Year 6 Reading Challenge

photo (1)

 

Bronze

1. Look up the meaning of the following words in the poem and write a definition of them: somnolent, ferocious and morsel.

2. Identify a line in the poem which made you laugh and explain why.

Silver

Identify the words or group of words the writer uses to describe Albert and the lion. Explain how they make you feel about each character.

Gold

Who do you feel is most to blame for Albert being eaten? Explain your answer fully using quotations form the text to support your explanation.

25 thoughts on “Year 6 Reading Challenge

  1. ferocious: when you are savage,cruel and violent
    somnolent:when you are sleepy
    morsel:when you have a mouth full of food in your mouth.

  2. Bronze Challenge:
    Smnolement means sleepy tired
    Ferocious mean savagely fierce cruel or violent
    Morsel means a small piece of amount of food : or mouthful

  3. I think that it was Albert’s fault. This is because the lion wasn’t going to say anything until Albert winded the lion up.There is evidence that the lion was sleeping peacefully ” Wallace was lying so peacefully that he did not right to the child” This shows us that Albert was teasing the lion by purpose.

    Furthermore, in the text it says that ‘ Wallace was living so peacefully he didn’t feel right to the child.’ This shows that Walace was being teased by purpose. This caused Wallace to react in a way that no one would prefer because
    Walace wasn’t expecting to be poked by a little boy.

  4. Good Challenge:

    I think that it was Alberts fault that he was eaten because he was teasing the lion and he wanted the lion to react to what he was doing to it. Also, the lion was not doing anything till the little boy approached him and started to winding Walkace the lion up.

    In the text it says ‘ he took the stick and pushed it into walace’s ear’. This suggests that Albert was annoying the lion on purpose. Furthermore, in the text it says ‘ Walace was living so peacefully he did not feel right to the child’ this also shows that Walace was not doing anything to the little boy.

    On the other hand Walace could have carried on deserving the child and carried on with whatever he was doing before the child arrived so I think Walace was not at fault.

    By Siver Ali 6M

  5. Silver:
    ‘ to suggest
    The writer has used the phrase ‘the lion was lying peacefully’ to suggest that Wallace was lying there with no worries. The writer has also used the phrase ‘brave little feller’ to suggest that Albert was brave and bold.

  6. Gold Challenge:

    I personally believe that Albert was at fault. The reason for this is that Wallace was undisturbed and did not want to do anything to Albert at that point of time. Also, in the text it was stated that “he took his stick and pushed into Wallace’s ear” This suggests that Albert was very cheeky. Furthermore, it was clearly written in the text that “Wallace was lying so peaceful well… it didn’t seem right to the child” This also suggests that he intentionally disturbed Wallace.

    Also, like any ‘normal’ lion Wallace reacted because he wasn’t expecting to lie there and be poked with sticks by a little boy. In addition, Wallace had to stop the little child from irritating him. Moreover, no person, animal or any other living thing would like to be pestered and annoyed and to be disturbed by a little nuisance.

    On the other hand Wallace the lion did have the ability to ignore the little boy; this act might have prevented the situation from taking place. In addition, Wallace the Lion should have thought carefully before taking such a dramatic and violent approach to stop Albert. I think that Albert and Wallace were in the wrong and they should have done the right thing.

    By Haniyah Raja 6S :)

  7. Gold Challenge:

    I believe that it was Albert to blame. This is because the lion was sleeping peacefully and did not want to be disturbed. There is evidence that the lion was sleeping peacefully such as, ” And to see the lion so peaceful…”. Furthermore, Albert was very annoying to the lion as it says in the text, ”He took his stick and pushed it into Wallace’s ear”. However, Albert did annoy the lion deliberately as it says ”Wallace was lying so peacefully but that did not feel right to the child”. This shows that Albert wanted to disturb the lion because he thought that it wasnt right to see a lion lying so peacfully. This silliness caused the lion to react in such a way because of the way the young boy disturbed the lion. Lions are exteremley dangerous animals that do not like being disturbed and children like Albert should not be near a lion at all! Besides, Wllace was not expected to just sit there and let an annoying boy to poke sticks into his ear. He had to do something to make him stop.

    Despite the young boy disturbing Wallace, Wallace could have roared at Albert to make him scared and run away or he also could have gotten up and moved away. Wallace, however, decided to deal with this minor incident in such an aggressive way.

    By Rayan 6M :)

  8. Gold Cahllenge:

    I think that Albert himself is at fault for the reason of him being eaten because who would tease someone without the other person doing anything to them. In the text there is a phrase which says ‘ he took his stck and pushed it up Walace’s ear’.

    Furthermore, in the text in states that ‘ Wallace was living so pie fully he did not feel right to the child.’ This shows that Walace was intentionally teased. This caused Wallace the lion to react in a way that no one would prefer because Walace was not expecting to be poked and prodded by a tiny boy. So Walce had to do something to get rid of him.

    On the other hand Wallace could have been more matchorer and ignored the fact that he was being teased and annoyed and carried on with what he was doing or even thought about what he was doing and if he as making the correct choice.

