealised all-to-kinetic description as a universal statement about every falling object. The level of approximation should match the question. A qualitative primary answer can acknowledge other transfers without calculating them.
3. During contact: deformation and recovery
The ball does not simply pass through an instantaneous reversal without interacting with the surface. It deforms, and the surface may deform too. Elastic recovery can return part of the stored deformation energy to the ball’s motion. The surface exerts a force during contact that helps change the ball’s motion from downward to upward.
However, not all deformation is perfectly recoverable. Internal friction, vibrations and other processes can transfer energy away from the organised bounce. This is why “the floor gives the ball free energy” is not a satisfactory explanation. In the ordinary passive case, the rebound draws on energy already involved in the approach and deformation.
4. During the upward rebound: gaining height and slowing
As the ball rises, its upward speed decreases under the effect of gravity. Its gravitational potential energy increases while the kinetic energy associated with upward motion decreases. The next maximum height depends on how much energy is available for that rise, along with the conditions of the motion.
Because less is returned to upward motion after a real impact than was available before it, the ball generally reaches a lower rebound height in the stated passive scenario. That comparison is about the same ball and reference level. It should not be turned into a universal ranking of different balls from height alone.
5. At the top: zero upward speed does not mean zero force
At the highest point of a nearly vertical rebound, the ball’s vertical speed is momentarily zero. Gravity still acts. The ball does not hover indefinitely because gravity has not switched off. It begins moving downwards again.
If a question assumes no significant rotation or sideways motion, the ball’s kinetic energy is momentarily very small at that highest point. In a more general motion, sideways or rotational movement could remain. Follow the stated model rather than using “all motion stops” for every possible bounce.
6. After several bounces: a decreasing mechanical-energy sequence
In an ordinary passive sequence, repeated impacts and motion transfer energy away from the organised bouncing motion. The peak heights reduce until the motion is no longer a visible bounce and the ball settles. This does not mean all energy in the ball or surroundings has become zero.
The OpenStax treatment of energy conservation supports the larger account: transfers and transformations must be included when comparing a chosen part of a system. The learner’s explanation should preserve that distinction instead of saying that energy has been used up and ceased to exist.
Worked Bouncing-Ball Questions
Case 1: A lower first rebound
Original scenario: a ball is released from rest with its bottom 100 cm above a level floor. Its first rebound reaches 64 cm, measured using the same bottom-of-ball convention when the ball is not deformed. Explain why it does not return to 100 cm in the ordinary passive setup.
A complete qualitative answer is that some mechanical energy is transferred into other forms and to the ball’s surroundings during the fall and collision. Less is returned to upward motion, so the ball cannot regain the same gravitational potential energy above the reference level and reaches a lower height.
Do not say that gravity was stronger on the second journey. No change in gravity is established by the question. Do not say only “because of friction” without connecting energy transfer to the lower rise. The explanation must account for the loss from rebound motion and its consequence.
Case 2: What the 64 cm measurement can tell us
Under a simplified same-mass, same-gravity comparison, the gravitational potential energy above the chosen reference is proportional to height. At a 64 cm rebound maximum compared with a 100 cm release, that part of the energy account is 64% of its initial value. The remaining 36% has not reappeared as that gravitational potential energy at the rebound top.
This is an optional model calculation, not a direct measurement that 36% became heat alone. Some energy can be in several other forms or have been transferred to the surroundings. The height comparison does not separately measure each destination. The distinction prevents a correct ratio from supporting an unjustified causal claim.
Nor does a height ratio of 64% mean the upward speed immediately after contact was 64% of the downward speed before contact. Speed and kinetic energy have a different mathematical relationship. Primary learners can simply avoid making a speed-percentage claim that the supplied heights do not directly state.
Case 3: Three later peaks do not guarantee a fixed pattern
Original invented record: release height is 100 cm, followed by rebound maxima of 62 cm, 39 cm and 24 cm. Describe the observed trend. The successive peaks decrease. Does the record prove that exactly the same number of centimetres is lost after each bounce? No: the decreases are not equal.
