These are complete ordinary examples, open for teaching. All numbers, small observations, characters and local situations below are invented unless a context explicitly points to one of the four real FACT cards. A constructed observation is not a real class investigation. Each model states the question, working, conclusion, limit and next job. Calculators, read-aloud and directed marks are welcome.
C01 · A question for a borrowed display
Job: A fictional library wants to understand why two bean displays look different. It has starting and final heights but no water record. Can “Which display is best?” be answered?
Worked model: “Best” needs a criterion. A checkable question is “Which group’s recorded mean height increased more over nine days?” using O2’s start/end/unit. It can be answered: A +18 mm, B +6 mm. The source cannot answer whether light caused the difference because actual water/light/temperature/moisture were not recorded. Own try: choose one missing record and say what question it would help answer. No actual library display is described.
C02 · Height at the finish is not growth
Job: An invented bean stem starts at 18 mm and reaches 30 mm after six days. Another starts at 26 mm and reaches 34 mm. Which grew more by the height measure?
Worked model: first 30 − 18 = 12 mm; second 34 − 26 = 8 mm, both over six days. The second is taller at the finish, but the first’s increase is 4 mm greater. A final-height ranking and an increase ranking answer different questions. We have no condition controls, alive counts or health measure. Own try: write two accurate sentences, one for final size and one for growth. Do not assign a cause.
C03 · The courtyard trend
Job: Summarise O2 without claiming every brighter place is better.
Worked model: A’s mean increases 6 mm every recorded three-day interval; B’s increases 2 mm every recorded three-day interval. A’s listed sequence rises from 20 to 38 mm; B’s from 20 to 26 mm. Both have 4/4 alive at Day 9. A careful sentence is “In this constructed nine-day record of four bean seedlings per group, A’s recorded mean height increased more.” The line between points is a representation, not observations of every moment. Own try: add a relevant missing condition and a new question.
C04 · A count needs its starting sample
Job: A fictional tray has five alive at Day 7 from eight initially labelled seedlings. A draft says “five out of five survived”.
Worked model: the original sample is eight. 5 of 8 are alive at Day 7; 8 − 5 = 3 are not recorded alive at that check. Five is not the denominator just because those five remain. This is not lifetime survival or a cause. Own try: represent eight marks, identify the five alive and label time. No organism needs to be owned or tested.
C05 · A graph with an honest scale
Job: Plot invented heights 12, 15, 18 mm at Days 0, 2, 4.
Worked model: horizontal axis is days after start with equal spacing 0/2/4; vertical axis is height in mm, for example 0/5/10/15/20 with equal spacing. Plot (0,12), (2,15), (4,18). Height increase is 6 mm over four days. A 12 mm truncated vertical baseline may magnify appearance; if used, it must be explicit. A zero-based scale is clearer for this small opening. Missing Day 3 is not an observed 16.5 mm. Own try: annotate “supplied record” and one unknown between checks.
C06 · One mean, one defined sample
Job: Check O2’s Day 9 A mean.
Worked model: (38 + 36 + 40 + 38) ÷ 4 = 152 ÷ 4 = 38 mm. The mean summarises the four individual heights; it does not mean each is 38 mm. O2’s B mean (26 + 28 + 24 + 26) ÷ 4 = 104 ÷ 4 = 26 mm. Both have four labelled observations, so these supplied means are comparable by that rule. Own try: write a sentence that preserves variation and a limit. Mean arithmetic is a support, not a separate claim of statistical mastery.
C07 · Repair a two-change test
Job: A fictional team gives shaded seedlings 80 mL daily in big pots and brighter seedlings 20 mL in small pots, then wants to decide about light.
Worked model: position/light, water and pot size differ, as may temperature/moisture. Revise the paper plan to use the same species/stage/container/mix/water schedule/check times, change assigned light condition, and record height and alive counts over a defined period. Record relevant environmental influences; shade may also change temperature, so review how light is isolated. This is a fairer proposal, not a confirmed controlled trial. Own try: make a blank record with changed/measured/kept/not observed headings.
C08 · A sensible precision
Job: Two paper stem models are measured as 28 mm and 32 mm; a rough note calls both “3 cm”.
Worked model: 3 cm = 30 mm. Rounding to whole centimetres can hide the 32 − 28 = 4 mm difference. A ruler marked in mm and a shared zero/reference/eye-level rule help address this question. More decimal places alone do not improve accuracy. The supplied pair is not the learner’s actual measurement. Own try: measure a safe own paper line if a ruler is available; record actual readings or label supplied values without equipment.
C09 · A reference-point problem
Job: One invented stem is 28 mm from soil line to tip but 43 mm from pot base to tip. Which number should a recorder use?
Worked model: neither number describes growth over time. The two rules differ by 43 − 28 = 15 mm; the difference is a reference point, not a fifteen-millimetre growth event. For plant height choose and consistently state soil line to tip; for container-plus-stem total choose pot base to tip and name that different quantity. Own try: rewrite the two column headings so the reader can distinguish them.
C10 · A permission request is not permission
Job: A fictional group writes “we will collect park seedlings tomorrow” but has no adult/site review.