    From Amaan Ahmed 6M

  9. I agree with Sarah and AhsanGold Challenge:
    I think that it was albert’s fault. The real reason for this is that Albert made the lion angry by winding him up and he didn’t talk to him. Also in the text it says that ‘he took his stick and pushed into Wallace’s ear’?In the text it also says ‘ Wallace was lying so peacefully that he did not it didn’t seem right to the child; This shows that they intentionally teased the poor and frustrated lion and he was confused to see that the lion didn’t pay attention to Albert.
    Then, the lion couldn’t control him self so reacted to him because he wasn’t going to let a little boy prodded and poked with sticks. Additionally, he had to do something to get rid of him and stop being annoying. Finally , he got the peace he needed and no person or animal would like to be pestered and annoyed and
    Make noisy and frustrating little boy who is very disturbing.
    On the other hand Wallace the lion could have ignored the little boy and could have walked a way or carried on with what he was doing before the boy had arrived. Clearly, Wallace should have thought carefully about his actions before opening his mouth such a step and could have cooled down and thought what he could do with no anger building up in his mind think if the decision being made was correct of not and also counted to 10 to calm down.

    Hope you liked reading what I have done

  10. Gold Challenge:

    I personally think that Albert himself was at fault. The reason that lion was not going to say anything to Albert until he winded the lion up. Also, in the text it was stated that ‘he took his stick and pushed into Wallace’s ear. Furthermore, it was clearly stated in the text that ‘ Wallace was lying so peacefully that he did not right to the child; This shows that they intentionally teased the poor and frustrated lion.

    Also, as you would understand this caused the lion to react because he wasn’t expecting to sit there and get prodded and poked with sticks by a tiny boy. Additionally, he had to do something to get rid of them and stop being annoyed by them. Moreover, no person or animal would like to be pestered and annoyed and make you get annoyed and frustrated by a little boy who is very disturbing.

    On the other hand Walace the lion could have ignored the little boy and could have walked a way or carried on with what he was doing before the boy had arrived. In addition, Walace should have thought carefully before thaking such a dropatic step and could have cooled down and thought what he could do with no anger building up in his mind think if the decision being made was correct of not.

    From Ahsan Khan 6M

  11. GOLD CHALLENGE:

    I think it was Albert’s fault that he was eaten because the lion wasn’t going to say anything to Albert until he winded the lion up. I know that Albert winded the lion up because in the text it says that Albert took his stick and pushed it into Wallace’s (the lion) ear. Moreover,it says that Wallace was lying so peacefully but that did not feel right to the child. This shows that he wanted to wind the lion up. This meant that the lion had the right to react in an unpleasant way because was not expected to just sit there and let a rude little boy just hit him with stick for no reason. Wallace had to do something to get rid of him. However, Wallace could have ignored the little boy and carried on living because there was no point in wasting time on a silly little boy. So it is also wallace’s fault that he ate the boy.

    By Arzu Haydari 6M!! :) :)

  12. Gold Challenge:
    I think it was Alberts fault that he was eaten.This is because the lion was not going to say anything to albert until he winded it up.In the text it says that ‘he took his stick and pushed it into Wallace’s ear.Furthermore,it says ‘Wallace was lying so peacefully but that did not feel right to the child’.This shows that he wanted to tease the lion.This caused the lion to react because he was not expected to sit there while a tiny boy just hit him with sticks.He had to do something to get rid of him.

    On the other hand,Wallace could have ignored the litte boy and got on withhis life.So it could have also been wallace’s fault that the boy was eaten.This is because the lion was very aggresive to react to sucha small thing.In addition,it might not have even been painful or harmful to him.

    BY SARAH KAUSER 6M ;) :) ;) :)

  13. Bronze :
    somnlent-sleepy and drowsey
    Ferocious-violent or crule
    Morcel-A amount ofanything

    Silver:
    The Writer has used the phrase (group of words) ‘the lion was lying peacefully’to suggest that Wallace was lying there with no worries. The writer has also used the phrase (group of words) ‘brave little feller’ to suggest that Albert was brave and was extremely determined.

  14. Silver

    The Writer has used the words ‘the lion was lying peacefully’ to suggest that Wallace was lying there with no problems. The writer also used the brave little feller to suggest he was very brave.

    by maciek :)

    • i made a mistake in the last sentence its ment to be the writer also used the phrase brave little feller to suggest he was very brave.

  15. Bronze
    Somnolement -sleepy and drowsy .
    Ferocious -savegly fierce cruel and violent .
    Morsel-a small piece or amount of food or a mouthful.

    The sentence that made me laugh was and swalled the little lad…whole! Because it’s a really funny sentence and it make me laugh because it’s saids that a little lad has been swalled .

    Sliver

  16. Silver:
    The Writer has used the phrase (group of words) ‘the lion was lying peacefully’to suggest that Wallace was lying there with no worries. The writer has also used the phrase (group of words) ‘brave little feller’ to suggest that Albert was brave and was extremely determined.

  17. Somnolent- is when you are half asleep and nodding and heavy eyes.

    Ferocious- is when you are very great and extreme and powerful.

    Morsel- is when you are a piece and a British team ana a amount.

Leave a Reply