# Author desk walkthrough and print QA · 30 September 2026

This is an **author desk simulation**, static verifier run and visual print inspection. No teacher, child, family, actual listener, school, motion device, material maker, portfolio sample or accessibility user was trialled. A hypothetical response in a worked example is not a classroom result. Local user and educator review is still needed.

## Teacher seat: could I run this fortnight?

1. On [Day 91](LESSONS.md#week-19--day-91--who-helps-a-listener-check-a-claim), I can read the [fictional four-try source](print/fictional-trial-record.pdf) without any ramp. Q Try 1 clearly says INTERRUPTED · NO STOP MARK. I ask who needs a source/status guide, not which surface “wins.” This does not consume the separate integrated Science fair test or its actual observations.
2. On Day 94, the [safe service steps](print/safe-service-steps.pdf) name the adult's material/source/access check before any making. If local approval is absent, I still run a spoken/drawn design plan and write physical making/reader use NOT TRIED. I never ask a child to operate motion equipment in this Design slot.
3. On Day 96, I approve and prepare only large clean blunt paper, if suitable. A willing child may mark broad ASK/CHECK/TELL cues under my supervision, or direct me; I record who actually marked/placed each cue. The A4 aid is a prompt sheet, not proof that physical cards exist.
4. On Day 97, I can invite one willing new listener to find which *fictional* attempt has no stop mark. I record the exact selection, words and prompts. If the reader declines, response is NOT TRIED. I do not write “worked for all readers” or an actual motion conclusion.
5. On Day 99, the [authentic sample slot](print/authentic-sample-slot.pdf) stays blank without a consented real source, date, child choice, redaction and appropriate audience. A fictional source is enough for Design rehearsal but not a midyear portfolio claim.

**Teacher critique:** This service adds most value when the cue causes a user to inspect a source/status before repeating a result. The static pages cannot prove that. The record therefore separates designed order, actual material handler, exact reader action and a later change. The fictional P/Q marks are deliberately not a neat general rule: one try is interrupted and the completed marks do not warrant a universal material claim.

## Learner seat: can I participate without making, hearing or reading small print?

- On Day 92, I can hear or see both service ideas, choose for a named pretend listener and explain a possible help/difficulty. I am not labelled a permanent “visual” or “auditory” learner.
- On Day 95, I receive a fresh pretend completed/unfinished reader record, two large blank idea spaces and no model cue. I may point, sign, use AAC, tell, draw or direct exact scribing. I can say NO CARD SELECTED for the interrupted try without a penalty for missing information.
- On Day 96, if I do not want to touch materials, I can direct an adult or describe where broad cues would go. My design decision is recorded, and the adult's physical making is not credited as my handling.
- On Day 100, I can describe the shapes printed on a fictional Sample B and ask about its unknown date. I am not asked to disclose my own work or claim real improvement from an invented pair.

**Access still to validate:** The PDFs contain selectable words but are **untagged**. The [full linear/tactile alternatives](print/TEXT-ALTERNATIVES.md) support a screen-reader/no-print route; actual AAC, sign, tactile and low-vision fit must be checked with local users. The A4 type and large fields looked clear in a rendered contact sheet, but that inspection cannot establish individual readability or cognitive access.

## Parent or supporter seat: can I help without supplies?

All ten [home bridges](LEARNER-CARDS.md) are conversation, pretend questioning or optional drawing. None requests a ramp, device, child record, real school assessment, photograph, printing, account, purchase or home test. A supporter may ask “Was that try finished?” and accept “we do not know” as an honest answer. Home pretend play never becomes evidence of real Science or child progress.

## Potential funder or reviewer seat: which claims are supported?

The [curriculum crosswalk](CURRICULUM-CROSSWALK.md) pins the two exact ACARA v9 Foundation Design descriptions to official workbook rows 19725 and 19733 and names the Queensland Prep entry point. The [rights ledger](SOURCE-AND-RIGHTS.md) distinguishes official quotations from newly authored CC BY 4.0 material and discloses the direct QCAA alignment-PDF 403 retrieval limit. The [independent verifier](verify_pack.py) checks source SHA/import wording, ten scripts with minute sums/codes, thirty same-goal routes, twenty swaps, held-check isolation, SVG/PDF geometry/phrases/alternatives, links and final SHA receipt. These are proofs of **authored pack integrity**, not evidence of adoption, learning effects, full curriculum coverage or endorsement. Physical making and reader usefulness remain conditional on actual local trials.

## Print and reproducibility QA

- Rendered and visually inspected all eight one-page A4 PDFs in a contact sheet, including both held checks. Text did not visibly collide or clip; large response fields remained empty. The fictional Q TRY 1 row explicitly says INTERRUPTED · NO STOP MARK. The assessment source panels contain no designed service answer or actual class result.
- Confirmed selectable PDF text, A4 geometry, SVG titles/descriptions and the exact labelled alternatives through the verifier. PDFs are untagged, so the linear route is supplied separately.
- Reran the generator after a two-second separation: SHA-256 for all **16 SVG/PDF files** was identical. The generator normalises Cairo time metadata using `pypdf`; regeneration needs `rsvg-convert` and compatible `pypdf` (5.1.0 used here).
- Ran lint, wrote the [SHA manifest](manifest.json) only after files were final, then reran the verifier read-only. No material stress test, live object motion, real user feedback, classroom outcome or personal portfolio review was performed.

**Release boundary:** A local educator checks adopted syllabus, school safety, source/privacy consent, access, language and any actual test/portfolio use. Generic materials do not provide local Country/Place teaching, a source of real student outcomes, or an approved classroom investigation.