Does it prove that every future peak follows one exact percentage rule? Not from this short rounded record alone. A mathematical model might approximate a pattern, but its assumptions should be stated and its predictions checked. Measurements with limited precision should not be forced into a perfect sequence.
A defensible conclusion is that the recorded peaks became progressively lower under the tested conditions. A scientific explanation can then connect the trend to transfers away from the bouncing motion. Keep the descriptive evidence and the explanatory mechanism distinct before combining them.
Case 4: The ball at its highest point
Original question: a ball is momentarily at the top of a vertical rebound. A student claims that no force acts because the ball is not moving upwards at that instant. Explain the error.
Force and velocity are different ideas. The momentary zero vertical speed does not remove Earth’s gravitational pull. Gravity continues to act downwards, changing the motion so that the ball begins to descend. The observation of a turning point is therefore not evidence of a force-free interval.
A related energy question asks whether the ball has zero energy at that point. It still has gravitational potential energy relative to a lower reference level. Under the simple no-spin vertical model, its translational kinetic energy is momentarily zero, but that statement should not be expanded into “all energy has disappeared”.
Case 5: Comparing two floor surfaces fairly
Original invented measurements use the same ball released from 100 cm without a push. Surface X gives first-rebound heights of 61 cm, 63 cm and 62 cm. Surface Y gives 40 cm, 41 cm and 42 cm. The corresponding averages are 62 cm and 41 cm.
The data support the statement that this ball rebounded higher on X in these trials. Under comparable conditions, more energy returned to the measured rebound rise on X. The result does not, by itself, tell us the exact thermal-energy increase in either surface or prove that X is the best surface for every kind of ball.
A fair interpretation requires the same release method, height convention, ball condition and measurement procedure. If the ball was pushed down only on X, the comparison would no longer isolate the surface change. The observed heights might still be real, but the proposed surface explanation would have weaker support.
Case 6: Different balls and the mass trap
Original scenario: a heavy ball rebounds higher than a light ball when both are dropped from the same height. The balls also differ in material, size and construction. Does this prove that heavier balls always bounce higher? No. Several properties changed together, so mass has not been isolated as the cause.
Students should distinguish an observation about two particular balls from a general rule about mass. The heavier ball in the record may also return deformation energy differently. More information or a better-controlled investigation would be needed to identify which property accounts for the difference.
Even comparing gravitational potential energy at the rebound peaks requires attention to mass. A higher peak does not automatically mean more potential energy when the balls have different masses. The simple height-proportional comparison works directly when the mass and reference conditions are held constant.
Case 7: A rebound higher than the release position
An original question reports that a ball rebounded above its release height. Should the student immediately claim that energy conservation has failed? No. First inspect the assumptions and measurements. Was the ball truly released from rest? Was it pushed? Did the surface move or supply additional energy? Was there another stored-energy source or a height-reading error?
The ordinary passive model assumes no extra input beyond the initial release conditions. A moving surface or an additional push changes the energy account. The observed result might be possible under a different setup, but it should not be explained by silently keeping the original assumptions.
This case teaches an important scientific response to surprise: examine the system boundary and initial conditions. Do not erase the observation, but do not announce a new physical law from one uncontrolled event either. A useful explanation accounts for every relevant energy source that the evidence establishes.
Case 8: A loud bounce is not a complete energy measurement
Two bounces sound different, and the louder one reaches a lower height. A student claims that all the missing rebound energy became sound. The data do not justify that allocation. Sound is one possible energy transfer, but loudness as heard by a person is not a direct measure of the total energy distributed into all other forms.
The ball, surface and surroundings can also gain thermal energy or retain vibrations and deformation. A complete quantitative account would need suitable measurements and a defined system. For a Primary 6 explanation, acknowledge that some energy is transferred into sound and other forms rather than assigning every missing amount to the most noticeable effect.
