# Cases · complete original material ## Part 1 ### Complete neutral source Original fictional puppet mechanic notes. Job: a short cue before the toy garage opens. Trial1: helper gently taps an empty plastic box once; supplied report “short tap”. Trial2: same box, helper rubs one edge once; supplied report “longer scratchy sound”. Same helper and observer spot are stated. Force was not measured. Before trials the helper predicted the two actions would give different reports. No trial with a real garage audience is supplied. ### Components #### Part 1 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Names tap and rub and a supplied report difference; no measured pitch/loudness demanded. ##### Exact prompt Name the two actions and one difference in the supplied reports. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Help a florist reader separate the wanted delivery place, action and actual stopping clue. ###### Guided different context For a new pretend florist desk, slide a paper flower towards a pot drawing. Child predicts a stopping place, then performs or directs the gentle slide and records its actual position. ###### Id N01 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child identifies actual action and reported result separately and leaves unperformed result open. ###### Ordinary possible model “Roll the cart” names an action; “blue square” names the reported stopping place. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Place job, action and result labels in separate pockets; model the parcel record, then let child label the flower event without filling their result. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Parcel-ramp action labels ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional parcel desk rolls a toy cart down a flat paper path; record says it stopped beside the blue square. A second note says a card was slid to the red square. These are movement notes, not sound observations. ##### Id A-first-1 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response Tap and rub; the helper described the tap as short and rub as longer/scratchy. ##### Staff focus U02 action/report variety partial knowledge #### Part 2 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Identifies a supplied result/report rather than the before-trial prediction; exact source qualification retained. ##### Exact prompt Which supplied clue shows what happened rather than only what was predicted? ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Help a fruit-stall reader find the after card, then explain how it differs from the before idea. Leave the second envelope’s result open. ###### Guided different context Complete different fictional fruit-stall account: before opening a picture-envelope at10:00, the helper expected four drawn apples, using yesterday’s four-apple card as the clue. The10:05 after-opening card reports one drawn apple. A second envelope has no after card. Ask the child to choose which card shows what happened, then compare it with the earlier expectation; no actual food task is required. ###### Id N02 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If before and after still merge, reduce this new story to two labelled time cards and ask one question. If the after distinction is clear, offer a genuinely new ordinary before/after event later. These coached accounts are teaching, not untouched held evidence. ###### Observable next evidence Child identifies the supplied after report rather than the prospective expectation and can keep the missing second result unknown; record each actual distinction and help separately. ###### Ordinary possible model The08:50 three-book expectation is a before-opening prediction. The09:00 two-book entry is an after-opening report. It differs from that prediction; boxM’s missing count is still unknown rather than zero. ###### Teacher preparation Print/read the complete library and fruit-stall accounts and their separate before/after headings. Keep the ordinary model on the staff page until the first meaning question. Offer big cards, AAC, drawing, signing or verbatim scribing with read-back; use no food, photos or sound. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read all library times and counts. Ask which statement was made before the box opened and which is an after report; keep the unseenM count blank. ###### Part 2 Model the three-versus-two distinction with separate time-labelled cards. Explain why the previous return record can be a prediction clue without guaranteeing the next count. ###### Part 3 Read the whole different fruit-stall account. Guide the first time label, then pause while the child chooses the actual supplied after card and compares it with four predicted apples; never insert your model into their own record. ###### Part 4 Ask what remains unknown about the second envelope and note the child’s exact source-qualified distinction, mode and support. Choose another unrelated before/after job if needed; do not rehearse the held tap/rub key. ###### Title Library return prediction and record ###### Whole unrelated teaching account Complete original fictional library account. At08:50, before the return box was opened, the helper predicted boxL would contain three returned books because the previous displayed return record had three. At09:00 the supplied after-opening record says boxL contained two books. BoxM has no count recorded. These are supplied story records, not a real library event or the child’s own prior prediction. The purpose is to make a label that separates what was expected from what was reported. ##### Id A-first-2 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response The supplied rub report says longer scratchy; it is a report after its trial, while the before idea was a prediction. ##### Staff focus I05 prediction/result distinction with source #### Part 3 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Purpose-linked choice uses an exact source clue and identifies the real audience/job trial as still open; alternative faithful quiet choice accepted. ##### Exact prompt For the stated short-cue job, what might you choose and why? Say what remains untried. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Choose a pretend rest mat using a supplied/seen drawing clue, then ask what real outdoor information would still be needed. ###### Guided different context Create a new pretend pet-rest scene with a roof drawing covering one paper mat and not another. ###### Id N03 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child gives a purpose-matched choice with evidence kind and a real-world question still open. ###### Ordinary possible model For this pretend plan, tableP has the supplied shade clue; real comfort is untested. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model purpose/clue/limit with the picnic; guide one roof-picture placement, then invite a distinct mat choice and child-authored question. Do not take children to observe the Sun. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Picnic shade choice ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional picnic plan wants a card to stand in shade. Supplied toy-scene note says umbrella drawing covers tableP, not tableQ; no real sunlight observation exists. ##### Id A-first-3 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response I could try the tap for the short cue because its supplied report was short. The real garage audience trial is untried. ##### Staff focus H01/I06 purpose-bound communication #### Part 4 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Gives one relevant planned similarity and a further comparison question; guidance permitted, no actual new performance required. ##### Exact prompt With guidance, suggest one way to keep a new action comparison similar and ask a further question. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Suggest one change and one similarity for a useful toy-travel question, then ask a further question with guidance. ###### Guided different context Lay two flat paper textures with a toy/card approved by adult. Plan a new question about travel without slopes, and leave any result open unless gently tried. ###### Id N04 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child connects comparison choices to the question and recognises an unmeasured factor. ###### Ordinary possible model Mat was the planned change; unmeasured push limits a mat-only cause claim. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Show the car source in two panels. Ask what changed, what was only planned similar and what was not measured. Child directs a new safe plan without being told the result. