Returned, one later choice supplied · Separate staff criteria
Full supplied source
In a different imaginary game, Ivo alone places a broad square cue back at its READY drawing. Ivo then moves that cue beside a pretend underwater-story picture and points to that picture. The account supplies this return and this one later choice. It does not say whether someone used the game before the return, who made the parts, any further action or anyone's preference. There is no real underwater trip or child trial.
Selection and support
matching C-first after actual instruction focused on its missing component and exposure review. The different action/record complexity is explicit; not calibrated equivalence.
Save an offered first idea before showing a worked example or a key. Record faithful access help separately from content/design help. Select only components actually taught and review exposure; the public forms are neither secure nor calibrated. Actual child making requires the child's own observed suitable action; adult manufacture is the adult's contribution. Actual familiar exploration is separate from interpreting a new fictional source. Never use response speed, handwriting, touch, compliance, sociability or length as design quality. These are original formative criteria, not official QCAA AP/MC/WW/EX/BA grading.
1. Who did what with the cue in this story?
Look for: Ivo alone returns and then moves/points; no adult placement invented; manufacture unknown. The missing manufacture account is a source limit, not an extra required response to this action question.
Teach next with an unrelated example: unrelated Lina alone moves a broad dot cue beside a pretend tree picture. Contrast a named sole operator with an adult-assisted source without assuming either child's skill here.
2. What return and choice are given? What earlier or further play is not told?
Look for: READY return and underwater picture choice supplied; prior use and further events unknown.
Teach next with an unrelated example: unrelated Noor puts a broad cue at WAIT and chooses a moon-story picture; source gives no previous use. Keep supplied order without inventing the earlier history.
3. What would you keep or change, or what do you like about the idea? Why?
Look for: named feature/reason, not invented universal liking.
Teach next with an unrelated example: unrelated Dev wants to keep separate ready/selected places for his own purpose; no use or preference by others reported. Invite a reason without a compulsory redesign.
4. What would you check next? Who would act? What would you record afterwards?
Look for: suitable specific proposed action/check and actual-result record, not automatically another success.
Teach next with an unrelated example: unrelated Sana proposes checking whether a cue can be found after return; no trial/result is supplied. Name proposed operator and leave after open.
Modified from Prep alignment, Prep standard elaborations and Prep techniques and conditions, © State of Queensland (QCAA) 2023, CC BY 4.0 with item exceptions. Guidance summaries are adapted; proposed SubjectNest stories, choices, tasks, criteria and teaching moves are original. No endorsement.