The same reasoning prevents an opposite mistake: a quiet bounce does not prove perfectly elastic recovery. Absence of a loud sound is not evidence that no other transfers occurred. Observable effect and complete energy budget are different levels of claim.
A Safe Rebound Investigation
Use a suitable lightweight ball, a clear level floor area and a stable height scale. An adult or teacher chooses a modest release height that can be reached without climbing. Keep people, breakable objects and electrical equipment away from the bounce area. Do not drop objects from balconies, stairs, windows or furniture, and do not use heavy, sharp or breakable objects.
Release the ball rather than throwing it down. Choose a consistent height convention, such as the bottom of the undeformed ball above the floor at release and at the rebound peak. Measuring the top at release and the bottom at rebound introduces an avoidable mismatch. A clear convention matters more than reporting an unrealistically precise number.
A side-on video can help identify the highest point, provided filming is allowed and unrelated people are not recorded. Keep the camera position stable and the scale near the plane of motion to reduce reading error. No recording is essential; supplied data can be used when the setting is unsuitable or permission is unavailable.
Repeat the same condition several times and record the readings honestly. A sideways bounce or accidental push should be noted rather than silently edited into the expected trend. The teacher can decide whether to repeat the intended trial. Record the reason so the data history remains understandable.
If comparing surfaces, keep the same ball, initial height, release method and measurement convention. Do not change the ball’s temperature, inflation or other condition at the same time and then attribute the result solely to the floor. Real investigations have limits; explaining those limits is part of the Science, not a failure of the activity.
Reading Rebound Data Without Overclaiming
A results table should identify what each number measures. First-rebound height after separate releases is different from successive peaks within one release. Mixing those two types of record can produce a false pattern. The table headings should state whether the rows are repeat trials, different surfaces or bounce numbers.
For repeat trials, inspect the spread as well as any average. The invented X readings of 61, 63 and 62 cm are close together. A set of 40, 70 and 25 cm would require more investigation of procedure and measurement before a simple average is treated as a dependable surface characteristic.
For successive peaks, do not assume equal time gaps or equal energy losses just because the bounce numbers increase by one. A bounce count is an event index, not a time measurement. A graph against bounce number answers a different question from a graph of height against time.
The Primary 6 data guide provides a wider route for these distinctions. In this lesson, the essential habit is to connect the measured quantity, the comparison and the conclusion. A correct number can still be used to answer the wrong scientific question.
Building a Complete Open-Ended Explanation
Begin with the question target. If asked why the rebound is lower, do not spend the whole answer describing why the ball falls. If asked why it slows while rising, do not answer only about the collision. The same event contains several mechanisms, and the required explanation depends on the stage named.
For a lower rebound, identify the energy transfers that reduce the amount returned to upward motion, then connect that reduction to a lower maximum height. For the top-of-bounce force question, state that gravity remains and the vertical speed is only momentarily zero. For a surface-comparison question, connect the observed height difference to the tested setup while acknowledging relevant controls.
A partial answer such as “energy is lost” can be repaired by naming the part of the energy account and at least one appropriate destination. “Some mechanical energy is transferred to other forms and the surroundings, so less is available for the next rise” is more complete. Add details only when the question requires them and the evidence supports them.
Avoid implying that every correct answer must use identical wording. The student’s sentence needs the scientific relationships, not a ritual phrase. A clear explanation in age-appropriate language can be stronger than a longer paragraph that lists several energy forms without connecting cause and consequence.
Our First-Principles Teaching Method
Diagnose the exact weakness
Ask the learner to explain the fall, the impact and the rise separately. Then ask about force at the highest point. This separates confusion about energy transfers from confusion about gravity. A correct lower-height prediction does not prove that either explanation is secure.
Rebuild from the first unstable point
If the child says energy vanishes, widen the account to include the surface and surroundings. If the child says gravity stops, separate force from momentary speed. If the child understands both but omits the collision, reconstruct the sequence before asking for a final written answer.