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Toy-car mat comparison ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional car desk compares the same toy rolled from a blue line on paper then cloth; stopping places differ. Release push was not measured. ##### Id A-first-4 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response Use the same box and observer spot for a new gentle action comparison. Would the reports differ again? Force still was not measured. ##### Staff focus I02/I05 planned consistency/further question, no conducting claim ### Delivery Read/display the exact whole neutral source and prompts, with one question at a time if wanted. Do not read criteria/worked/next accounts. Each own page has initial-closed same-page full neutral source disclosure and an external whole-source link; paper mat repeats this source identity and four exact prompts. ### Eligibility Staff records learning opportunity, familiarity with source, prior answer exposure, adult help/operation/scribing, mode, self-directed versus guided reasoning and whether actual practical evidence was offered. After coaching on this source, use it as teaching and arrange genuinely fresh later evidence. ### Exact four prompts #### Part 1 Name the two actions and one difference in the supplied reports. #### Part 2 Which supplied clue shows what happened rather than only what was predicted? #### Part 3 For the stated short-cue job, what might you choose and why? Say what remains untried. #### Part 4 With guidance, suggest one way to keep a new action comparison similar and ask a further question. ### First later First and later are eligible local evidence opportunities, not required timing or a numerical progress scale. Describing supplied outcomes does not demonstrate practical conducting; keep actual observations in a separate folio. ### Id A-first ### Own response values #### Part 1 #### Part 2 #### Part 3 #### Part 4 ### Role neutral held assessment source; teacher offered only after relevant learning opportunity; independent staff criterion/models separate ### Source kind original supplied fiction; any reference fact/model explicitly labelled ### Title Puppet mechanic action notes ## Part 2 ### Complete neutral source Original fictional library play-scene notes. Job: a turn cue with a printed option for readers who want it. One gentle lid tap is described. ReporterP writes “soft tap”. ReporterQ writes “not sure what I heard”. Their locations are not recorded. A printed turn card is available but has not been tried by any reader in these notes. There is no voice recording, sound-level measurement or report of hearing ability. ### Components #### Part 1 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion PreservesP soft tap andQ unsure as separate attributed reports. ##### Exact prompt Keep each reporter’s supplied words beside the correct reporter. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Make two attributed reports without changing unsure into a wrong answer. ###### Guided different context Offer new craft-cloth cards: helperX says smooth, helperY says unsure. Child reads/points to each exact account. ###### Id N05 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child keeps report identity and uncertainty instead of merging or ranking accounts. ###### Ordinary possible model A’s word andB’s unsure belong to different reports; neither proves a diagnosis or a measured property. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Read both garden accounts; model attribution, guide the cloth pairing, then child dictates a separate caption preserving both reports. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Seed-tray report voices ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional garden note has growerA describing soil “crumbly” and growerB writing “not sure”; no photograph/measurement is supplied. ##### Id B-first-1 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response P: soft tap. Q: not sure what I heard. ##### Staff focus I03/I06 source attribution reasoning #### Part 2 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Identifies described difference and absent location/circumstance without diagnosing or ranking. ##### Exact prompt What difference is supplied, and what circumstance is not known? ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Tell a reader what is known and what question remains before planning a whole pretend visit. ###### Guided different context Make a new pretend museum visit card with an opening time supplied but no closing time. ###### Id N06 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child uses stated information and names an unresolved circumstance without inventing it. ###### Ordinary possible model First time is known in the story; second remains not supplied. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model known/unknown pockets with bus cards, guide museum opening/closing distinction and invite a child-authored enquiry. No live travel recommendation. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Bus-stop timetable gap ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional play-town timetable lists one toy bus at09:00 and another with no time entered. It is not a current transport service. ##### Id B-first-2 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response P described soft; Q was unsure. Their positions are not supplied, and the notes do not tell why reports differ. ##### Staff focus I05 different reports/unknown circumstances #### Part 3 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Offers a relevant sound/printed/no-sound choice with reader trial/selection genuinely unresolved. ##### Exact prompt Offer a choice for the stated turn-cue job. What reader response is still missing? ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Offer a reader choice and record only their actual preferred option if volunteered. ###### Guided different context Build a new pretend toy-exhibit with a picture label or an exact spoken/pointed label selected by a willing helper. ###### Id N07 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child offers a choice respectfully and keeps imagined versus actual feedback distinct. ###### Ordinary possible model Two choices can be offered; the notes do not prove either works for every visitor. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model an invitation rather than an ability assumption. Rehearse the exhibit choice quietly and let the child ask a reader which route they want. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Park-map reader choices ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional park map offers a large-text route card and a raised-line route drawing; no user trial occurred. ##### Id B-first-3 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response I would offer a printed turn card as well as an optional gentle cue; no reader has chosen or tried the card in these notes. ##### Staff focus H01 purpose/options no sensory diagnosis #### Part 4 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Purpose-linked further question and one planned similar circumstance; no invented measured condition or required actual trial. ##### Exact prompt With guidance, ask a useful further question and name one circumstance to keep similar if the event is compared again. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Ask a purpose-linked next question and suggest one condition to keep similar. ###### Guided different context Use a new pretend apron test: same fabric drawing with two folds on same dry mat; no wearing result supplied. ###### Id N08 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child links question to chosen change and does not turn a plan into a result. ###### Ordinary possible model The notes cannot answer a material-only floating question. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 List boat changes with source cards; guide apron change/similarity pair, then child asks a new question whose answer remains open. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Paper-boat fair plans ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional boat display compares folded paperA on a dry table with plasticB on a wet table. Two factors change; no floating test was done. ##### Id B-first-4 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response Which cue does a willing reader want? If comparing the same event, keep the observer spot similar and record it. ##### Staff focus I01/I05 guided question/similarity ### Delivery Read/display the exact whole neutral source and prompts, with one question at a time if wanted. Do not read criteria/worked/next accounts. Each own page has initial-closed same-page full neutral source disclosure and an external whole-source link; paper mat repeats this source identity and four exact prompts. ### Eligibility Staff records learning opportunity, familiarity with source, prior answer exposure, adult help/operation/scribing, mode, self-directed versus guided reasoning and whether actual practical evidence was offered. After coaching on this source, use it as teaching and arrange genuinely fresh later evidence. ### Exact four prompts #### Part 1 Keep each reporter’s supplied words beside the correct reporter. #### Part 2 What difference is supplied, and what circumstance is not known? #### Part 3 Offer a choice for the stated turn-cue job. What reader response is still missing? #### Part 4 With guidance, ask a useful further question and name one circumstance to keep similar if the event is compared again. ### First later First and later are eligible local evidence opportunities, not required timing or a numerical progress scale. Describing supplied outcomes does not demonstrate practical conducting; keep actual observations in a separate folio. ### Id B-first ### Own response values #### Part 1 #### Part 2 #### Part 3 #### Part 4 ### Role neutral held assessment source; teacher offered only after relevant learning opportunity; independent staff criterion/models separate ### Source kind original supplied fiction; any reference fact/model explicitly labelled ### Title Quiet library prop reports ## Part 3 ### Complete neutral source Original fictional print-shop prop notes. CardR: helper gently scrapes an empty cardboard box edge; supplied words “higher pitch, loud”. CardS: helper gently rubs an empty plastic cup; supplied words “lower pitch, loud”. No frequency or sound-level measurements are supplied. CardT says only “bright sound”; the writer gives no definition or comparison for bright. Job: a guide that keeps pitch words separate from loudness words. No real child listening trial is supplied. ### Components #### Part 1 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion SeparatesR higher/S lower pitch from shared loud loudness wording, as supplied descriptions rather than measurements. ##### Exact prompt Which supplied words describe pitch, and which describe loudness, forR andS? ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Describe each outline with two separate labels and explain what changed. ###### Guided different context Build two paper tower outlines with same drawn height and different widths. ###### Id N09 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child keeps two descriptive categories separate; no sound claim or physical measurement is inferred. ###### Ordinary possible model Tall is not a substitute for wide. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model tall/narrow with first source, guide same-height/different-width choice, then let child describe a new outline in their own mode. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Tower height and width ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional block tower is tall/narrow; another is short/wide. These words answer different shape questions. ##### Id C-first-1 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response R higher andS lower are pitch words; both supplied cards use loud for loudness. ##### Staff focus U02 two distinct descriptive dimensions #### Part 2 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Recognises no defined pitch/loudness comparison for bright; does not force a category/result. ##### Exact prompt What do the notes leave unknown about the word bright onT? ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Help the parcel-label reader ask what the unclear word means. You can name an unknown without guessing its category. ###### Guided different context Complete different fictional parcel-label account. One drawing is described as “long”, another “heavy”; neither is a measured reading. A third drawing’s label says “neat”, with no definition or comparison. The reader wants a clear packing guide. Invite a question about what neat means here and what description would help; keep any new measurement or packing outcome open. ###### Id N10 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the child guesses a category, reread only the full undefined label and ask where its definition is supplied. If they identify the gap, offer a different ordinary label-making job with a new ambiguity and a willing reader, keeping any reply distinct. ###### Observable next evidence Child recognises an undefined description and asks a relevant clarification without forcing it into one of the provided attribute categories or inventing a result. ###### Ordinary possible model P andQ name height/width descriptions. R’s word bold is not defined here; I would ask which feature and comparison the writer intended. I cannot choose tall or wide forR from this account. ###### Teacher preparation Use the full museum and parcel accounts, big printed words and empty question space. Keep tall/wide and long/heavy as supplied descriptive categories, not measured equivalences. Offer pointing, spoken/signed/AAC or exact scribing; no actual parcel lifting or public feedback is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete museum labels. Ask whatP andQ describe, then stop atR without supplying a definition for bold. ###### Part 2 Model an own clarification question, such as “Which feature and comparison did you mean by bold?” Explain that a missing definition is different from a recorded result or measured category. ###### Part 3 Read the complete different parcel account. Guide identifying the given long/heavy words, then let the child ask about neat in their own mode. Do not give the third parcel a size or mass. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to point to what is supplied and what their question would clarify. Record support and keep future information open. Return to a different unclear label if needed instead of revealing the held bright answer. ###### Title Museum description needing clarification ###### Whole unrelated teaching account Complete original fictional museum-label account. A paper display has labelP “tall outline” and labelQ “wide outline”. A third labelR says “bold”, with no definition, width, height or other comparison given. No new visitor response or physical measurement is supplied. The label-maker’s job is an accurate description for a reader, so they need to ask what the writer meant rather than force “bold” into tall or wide. ##### Id C-first-2 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response The notes do not define bright or give its pitch/loudness comparison; I would ask what the writer meant. ##### Staff focus I05 source gap reasoning #### Part 3 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion PairsR scrape/higher-loud andS rub/lower-loud faithfully; table/drawing/dictation equivalent accepted. ##### Exact prompt Make two matching record rows forR andS using each action and its exact description. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Create an accurate object/count table and state what the count represents. ###### Guided different context Arrange a new pretend shop with three fruit drawings and one bread drawing in labelled baskets. ###### Id N11 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child preserves pairing and explains count units as tokens/drawings, not performance quality. ###### Ordinary possible model Two belongs to red and one to blue; total counts tokens in these notes. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Read each whole sports row; guide one basket count, then child pairs/counts the other basket and checks against actual drawings. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Sports-token record rows ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional scorekeeper has red-team two tokens and blue-team one token; these counts are story records, not actual sport results. ##### Id C-first-3 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response R—scrape box edge—higher pitch, loud. S—rub cup—lower pitch, loud. Both are supplied notes. ##### Staff focus I04 faithful organiser #### Part 4 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Own question relates to useful description/source clarification for guide; new outcome stays open, no action required. ##### Exact prompt Ask a question that would help the stated guide job without inventing a new result. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Choose a label for that pretend job and ask a next question before real use. ###### Guided different context Use a new toy-book shelf sign asking for a short label; two label lengths are supplied as drawing boxes. ###### Id N12 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child justifies a limited purpose choice and states what a real user trial would need. ###### Ordinary possible model The sign gives a display job, not verified growing advice. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model job/evidence/limit; guide label-box comparison, then child proposes a shelf-specific enquiry without claiming reader success. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Plant-label purpose query ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional nursery sign says potP is for a sunny pretend display; no plant needs or local climate facts are supplied. ##### Id C-first-4 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response What comparison did the writer mean by bright so our guide can use it clearly? No new result is supplied. ##### Staff focus I01/I06 purpose-linked enquiry ### Delivery Read/display the exact whole neutral source and prompts, with one question at a time if wanted. Do not read criteria/worked/next accounts. Each own page has initial-closed same-page full neutral source disclosure and an external whole-source link; paper mat repeats this source identity and four exact prompts. ### Eligibility Staff records learning opportunity, familiarity with source, prior answer exposure, adult help/operation/scribing, mode, self-directed versus guided reasoning and whether actual practical evidence was offered. After coaching on this source, use it as teaching and arrange genuinely fresh later evidence. ### Exact four prompts #### Part 1 Which supplied words describe pitch, and which describe loudness, forR andS? #### Part 2 What do the notes leave unknown about the word bright onT? #### Part 3 Make two matching record rows forR andS using each action and its exact description. #### Part 4 Ask a question that would help the stated guide job without inventing a new result. ### First later First and later are eligible local evidence opportunities, not required timing or a numerical progress scale. Describing supplied outcomes does not demonstrate practical conducting; keep actual observations in a separate folio. ### Id C-first ### Own response values #### Part 1 #### Part 2 #### Part 3 #### Part 4 ### Role neutral held assessment source; teacher offered only after relevant learning opportunity; independent staff criterion/models separate ### Source kind original supplied fiction; any reference fact/model explicitly labelled ### Title Toy print-shop describing cards ## Part 4 ### Complete neutral source Original fictional toy-aquarium display. A paper-strip drawing has four selected positions: centre, right, centre, left. Caption: movement model, no time or sound measurement. Helper note: a slowly moved cloth strip was seen moving; no receiver effect or sound report was recorded. Referenced general fact cardF2 (NIH/NIDCD, How Do We Hear?, last updated16March2022): incoming sound waves make the eardrum vibrate. Job: explain what our model shows and what an actual receiver investigation would still need. No real eardrum or speaker experiment occurred here. ### Components #### Part 1 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Identifies selected model positions/movement representation and absent time/sound measurement; no waveform or measured vibration-frequency claim. ##### Exact prompt What does the four-position model show, and what does it not measure? ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Tell a reader what the storyboard shows and what it cannot measure. ###### Guided different context Make a new four-frame paper pet-toy movement loop; choose each position deliberately. ###### Id N13 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child describes represented movement without inventing time/distance data. ###### Ordinary possible model Frames show selected positions; they do not give delivery speed. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Read courier caption before moving cards; guide two pet frames, then child finishes and explains the model limit. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Courier-envelope movement model ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional drawing sequence places an envelope at desk, door, cart and desk; no clock readings or delivery distances exist. ##### Id D-first-1 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response It shows selected strip positions; it does not measure time, pitch, loudness or real sound. ##### Staff focus I04 model/literal evidence limits #### Part 2 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion General incoming-sound/eardrum account is reference knowledge; helper supplied source movement without receiver observation remains distinct. ##### Exact prompt Separate the referenced general receiver fact from the helper’s supplied strip note. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Separate general idea from an unobserved particular event. ###### Guided different context Provide a new pretend light card stating “lamps can light a room” alongside an empty room observation space. No mains equipment is handled. ###### Id N14 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child distinguishes a general statement from a specific result and keeps missing local observation open. ###### Ordinary possible model A general reference does not prove it rained here today. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Use reference/actual columns; model the weather gap, guide lamp-note classification, then invite a child-authored check question for a toy room drawing. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Weather-reference boundary ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional poster carries the supplied sentence that rain falls from clouds, but has no report for today at this school. Its fact wording is an ordinary teaching illustration, not a local forecast. ##### Id D-first-2 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response F2 is a general fact about incoming sound and eardrum vibration. The helper note only records seeing a strip move, not a receiver effect. ##### Staff focus U02 receiver concept partial knowledge/reference vs actual #### Part 3 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Message suits explanation purpose and uses an exact source/model/reference clue with status named; no pretended physical conducting. ##### Exact prompt For the stated explanation job, give one useful source-qualified message. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Give a source-bounded recommendation and tell reader a limit. ###### Guided different context Use a new pretend game counter box with room for three drawn tokens and a second box with no capacity note. ###### Id N15 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child ties choice to source clue and avoids “best everywhere”. ###### Ordinary possible model BagA has the purpose-relevant supplied clue, but durability remains untested. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Read all stall notes; model one recommendation. Guide matching three-token job to exact drawing, then child adds an unresolved practical question. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Reusable-bag advice ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional stall wants a bag to hold two paper tickets. Supplied drawing shows bagA contains two, bagB untested; no real strength comparison exists. ##### Id D-first-3 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response Our display can say these are model positions and not an observed receiver result. The source caption says no sound measurement. ##### Staff focus I06 source-qualified explanation #### Part 4 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Relevant further receiver question with actual result unresolved; guidance allowed, no unstated test action requirement. ##### Exact prompt With guidance, ask a further receiver question whose real result is still open. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Pose an unanswered question appropriate to the new plan rather than filling its result in advance. ###### Guided different context On paper plan moving two drawing tokens into a basket; do it only if wanted and count actual placements. ###### Id N16 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child maintains prediction/result distinction while asking a useful next enquiry. ###### Ordinary possible model The prediction does not establish a result. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model open question from pot source; guide token prediction before action, then child records actual or unperformed status and a next question. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Garden-water plan unknown ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional watering plan predicts one cup will fill a toy pot, but no pour record exists. No plant-care amount is verified. ##### Id D-first-4 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response What safe evidence could show an actual receiver object responding to sound? That result is not supplied here. ##### Staff focus I01/I05 guided further question ### Delivery Read/display the exact whole neutral source and prompts, with one question at a time if wanted. Do not read criteria/worked/next accounts. Each own page has initial-closed same-page full neutral source disclosure and an external whole-source link; paper mat repeats this source identity and four exact prompts. ### Eligibility Staff records learning opportunity, familiarity with source, prior answer exposure, adult help/operation/scribing, mode, self-directed versus guided reasoning and whether actual practical evidence was offered. After coaching on this source, use it as teaching and arrange genuinely fresh later evidence. ### Exact four prompts #### Part 1 What does the four-position model show, and what does it not measure? #### Part 2 Separate the referenced general receiver fact from the helper’s supplied strip note. #### Part 3 For the stated explanation job, give one useful source-qualified message. #### Part 4 With guidance, ask a further receiver question whose real result is still open. ### First later First and later are eligible local evidence opportunities, not required timing or a numerical progress scale. Describing supplied outcomes does not demonstrate practical conducting; keep actual observations in a separate folio. ### Id D-first ### Own response values #### Part 1 #### Part 2 #### Part 3 #### Part 4 ### Role neutral held assessment source; teacher offered only after relevant learning opportunity; independent staff criterion/models separate ### Source kind original supplied fiction; any reference fact/model explicitly labelled ### Title Toy aquarium movement cards ## Part 5 ### Complete neutral source Original fictional pop-up bakery scene. Job: a longer cue before the pretend tray changes. Same empty bowl/helper/observer spot are stated for both trials. Trial1 gentle tap once, report “short low tap”. Trial2 gentle rub once, report “longer scratchy sound”. Force was not measured. Before trials the helper predicted reports would be the same. No cue was tried with the bakery scene readers. ### Components #### Part 1 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Tap/rub plus one exact supplied description difference; no measured energy/level demanded. ##### Exact prompt Name both actions and one supplied report difference. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Make an action catalogue that preserves which note belongs to which action. ###### Guided different context Child directs a new safe paper crease and paper slide, or works with supplied exact notes, keeping modes named. ###### Id N17 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child compares variety with exact action-result provenance rather than assuming sound behaviour. ###### Ordinary possible model Different actions have different supplied notes; object/action/result must stay paired. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model first workshop row, guide one new row with a helper, then child assembles the other and checks full source/actual event. