Rationale Model
A rationale is not a diary of what you did. It is an argument for why your design choices work for a specific audience and purpose.
Success criteria
- I can state the purpose and key message of my infographic.
- I can explain how my infographic links to the documentary.
- I can justify at least three design choices with effects on the audience.
- I can evaluate the overall effectiveness and name one improvement.
The structure
1. Purpose and message
What is the infographic trying to achieve? What is the one message the audience should remember?
2. Documentary link
Which issue from the documentary did you focus on, and why did it matter enough to explore further?
3. Audience
Who is the target audience? What do they already know, and what do they need from the infographic?
4. Design choices
Explain at least three choices: layout, colour, icons, data display, type, or language. Link each choice to an effect.
5. Effectiveness
How well does the infographic communicate to the audience? What is strong, and what is limited?
6. Improvement
What would you change with more time, and why would that change help?
Model rationale
This is a teacher-written model for a hypothetical infographic. It is not a real student response. Use the structure and reasoning, not the wording.
My infographic, The lunchbox problem, is designed to inform and persuade Year 7 students and their families that most lunchbox waste is preventable. The key message is that small, repeatable changes to planning and packaging can reduce food waste, cost, and environmental impact. This issue grew from the documentary's discussion of everyday consumption. I focused on lunchboxes because the audience can act on the issue immediately, rather than treating sustainability as a distant problem.
I chose a three-column structure because it allows the audience to compare causes, impacts, and solutions without searching through long paragraphs. The headings are short and parallel, so the reader can scan the page in seconds. I placed the main claim in the largest text and repeated it in the closing call to action, which frames the whole infographic as an argument rather than a list of facts.
I used a muted green for the cause and impact sections and a warm accent for the action. The contrast separates the problem from the response and makes the call to action the final focal point. I also used one line-icon family for food, packaging, and composting so the visuals feel consistent. Each icon is labelled, because a symbol such as a compost bin may not be familiar to every viewer.
For the data display, I used a simple labelled comparison rather than a pie chart. The data is explained in a short annotation, so the audience does not have to interpret the chart alone. I included a source line because the infographic's credibility depends on the audience being able to check the evidence.
Overall, the infographic is effective for a student audience because it is short, visual, and action-focused. However, the amount of text in the impact section may still be too dense for a viewer scanning on a phone. With more time, I would replace one sentence with a simple diagram showing the journey of food waste from lunchbox to landfill. This would make the environmental impact quicker to understand and strengthen the visual consistency of the page.
Why the model works
| Move | Evidence in the model | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| States purpose and message early | First two sentences | The reader knows what is being justified. |
| Links to the documentary | "This issue grew from..." | Meets the task requirement without retelling the film. |
| Names a specific audience | Year 7 students and families | Design choices can be judged against a real audience. |
| Justifies structure | Three-column comparison | Connects layout to comprehension. |
| Explains colour and contrast | Muted green / warm accent | Shows symbolic and functional purpose, not personal taste. |
| Explains icons | One family; labelled | Connects consistency to accessibility. |
| Explains data choices | Labelled comparison, annotation, source | Connects honesty and trust to audience. |
| Evaluates and improves | Dense impact section; diagram proposal | Shows critical reflection, not just description. |
Sentence frames
Common errors
| Error | Why it weakens the rationale | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Retelling the documentary | Uses words on summary instead of justification. | Mention the issue and move to your choices. |
| Listing choices without effects | "I used green and a title" does not explain why. | Add "so that..." or "which helps the audience...". |
| Vague praise | "It looks good" is not evidence. | Name the choice and its effect on understanding. |
| Personal taste | "Green is my favourite colour" is not a design argument. | Link colour to meaning, contrast, or audience. |
| No evaluation | Misses the top level of the criterion. | Name one limitation and one specific improvement. |
| Too short | Cannot justify three choices or evaluate effectiveness. | Plan six short paragraphs before the lesson. |
Plan your rationale
| Paragraph | Key idea | Evidence or example |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose and message | ||
| Documentary link | ||
| Audience | ||
| Design choice 1 | ||
| Design choice 2 | ||
| Design choice 3 | ||
| Effectiveness and improvement |
Conditions: the rationale is usually handwritten in class. Check your school's policy on AI and your teacher's conditions before you start. Plan in note form; do not memorise a full essay, and do not bring a pre-written response.