A plan with no maker account · Separate staff criteria
Full supplied source
A new fictional drawing shows two broad picture places and a loose broad cue next to one of them. Its heading says PLAN. No maker words, ready/use labels, purpose, actual making/play event or real child's familiarity are supplied. The drawing is a people-designed proposal, not a real game known to this child.
Selection and support
matching D-first after targeted source-purpose/familiarity teaching and exposure review, often beyond the fortnight.
Save an offered first idea before showing a worked example or a key. Record faithful access help separately from content/design help. Select only components actually taught and review exposure; the public forms are neither secure nor calibrated. Actual child making requires the child's own observed suitable action; adult manufacture is the adult's contribution. Actual familiar exploration is separate from interpreting a new fictional source. Never use response speed, handwriting, touch, compliance, sociability or length as design quality. These are original formative criteria, not official QCAA AP/MC/WW/EX/BA grading.
1. What people-made parts does the plan show? What is not told about why they were chosen?
Look for: two broad picture places and loose cue; maker's reason unknown.
Teach next with an unrelated example: unrelated Pia's drawing shows three broad unlabelled cue places but gives no reason. Describe form; retain purpose as question rather than promote a guess to source fact.
2. Does the story give an actual play event? Does it tell us whether a real child knows this game?
Look for: neither is supplied; not the same as explicit no event ever.
Teach next with an unrelated example: unrelated Omi's game sketch has no actor/event/child account. Teach missing evidence versus an explicit unperformed plan, keeping genuine familiarity separate.
3. What would you keep or change for your own purpose? Why?
Look for: a named own feature/reason with proposal/function boundary.
Teach next with an unrelated example: unrelated Ed prefers separate own cue places to fit a private story choice; they have not tested them. Invite a real reason without supplying a held layout answer.
4. What question could a helper check, or what could you notice in a suitable game or setup you already know?
Look for: relevant neutral question or proposed actual familiar exploration, with unknowns honest; no actual familiarity awarded unless offered.
Teach next with an unrelated example: unrelated adult Yun reviews an appropriate primary page for one stated feature, retaining source/date and unknown real use. A primary fact does not make the child's encounter familiar; ask which actual source/experience was available, or leave it open.
Modified from Prep alignment, Prep standard elaborations and Prep techniques and conditions, © State of Queensland (QCAA) 2023, CC BY 4.0 with item exceptions. Guidance summaries are adapted; proposed SubjectNest stories, choices, tasks, criteria and teaching moves are original. No endorsement.