Worked model: stop at the paper proposal. Use supplied O2 instead; no field collection is needed. A real enquiry requires school/site permission, safe access, plant identity, local cultural/intercultural process where relevant and guidance about what may be done. A written request does not show consent was obtained or that an investigation happened. Own try: draft a non-invasive question for an educator to review, with result cells “not observed”. No invented landowner voice or local Country knowledge.
C11 · Building on an earlier contribution
Job: Explain H01 reasoning from FACT1 rather than just naming a team.
Worked model: earlier monitoring gives a basis for a later environmental question; measurement and smart-sensing contributions address different evidence needs. The learner links a named contribution in the full card to why another was needed. The historical prototype article does not verify present installation or success. Own try: choose a contribution pair and explain the gap if one were absent; cite FACT1’s date/place. Do not attribute invented motives to real scientists.
C12 · A revised professional design
Job: Explain why the historical FACT3 design was reconsidered.
Worked model: performance in one environment did not settle performance in another. The complete card gives distinct development and water-management expertise; their contributions enabled a revision/test proposal. An anticipated final harvest is not a reported outcome. Own try: make a labelled “earlier evidence / difficulty / revised test / unknown result” strip. This is historical source analysis, not a performed space experiment.
C13 · A reef headline needs place and time
Job: A fictional notice copies a general heat-stress idea into “all reefs near us are bleached today”.
Worked model: FACT2 supports a bounded historical example and an uneven response, not today’s local observation. Replace the statement with a question for a named reef/date and a dated monitoring source/method. Do not treat an accumulated heat measure as a single temperature reading or import unopened numerical thresholds. Own try: identify the missing place, period and biological observation. No swimming, sample collection or coral care advice is offered.
C14 · A reviewed lighting enquiry
Job: Use FACT4 to advise a fictional coastal school committee without claiming it has caused turtle harm.
Worked model: request adult review of the current local guidance, where light reaches the nesting environment, period and safe/legal permissions. The source knowledge supports an enquiry/possible response, not a measured local effect or unauthorised electrical action. Own try: write “We should ask… because…; we do not yet know…”. The school/site/lighting details are invented; the actual reference remains Mon Repos/Bundaberg.
C15 · Two legitimate criteria
Job: Choose between O4 trays for a fictional keeper.
Worked model: growth priority favours Q’s recorded 36 − 20 = 16 mm over P’s 31 − 20 = 11 mm; alive-at-Day-8 priority favours P’s 6/6 over Q’s 4/6. Neither ranking proves a water treatment is best or safe for all plants. Both mean definitions must remain attached. Own try: choose a criterion, justify it for an invented reader and name a missing condition before a real decision.
C16 · Neither option meets a full requirement
Job: A fictional brief requires mean increase at least 10 mm and all four initially labelled plants alive at Day 6. A: +12 mm, 3/4 alive. B: +8 mm, 4/4 alive.
Worked model: A passes increase but fails alive count; B passes alive count but fails increase. Neither meets both. Adding A’s height to B’s survival invents a third option. Recommend more evidence or a reviewed retest, not silently drop a requirement. Own try: show a two-criterion table and an exact unknown. These ordinary values are not fresh-check inputs.
C17 · A missing height is not zero
Job: An invented group’s final height entries are 18, 22, blank, 20 mm for four initially labelled seedlings. May it report a four-seedling mean of 15 mm?
Worked model: 18 + 22 + 20 = 60 mm, but treating blank as zero without evidence invents a measurement. A mean of the three recorded heights is 60 ÷ 3 = 20 mm, labelled as three of four with one missing. A complete four-seedling mean is unknown. Do not compare the three-record summary as if it has the same original sample rule as O4. Own try: choose recover missing record / show incomplete sample / defer, with a reason.
C18 · Different durations deserve a warning
Job: Two invented samples each increase 12 mm, one over four days and one over eight. Can “same change” mean “same speed”?
Worked model: total recorded increase is equal. A simple interval-average is 12 ÷ 4 = 3 mm per day versus 12 ÷ 8 = 1.5 mm per day; this is a constructed period average, not proof of steady daily growth. Actual individual days are unrecorded. Different biological contexts may also matter. Own try: label the period on each total and write one next question. Rate arithmetic is optional support, not a required Year 6 Science outcome.
C19 · Compare methods before pooling records
Job: Fictional groups check paper stems at 9 am and 3 pm and use different height reference points. They want to combine their results.
Worked model: make a method table before pooling: source/group, reference point, unit, check time, sample and deviations. Standardise or keep sets separately labelled; a precise-looking mean of incompatible quantities is misleading. A pooled number cannot repair the older measurements. Own try: ask a specific clarification and propose the next consistent check. A peer comparison is actual interaction only if observed, not inferred from this example.
C20 · A useful final guide
Job: Rewrite “brighter is always best; move the plants tomorrow” for the fictional courtyard team.
Worked model: “O2 records greater mean height increase for A over nine days: 18 mm versus 6 mm. Both groups had four of four alive at Day 9. Actual light, temperature and moisture were not recorded, so we cannot isolate light or predict later survival. Ask for a reviewed comparison with consistent measurement and recorded conditions before choosing a real change.” The choice may be defer/retest, not a product recommendation. Own try: make your own reader-specific next-step guide and document one meaningful revision.