Establish a clear problem boundary
Begin with a ball released from rest above a stationary surface, with no added push or significant spin. These conditions make the first explanation manageable. Add moving surfaces, different balls or numerical ratios only after the learner can explain the ordinary case accurately.
Move from observation to an energy account
List the stages in order and attach the relevant change to each. Height decreases during the fall; the ball deforms at contact; height increases during the rise. Then distinguish energy that returns to the rebound from energy transferred elsewhere. The sequence prevents random keyword listing.
Ask students to think aloud
Have the learner challenge a wrong explanation: “the ball has no energy at the top” or “all lost height became sound”. Ask which observation or definition contradicts it. Explaining why a claim fails often shows a stronger concept boundary than reciting the correct answer alone.
Retrieve and vary
At a later lesson, use a different surface, a new set of peak heights or a question about the top of the rebound. Mix explanation and evaluation tasks. The learner should select the relevant mechanism from the question rather than reproduce the last answer remembered.
Build independent checking
A short check asks whether the answer names the correct stage, preserves energy conservation and links the transfer to the observed result. For data questions, add the mass and height-reference conditions where relevant. The check should target the learner’s recurring error rather than become another paragraph to memorise.
What Happens During a 90-Minute Lesson
An illustrative lesson begins with ten minutes of independent predictions and explanations. Fifteen minutes then build the fall-contact-rise sequence. Students identify which parts are observations and which are explanatory statements, preserving the distinction before numerical data is introduced.
Twenty minutes examine a safe demonstration or supplied rebound record. The next twenty minutes are independent worked cases: a lower rebound, a highest-point force question and a flawed surface comparison. Fifteen minutes are used to review the first incorrect link in each response.
The final ten minutes select a short return task with one explanation, one data interpretation and one rejected misconception. This is an example of lesson design rather than a statement of currently available tuition slots. Confirm schedules and arrangements directly with the centre.
Three Primary 6 Student Pathways
The repair pathway
A learner who confuses force and energy begins with their different roles. Gravity is a force; gravitational potential energy is associated with height in the system. The student then follows a simple vertical journey before adding collision losses. This avoids introducing every energy term while the basic distinction remains unstable.
The stabilisation pathway
A learner who understands the sequence but loses marks through incomplete explanations needs varied question targets. Ask about falling, impact, rising, the top and the comparison between peaks. The child practises answering the named stage instead of writing the same generic paragraph for every bounce question.
The extension pathway
A secure learner can evaluate same-mass height ratios, compare repeat trials and identify extra energy inputs in surprising rebounds. The extension should improve assumptions and evidence use, not force advanced formulas into every answer. Recognising what cannot be inferred is part of stronger Science reasoning.
Why the Reference Height Receives Special Attention
Height is measured from a chosen reference. A comparison becomes unreliable if one trial uses the floor, another uses a raised mat and a third measures a different part of the ball. The number can change because the convention changed rather than because the rebound changed.
For the same undeformed ball at release and at a rebound peak, a consistent bottom-of-ball gap can represent the change in centre height above its resting reference. The optional ratios in this lesson use that consistent convention. During compression, the geometry changes, so those simple peak comparisons should not be treated as direct measurements of impact energy at every instant.
This is a useful example of why units alone are insufficient. Two readings can both be in centimetres and still describe different quantities. The question, reference and measurement convention must agree before a numerical comparison becomes meaningful.
How We Reduce Careless Bouncing-Ball Mistakes
Common errors include saying energy was destroyed, saying gravity stops at the top, omitting the impact stage, comparing different masses by height alone and attributing a two-variable test to one cause. Another error treats a lower peak as proof of exactly how much sound or heat was produced.
Use focused checks: identify the stage, name the type of energy, trace its destination and check the comparison conditions. For force questions, inspect whether the answer has confused speed with force. For investigations, identify what was deliberately changed and what else could have affected the result.
The correction should be specific. A student who understands conservation but cannot read the table needs data work, not another lecture on energy. A student who reads the heights correctly but says energy vanished needs the system account repaired. The visible wrong answer is the starting evidence, not the complete diagnosis.
