SubjectNest resource library

Foundation / Design And Technologies / Term 2 / Weeks 13 14

Development draft · local review needed

Author desk run-through · teacher, learner, supporter and…Foundation Design Tech · T2 W13–14 · Run Through

Download editable text

Run date: 30 September 2026. I used the actual scripts, linear text and rendered PDFs at a desk to simulate these roles. No real child, classroom, physical paper trial, family artefact, plant observation, viewer or accessibility-user trial occurred. The simulated answers are not learner evidence.

Perspective and task What I ran Finding / action
Prep teacher, Day 61 Opened the two fictional drawing cards, read CARD ONE and TWO with their square/dot difference, then walked through the six timed segments. The source clearly says invented; the designer's purpose is paper positioning, not explaining the marks. The real familiar-source component remains a school gate.
Prep teacher, Day 67 Ran the approved-material branch and the no-material branch in the script. Checked that the record gives separate fields for maker, edge contact and viewer. Seven minutes may be tight for all children in a whole-class physical build. Prepare materials and use a rotating small group or later approved observation; the 25-minute no-material route stands on its own. Do not claim all children made a guide.
Learner, no-print/no-touch, Day 62 Used only the linear descriptions of the straight lower line and L-shaped corner, chose one for a stated broad-sheet user, and named what a real trial would need. Same Design target was reachable by speech without sight, cutting, touching or colour. This desk simulation does not establish accessibility-user success.
Learner, Check A first response Read the child prompt before the public key, gave two reference-mark shapes and an observation question. The held page supplies only new fictional source names and blank idea spaces. No guide answer or physical result is seeded. The public key means formative rather than secure assessment.
Learner, Check B first response Gave two guide ideas for fictional notebook pages, selected NOT TRIED without a physical action, and said a plant-change claim would need real dated, comparable views. The check separates tabletop paper positioning from Science. Even if two physical pages touched a guide, the source's invented marks could not establish growth.
Time-poor supporter Tried all ten home prompts as short speech to a puppet. No printer, purchase, plant, outdoor time, private family story or tool trial is required. Home prompts are optional, not assessment.
Potential funder Followed exact rows and source SHA, QCAA listing, rights/limits, both checks and the file receipt. Provenance and reusable original content are inspectable. Direct automated QCAA PDF retrieval returned 403 and is disclosed; no endorsement, classroom effect, physical success or full-year claim is made.

Print QA: All eight original SVG/PDF pairs were generated and rendered locally. pdfinfo confirms one A4 page each; pdftotext extracts selectable words; I inspected an eight-page contact sheet for clipping, contrast, clear source labels, blank first-response areas and footer. PDFs are untagged, so full source text and broad tactile/no-print options are supplied. The read-only verifier checks exact official source rows/SHA, 10 lesson timings, 30 access routes, 20 worked swaps, held checks, source/diagram order, local links and SHA receipt.

Local work still needed: material and table safety approval, genuine familiar source if assessing that knowledge component, child-preferred access, any real card handler/contact result, willing viewer feedback, and authentic dated plant records only through the separate Science lesson and school procedures. No family data or living plant handling is required here.