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Workshop action catalogue ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional craft workshop has paper fold—two corners meet; card slide—stops by edge. These are supplied material/motion descriptions. ##### Id A-later-1 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response Tap and rub; short low tap versus longer scratchy sound were reported. ##### Staff focus U02 action variety #### Part 2 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Recognises reports differ from same-report prediction; limits conclusion to supplied trials. ##### Exact prompt Compare the supplied results with the before-trial prediction. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Make a three-lane kit record: requested, predicted before, reported afterwards. Explain one comparison without turning a request into evidence. ###### Guided different context Complete different fictional craft-kit account. A maker asks for three drawn buttons. Before a packet is filled, the helper predicts three buttons because an earlier packet card showed three. The later fill record shows two buttons. No later record exists for a second packet. Ask the child to compare the explicit before expectation and after record while keeping the request separate. Use paper pictures only. ###### Id N18 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If wishes and predictions blur, return to the time-labelled expectation and separate request in this new account, then ask one outcome question. If comparison is clear, choose a fresh ordinary event with another prediction/record pair; no annual or independent transfer judgement follows automatically. ###### Observable next evidence Child compares an explicit prospective prediction with the supplied after record, states the difference within that story, and keeps desire/request distinct from both prediction and observation. ###### Ordinary possible model The helper predicted two before packing, using earlier two-roll records. The after record shows one, so this supplied result differs from that expectation. The request for two is a wish, not itself a prediction or proof of packing. The second tray remains unknown. ###### Teacher preparation Prepare the complete bakery/kit accounts and three large time/purpose lanes, not food or loose buttons. Keep staff model separate until initial response. Offer drawings, signing, AAC or helper read-back; label supplied fiction and actual support. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the bakery request, explicit timed expectation and after entry. Ask when each was stated and which one gives the reported outcome. ###### Part 2 Model the two-predicted versus one-reported comparison, then show why the customer’s wish is not the prediction’s evidence or an observed result. ###### Part 3 Read the whole different kit account. Guide one lane heading, then allow the child to place or direct three statements, compare three predicted with two reported and leave the second packet unknown. ###### Part 4 Ask for the child’s reason and missing result; record exact words, source and support. Offer a new unrelated prediction comparison later if needed, not coached repetition of the held same-report sound task. ###### Title Bakery expectation versus packing record ###### Whole unrelated teaching account Complete original fictional bakery account. A customer requests two drawn rolls. Before packing at11:00, the helper predicts the tray will contain two rolls because the last two pictured orders each had two. After packing at11:05, the supplied record shows only one roll on this tray. A second tray has no packing record. The customer’s request, helper’s prediction and after record are different statements; no real food order or customer event occurred. ##### Id A-later-2 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response The supplied reports differ, unlike the helper’s prediction that they would be the same. This describes those notes only. ##### Staff focus I05 prediction/results reasoning #### Part 3 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Purpose-linked rub or other source-faithful choice uses longer clue and preserves real scene/reader trial unknown. ##### Exact prompt For the longer-cue job, what could you choose using a clue, and what remains untried? ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Choose what could help the costume reader find the return table. Give one supplied clue and keep the real reader trial open. ###### Guided different context Complete different fictional rehearsal notice. The job is to help a costume-display reader find the return table. SignA has a labelled arrow toward the table on a plan; supplied helper note says it points to that drawn table. SignB has a swirl and no location note. No real display reader has used either sign. Invite a choice for that job, its exact clue and an untried-reader statement. ###### Id N19 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the response is only decorative preference, return to the complete named job and ask which supplied clue relates to it. If the job/clue/limit chain is clear, offer another ordinary reader product with a different purpose; avoid rehearsing the held longer-cue answer. ###### Observable next evidence Child links a choice to a named useful reader job and a relevant supplied clue, and identifies actual reader use as untried rather than guaranteed. ###### Ordinary possible model I could offerP for finding the next stop because the supplied note links its arrow to locating the drawn stop. Our actual game reader has not tried it; a different source-faithful option or an open choice is legitimate with its own relevant clue and limit. ###### Teacher preparation Read/print the complete map and rehearsal accounts with two large option cards for each. The arrow is a plan drawing, not a visited place or universal access guarantee. Offer seated card placement, voice/sign/AAC or exact scribing; sharing with a real reader is optional and separately consented. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the entire treasure job, both alternatives and the supplied note. Ask what the reader needs before discussing your own preferred choice. ###### Part 2 Model a purpose-linkedP choice with its exact locating clue and the untried reader boundary. Explain that a decorative preference can be expressed but does not establish the locating job. ###### Part 3 Read the different rehearsal account. Guide naming its return-table purpose, then let the child choose a sign or a faithful open choice, cite a relevant source clue and leave actual use unresolved. ###### Part 4 Ask what a willing real reader could later help check, without pretending they already used it. Record the child’s choice/reason/limit and any help; choose a fresh job if the source link still needs teaching. ###### Title Treasure-path choice for a reader job ###### Whole unrelated teaching account Complete original fictional treasure-map account. The job is to help a reader find the next stop on a paper trail. OptionP is a large arrow drawing; supplied note says a helper located the drawn next stop using that arrow on the plan. OptionQ is a decorative star with no pointing direction and no locating report. No actual treasure-game reader has tried either option. The clue is about the supplied arrow/plan event, not proof of success for a new reader. ##### Id A-later-3 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response I could try rub for longer because its supplied note says longer. Bakery scene readers have not tried it. ##### Staff focus H01/I06 bounded purpose choice #### Part 4 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Relevant planned similarity and new question with guidance; no performance/force certainty requirement. ##### Exact prompt With guidance, suggest one similarity for a new action comparison and a further question. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Name one planned change, one similarity and a useful further question. ###### Guided different context Design a new pretend museum-label comparison changing font size while keeping text/position same; no real user result yet. ###### Id N20 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child recognises multi-change limits and asks a purpose-linked next question. ###### Ordinary possible model The plan cannot isolate colour preference. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 List cover changes, model a question-matched revision, then guide child to design the label plan and leave actual feedback blank. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Book-cover trial fairness ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional reader trial compares red cover at large size with blue cover at tiny size. Colour and size both change; preferences are not supplied. ##### Id A-later-4 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response Keep bowl/helper/observer spot similar and ask whether a new gentle rub report will still be longer. Force remains unmeasured. ##### Staff focus I02/I05 guided future comparison ### Delivery Read/display the exact whole neutral source and prompts, with one question at a time if wanted. Do not read criteria/worked/next accounts. Each own page has initial-closed same-page full neutral source disclosure and an external whole-source link; paper mat repeats this source identity and four exact prompts. ### Eligibility Staff records learning opportunity, familiarity with source, prior answer exposure, adult help/operation/scribing, mode, self-directed versus guided reasoning and whether actual practical evidence was offered. After coaching on this source, use it as teaching and arrange genuinely fresh later evidence. ### Exact four prompts #### Part 1 Name both actions and one supplied report difference. #### Part 2 Compare the supplied results with the before-trial prediction. #### Part 3 For the longer-cue job, what could you choose using a clue, and what remains untried? #### Part 4 With guidance, suggest one similarity for a new action comparison and a further question. ### First later First and later are eligible local evidence opportunities, not required timing or a numerical progress scale. Describing supplied outcomes does not demonstrate practical conducting; keep actual observations in a separate folio. ### Id A-later ### Own response values #### Part 1 #### Part 2 #### Part 3 #### Part 4 ### Role neutral held assessment source; teacher offered only after relevant learning opportunity; independent staff criterion/models separate ### Source kind original supplied fiction; any reference fact/model explicitly labelled ### Title Pop-up bakery prop comparison ## Part 6 ### Complete neutral source Original fictional garden-theatre start cue. Same gentle empty-tub rub event is described. ReporterM at a marked near spot writes “soft scratch”. ReporterN at another spot writes “unclear to me”. Exact distances are not measured. Job: offer a start cue without making readers compete to hear. A picture-start card is planned; no reader selection/use feedback is supplied. No reason for the difference or hearing-condition information is supplied. ### Components #### Part 1 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion KeepsM soft scratch/N unclear to me attributed separately. ##### Exact prompt Preserve each reporter and their exact supplied description. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Write two separate reports without inventing a reason for the difference. ###### Guided different context New pretend bookmark reports readerX “clear word”, readerY “not sure”; no reading test supplied. ###### Id N21 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child preserves exact report ownership and avoids ability judgements. ###### Ordinary possible model Keep both attributed descriptions and known limits. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model attribution with badge cards; guide one bookmark report pairing, then child dictates the second and a question about circumstances. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Craft-feedback attribution ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional badge note has makerP say “easy to hold” and makerQ say “not sure”; conditions are absent. ##### Id B-later-1 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response M: soft scratch. N: unclear to me. ##### Staff focus I03/I06 attributed reports #### Part 2 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Reports different descriptions with unmeasured distance or unknown reason identified; no diagnosis/ranking. ##### Exact prompt Name a supplied difference and one circumstance still unknown. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Sort known and unknown circumstances and ask for one useful missing detail. ###### Guided different context Use a new pretend gallery record giving shelf position but not viewing height. ###### Id N22 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child names an actual supplied circumstance and an unresolved one accurately. ###### Ordinary possible model Gate is supplied; lighting and sign distance remain unknown. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Read full map record, guide gallery position/height lanes and invite a new question, not an assumed cause of a reader report. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Playground-map circumstances ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional map report says visitor stood at gate, but no lighting or distance-to-sign information exists. ##### Id B-later-2 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response Reports differ; exact distances are not measured and whyN found it unclear is unknown. ##### Staff focus I05 bounded difference #### Part 3 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Relevant cue options preserve absent actual reader selection/use; no guaranteed accessibility claim. ##### Exact prompt Offer a job-relevant choice and state what user response remains open. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Offer a job-relevant choice without claiming every reader can use it. ###### Guided different context Create a new pretend pottery queue card offering picture turn or written word turn, with a helper’s voluntary selection. ###### Id N23 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child gives an inclusive bounded choice and respects refusal. ###### Ordinary possible model A silent arrow fits the stated quiet purpose; effectiveness is untested. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model purpose/choice/gap from chess; rehearse pottery invitation, then child lets helper choose or pass and records only actual feedback. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Quiet chess-turn choice ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional chess club wants turns shown silently; paper arrow cue is planned, no player trial occurred. ##### Id B-later-3 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response I would offer a picture-start card and an optional gentle cue; no reader’s selection/use is recorded. ##### Staff focus H01 purpose/reader choice #### Part 4 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Purpose-linked question plus planned similar circumstance; guidance allowed and result open. ##### Exact prompt With guidance, ask a further question and name one circumstance to keep similar in a new comparison. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Ask what to investigate next and say one condition to keep similar. ###### Guided different context Plan a new desk-organiser comparison changing one divider drawing while keeping same ticket drawings and tray. ###### Id N24 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child asks a useful guided comparison question rather than repeating an unsupported conclusion. ###### Ordinary possible model Two changes limit a padding-only conclusion. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Show full packing record; guide organiser question/change relation, then child proposes a next enquiry with result left open. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Packing-test question ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional packing record changed both box and padding when checking two paper tickets; no drop test is permitted. ##### Id B-later-4 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response Which start cue would a willing reader choose? For a new event comparison keep the observer spot similar and note it. ##### Staff focus I01/I05 future question/similarity ### Delivery Read/display the exact whole neutral source and prompts, with one question at a time if wanted. Do not read criteria/worked/next accounts. Each own page has initial-closed same-page full neutral source disclosure and an external whole-source link; paper mat repeats this source identity and four exact prompts. ### Eligibility Staff records learning opportunity, familiarity with source, prior answer exposure, adult help/operation/scribing, mode, self-directed versus guided reasoning and whether actual practical evidence was offered. After coaching on this source, use it as teaching and arrange genuinely fresh later evidence. ### Exact four prompts #### Part 1 Preserve each reporter and their exact supplied description. #### Part 2 Name a supplied difference and one circumstance still unknown. #### Part 3 Offer a job-relevant choice and state what user response remains open. #### Part 4 With guidance, ask a further question and name one circumstance to keep similar in a new comparison. ### First later First and later are eligible local evidence opportunities, not required timing or a numerical progress scale. Describing supplied outcomes does not demonstrate practical conducting; keep actual observations in a separate folio. ### Id B-later ### Own response values #### Part 1 #### Part 2 #### Part 3 #### Part 4 ### Role neutral held assessment source; teacher offered only after relevant learning opportunity; independent staff criterion/models separate ### Source kind original supplied fiction; any reference fact/model explicitly labelled ### Title Garden theatre reader notes ## Part 7 ### Complete neutral source Original fictional costume-stall prop guide. Job: record pitch and loudness descriptions without guessing missing words. Uncovered empty lid/tap report by helper: “lower pitch, soft”. Cloth-covered same lid/tap report: “not sure about pitch, soft”. Same observer spot is stated; force and cover fit are not measured. Before trying, helper predicted covered would seem softer. No sound-level reading or real child trial is supplied. ### Components #### Part 1 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Uncovered lower pitch/soft and covered unsure pitch/soft kept in distinct categories; unsure not rewritten as higher/lower. ##### Exact prompt Separate supplied pitch and loudness words for each row, retaining uncertainty. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Describe two distinct attributes without using one as the other. ###### Guided different context Make a new pretend flag pair same height/different colour. ###### Id N25 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child keeps separate descriptive dimensions and identifies unspecified comparisons. ###### Ordinary possible model Same colour can go with different drawn heights. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model height/colour organiser; guide one flag classification, then child describes a third flag in two categories. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Garden tall versus green ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional plant drawing is tall/green; another short/green. Tall/short and colour are separate descriptive categories, not measured plant growth. ##### Id C-later-1 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response Uncovered pitch lower, loudness soft; covered pitch not sure, loudness soft, in supplied reports. ##### Staff focus U02 separate descriptions and unknown #### Part 2 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Both reported soft does not show the predicted softer comparison occurred; no quantitative reduction claim. ##### Exact prompt Compare the supplied loudness reports with the prediction, keeping measurement limits. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Help the sign reader compare “clear/clear” with the before “clearer” idea. Keep the difference between a broad word and a measured change. ###### Guided different context Complete different fictional shelf-sign account. Before a reader story trial, the helper predicts the large-print version will be clearer than the small-print version. The after notes describe small print “clear” and large print “clear”. No reading-time, error-count or numerical clarity measure is supplied; no real reader trial occurred. Ask the child what the pair does and does not show about the predicted increase, then suggest a relevant further question. ###### Id N26 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If repeated descriptors are treated as a precise measured result, show the empty measurement headings in this new account and ask what evidence is actually present. If the limit is clear, offer a fresh ordinary caption with a different qualitative pair and purpose, not a rehearsed held answer. ###### Observable next evidence Child compares a prospective change prediction with two broad supplied after descriptions, keeps their condition pairing, and does not infer the predicted reduction/increase or measured equality from a repeated qualitative word. ###### Ordinary possible model The before idea predicted steadier. Both after reports say steady, so those broad words do not show the predicted increase or a measured equality. We need clearer comparison evidence before saying the brace improved this job. ###### Teacher preparation Use both complete accounts with separate before and two after cards. Keep bigger/smaller pictured print as design labels, not an access verdict. No loading a bridge, timing a child’s reading or public performance is required. Offer paper, sign, voice/AAC or exact helper scribing. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the full bridge before prediction and both after reports. Ask what comparison was predicted, then preserve each report beside its condition. ###### Part 2 Model why steady/steady does not demonstrate steadier and does not establish measured equality. Keep the proposed evidence question open instead of declaring the brace useless. ###### Part 3 Read the full different sign account. Guide finding its before clearer idea, then pause while the child compares both broad clear reports and explains one measurement or description limit. ###### Part 4 Invite one question for a future accurate-sign record. Record actual source-qualified reasoning/support; choose another paired-description job if needed and leave the held soft/soft sound source untouched. ###### Title Paired descriptions do not measure a change ###### Whole unrelated teaching account Complete original fictional paper-bridge account. Before a gentle classroom-display story trial, the helper predicts adding a folded brace will make the bridge steadier than its unbraced version. The supplied after reports say unbraced “steady” and braced “steady”. No wobble scale, force, duration or numerical stability measurement is recorded. The broad repeated word does not show that the predicted increase occurred, and it does not prove equal measured stability. The purpose is an accurate bridge-display caption, not a strength recommendation. ##### Id C-later-2 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response Both loudness descriptions are soft, so these words do not show the predicted softer comparison. No measured level exists. ##### Staff focus I05 prediction/result limitation #### Part 3 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Faithful two condition/action/report rows; same spot stated and unmeasured factors can remain source notes, not demanded if absent prompt. ##### Exact prompt Make matching uncovered/covered rows with action and exact report. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Make a faithfully labelled table and explain unknown versus observed zero. ###### Guided different context Arrange a new pretend stationery shop with pencil pictures and an uncounted eraser-picture envelope. ###### Id N27 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child preserves rows and unknown count state. ###### Ordinary possible model The table has one count and one missing count, with different produce labels. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Read complete market rows; model one pairing. Guide pencil count, then child labels unopened envelope without guessing. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Market-table record integrity ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional market tally has apples three and lemons no tally supplied; unknown lemons must not become zero. ##### Id C-later-3 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response Uncovered lid/tap—lower pitch, soft. Cloth-covered lid/tap—not sure about pitch, soft. ##### Staff focus I04 exact data pairing #### Part 4 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Purpose-relevant question about descriptions/conditions/recording with future result open; no actual action or success required. ##### Exact prompt Ask a useful further question for the stated accurate-guide job, with next result open. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Ask a next question that helps the stated reader job. ###### Guided different context Choose a new pretend restaurant turn card with one arrow versus an untested blank card. ###### Id N28 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child question is tied to purpose and acknowledges the missing reader trial. ###### Ordinary possible model One-turn note is purpose-relevant but audience usefulness remains open. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model source-bounded choice and a stage-reader question; guide restaurant purpose, then child authors a different enquiry with no preset outcome. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Stage-prop next enquiry ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional stage needs a short paper flag cue. Supplied note says flagA has one turn and flagB untested; no real audience response supplied. ##### Id C-later-4 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response What comparison words would the helper use for loudness in a new similar gentle trial? Result remains open. ##### Staff focus I01/I06 purposeful new question ### Delivery Read/display the exact whole neutral source and prompts, with one question at a time if wanted. Do not read criteria/worked/next accounts. Each own page has initial-closed same-page full neutral source disclosure and an external whole-source link; paper mat repeats this source identity and four exact prompts. ### Eligibility Staff records learning opportunity, familiarity with source, prior answer exposure, adult help/operation/scribing, mode, self-directed versus guided reasoning and whether actual practical evidence was offered. After coaching on this source, use it as teaching and arrange genuinely fresh later evidence. ### Exact four prompts #### Part 1 Separate supplied pitch and loudness words for each row, retaining uncertainty. #### Part 2 Compare the supplied loudness reports with the prediction, keeping measurement limits. #### Part 3 Make matching uncovered/covered rows with action and exact report. #### Part 4 Ask a useful further question for the stated accurate-guide job, with next result open. ### First later First and later are eligible local evidence opportunities, not required timing or a numerical progress scale. Describing supplied outcomes does not demonstrate practical conducting; keep actual observations in a separate folio. ### Id C-later ### Own response values #### Part 1 #### Part 2 #### Part 3 #### Part 4 ### Role neutral held assessment source; teacher offered only after relevant learning opportunity; independent staff criterion/models separate ### Source kind original supplied fiction; any reference fact/model explicitly labelled ### Title Costume stall covered-prop notes ## Part 8 ### Complete neutral source Original fictional mini-museum sound guide. A silent paper-strip model offers slow/quick drawing cycles and narrow/wide drawn span. The fresh model starts at centre (cycle index0). A child chooses quick/narrow and deliberately steps once; quick advances two positions in the stated cycle to index2, so the strip is drawn left of centre. No real frequency, force, sound, pitch or loudness was measured. Separate helper note says an empty plastic prop was gently tapped; report “short tap”; no receiving object was observed. ReferencedF2 fact card is the same general incoming-sound/eardrum-vibration account, not this event. Job: guide a reader using model and report without mixing evidence kinds. No museum user feedback is supplied. ### Components #### Part 1 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Names one correctly supplied setting (quick or narrow) OR state (left of centre after the explicit fresh quick step), plus one legitimate absent actual sound/measurement limit; no demand for all three, no model-speed equals measured pitch claim. ##### Exact prompt Describe one chosen model setting/state and one thing the model does not establish. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Identify model information and an actual event it does not establish. ###### Guided different context Create an unrelated paper kite four-position storyboard without flying outdoors. ###### Id N29 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child distinguishes depicted positions from measured motion or real flight. ###### Ordinary possible model Positions model change; they do not measure how fast a real clock runs. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Read clock caption, guide first kite frame, then child completes/labels storyboard and an untested flight question. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Clock-drawing model limits ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional clock drawing shows four hand positions, no actual times or movement durations. ##### Id D-later-1 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response One possible richer response: The fresh model started at centre and one deliberate quick turn advanced two cycle positions to left of centre; quick/narrow are the chosen drawing settings. It does not establish actual pitch or loudness. One correctly named supplied setting OR state and one legitimate limit is sufficient for this prompt. ##### Staff focus I04 model/observation distinction #### Part 2 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion General receiver reference, supplied short tap and absent actual receiver observation kept distinct. ##### Exact prompt Separate the general receiver reference from the supplied prop report and missing receiver observation. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Separate general idea from the particular unobserved event. ###### Guided different context Give a new pretend storage fact card that containers can hold objects, alongside an empty actual packing space. ###### Id N30 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child identifies evidence level and leaves a specific outcome open. ###### Ordinary possible model General possibility is not a local collection result. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model general/local lanes with recycling cards; guide storage note classification, then child poses an event-check question instead of inventing packed contents. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title General recycling versus local event ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional information card says paper can be reused for drawing; there is no record of a particular school collecting it. ##### Id D-later-2 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response F2 is general receiver knowledge. The supplied prop report is short tap; no receiver was observed in that event. ##### Staff focus U02 receiver concept status #### Part 3 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Purpose-linked message uses model caption or report clue with correct status; no invented reader success. ##### Exact prompt Give a source-qualified message for the stated guide job using a relevant clue. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Recommend a choice for the stated job using an exact clue and a limit. ###### Guided different context Use a new pretend puzzle-envelope drawing with one square-card fit and another unknown. ###### Id N31 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child connects choice to the actual supplied evidence and bounded use. ###### Ordinary possible model P has a supplied purpose clue, not proof of real fit/strength. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Read complete costume notes; model bounded recommendation. Guide puzzle purpose, then child adds a new physical-fit question without pretending a trial. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Costume-pocket purpose choice ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional costume needs room for a drawn ticket; pocketP drawing fits one ticket, pocketQ dimensions are not supplied. ##### Id D-later-3 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response Our guide can say the short tap is a supplied report and the moving strip is a silent model, so a reader does not mistake it for measured sound. ##### Staff focus I06 source-qualified reader message #### Part 4 ##### Accept other responses Accept a different source-faithful response in text/drawing/speech/sign/AAC/exact scribing. No required wording, hearing performance or neatness score. Apply only the exact prompt/criterion; no unstated physical action or result required. ##### Exact component criterion Relevant open receiver/reader enquiry with guidance, no extra required action or outcome. ##### Exact prompt With guidance, ask a further question with the actual receiver or reader result left open. ##### Full individual next learning ###### Child invitation Ask for feedback and record only actual response, leaving untried questions open. ###### Guided different context Make an unrelated pretend game rule card; a willing helper may locate the start instruction or pass. ###### Id N32 ###### Mode opportunity This is supported teaching after review. Actual performing, reasoning about supplied stories and model construction are recorded separately. New-context transfer is a small observed step, not annual mastery or a new official grade. ###### Next decision If the named distinction is still unclear, return to two source-labelled cards in this unrelated context and one prompt at a time. If clear, offer a different job/source after further learning; do not retry this held case with the staff model rehearsed. ###### Observable next evidence Child separates offer, actual feedback and unknown success without auto-awarding completion. ###### Ordinary possible model An invitation is not evidence someone used or understood the sign. ###### Teacher preparation Full account/model and a separate blank child page; cards or paper drawings as named in the guided context. Offer pointing/AAC/exact scribing and quiet helper operation. No source collection or public publication is required. ###### Teacher sequence ###### Part 1 Read the complete new account and ask which event/reference is actually supplied before showing its ordinary model. ###### Part 2 Model invitation/feedback distinction with festival note; rehearse game offer, then child lets helper act and records their real words or no response. ###### Part 3 Guide the different new context above using an open question. After child chooses, pause so they can author/select/draw their own evidence distinction; the model answer stays a teaching example, never inserted into their own work. ###### Part 4 Invite the child to explain one exact clue and one limit in the new task. Keep actual events, supplied stories and unperformed plans labelled. Use the observable check below to choose whether to revisit this meaning or offer a genuinely fresh task later. ###### Title Festival-invitation open response ###### Whole unrelated teaching account A fictional festival booth offers a sign-reading invitation but has no visitor responses. No real event attendance is stated. ##### Id D-later-4 ##### Initial own value ##### One possible staff response What safe receiver evidence or actual reader feedback would help the guide next? Neither result is supplied. ##### Staff focus I01/I05 guided open question ### Delivery Read/display the exact whole neutral source and prompts, with one question at a time if wanted. Do not read criteria/worked/next accounts. Each own page has initial-closed same-page full neutral source disclosure and an external whole-source link; paper mat repeats this source identity and four exact prompts. ### Eligibility Staff records learning opportunity, familiarity with source, prior answer exposure, adult help/operation/scribing, mode, self-directed versus guided reasoning and whether actual practical evidence was offered. After coaching on this source, use it as teaching and arrange genuinely fresh later evidence. ### Exact four prompts #### Part 1 Describe one chosen model setting/state and one thing the model does not establish. #### Part 2 Separate the general receiver reference from the supplied prop report and missing receiver observation. #### Part 3 Give a source-qualified message for the stated guide job using a relevant clue. #### Part 4 With guidance, ask a further question with the actual receiver or reader result left open. ### First later First and later are eligible local evidence opportunities, not required timing or a numerical progress scale. Describing supplied outcomes does not demonstrate practical conducting; keep actual observations in a separate folio. ### Id D-later ### Own response values #### Part 1 #### Part 2 #### Part 3 #### Part 4 ### Role neutral held assessment source; teacher offered only after relevant learning opportunity; independent staff criterion/models separate ### Source kind original supplied fiction; any reference fact/model explicitly labelled ### Title Mini-museum model explanation