Teaching Ahead Without Rushing
The bouncing ball can prepare students for later mechanics, but the Primary 6 task is a qualitative explanation with disciplined evidence. Numerical impact-force calculations require contact time and further modelling; coefficients of restitution require definitions and assumptions. Those extensions should not displace the core sequence.
A useful next step is to compare another familiar motion, such as a swing gradually losing amplitude, while identifying which mechanisms are shared and which differ. Do not claim every mechanical system loses energy in exactly the same way. Transfer means recognising a relevant pattern without erasing the details of the new situation.
What Progress Should Look Like
Progress is visible when the learner can explain a lower rebound without saying energy disappears, identify gravity at the highest point and interpret a same-ball surface comparison cautiously. The child should also be able to state why different balls do not isolate mass as a cause merely because they start at the same height.
Check with three independent tasks: a full event explanation, a force-versus-speed question and an investigation-evaluation question. Add a later return with new numbers and a different measurement convention. Consistency across those tasks is more informative than reproducing one model answer immediately after teaching. No fixed score or rate of improvement is guaranteed.
When Should a Student Seek Help With This Topic?
Support may be useful when a learner can list energy forms but cannot connect the collision to the next rise, or repeatedly uses force and energy as if they were the same idea. Bring the actual question, the first answer and the marked correction. The missing link may be conceptual, numerical or linguistic.
The tuition enquiry guide explains how to prepare a focused discussion. Confirm the current venue, timetable, fees and class arrangements directly rather than treating an educational guide as a live availability notice.
Class Details and What Parents Can Bring
A small-group lesson allows each child to make a prediction, account for the stages and defend a conclusion. Useful materials include a current energy worksheet, a marked data question and a response that looked correct to the child but lost credit. Preserve the complete diagram and all stated conditions.
Practical work is optional. A supplied video, clear written scenario or invented data set can test the reasoning when a safe drop area is unavailable. No one needs to climb, use heavy objects or film other children to learn the energy account.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is energy destroyed when the ball bounces lower?
No. Less energy returns to the organised rebound motion, while energy is transferred to other forms and the surroundings. The explanation must distinguish that mechanical-energy reduction from the total energy account.
Why does the ball slow while rising?
Gravity acts downwards while the ball moves upwards, reducing its upward speed. Its gravitational potential energy increases as it rises. This is a different stage from the collision that reduced the energy available for the rebound.
Does gravity stop at the highest point?
No. The vertical speed is momentarily zero, but gravity still acts downwards. The turning point is not a force-free pause.
Does a heavier ball always bounce higher?
No such conclusion follows from comparing two balls that also differ in material, size or construction. Identify the controlled variable and the evidence before making a general claim.
Can rebound height tell us exactly how much energy became heat?
Not by itself. The height comparison can support a limited mechanical-energy account under stated assumptions, but it does not separately measure thermal energy, sound and other transfers.
Why should the release be a drop rather than a throw?
A downward throw adds an extra initial-motion condition. If the investigation is comparing rebounds from the same release height without added input, pushing the ball changes the energy account and weakens the intended comparison.
Can a ball ever rebound above its release height?
A different setup can include additional energy from a push, a moving surface or another stored source. Inspect those possibilities and the measurements before applying the ordinary passive-bounce explanation. The assumptions determine what the model predicts.
Are the optional percentages required for every answer?
No. The main lesson is qualitative. Use the numerical comparisons only when the learner understands the same-mass and reference-height assumptions and when the question actually calls for that reasoning.
Where Next
A lower bounce is not just a picture of lost height. It is a sequence of energy conversions, transfers and forces that must be explained at the right stage and within the stated conditions. That makes it valuable practice for broader Primary 6 Science reasoning.
Continue through the Primary 6 Science Learning Hub, the open-ended answering guide and the data interpretation guide. Properly Taught Kids Shine a Bright Light Into the Future.
