Staff after capture · D-first
Whole neutral source
Two source roles. Real dated note: F1 · The official Rockhampton Museum of Art exhibition-page indexed extract describes a changing exhibition programme. Checked through the primary-site index on 12 October 2026; the search result was marked crawled six days earlier. Direct current-page requests failed. No publication/update date for the general statement was supplied. Primary page. This dated provider note can start a question about displays; it supplies no learner visit, maker explanation, model performance, artwork copying grant, current venue status or cultural permission.
Original fiction: Sam says, “I know our classroom shelf label. Today I noticed its front face and bent base.” The fictional label’s maker supplies no reason. This is not this learner’s visit, familiarity, observation, maker account or tested display.
Select after
Actual primary-note/fiction/source-claim distinction, genuine familiar-example exploration and noticing-versus-intention teaching (Day192/199 or equivalent). Own familiar doorway optional; unexposed held source. No required personal disclosure.
Empty own page · Source · Selection and access
D-first-D1
Exact prompt: What can the real museum note tell us, and what belongs only to the fictional label account?
Own heading: My component 1: What can the real museum note tell us, and what belongs only to the fictional label account?
Criterion: Museum note supports a dated provider statement about its changing programme; Sam’s familiarity/noticing belongs to supplied fiction. Neither proves this learner’s visit or the label maker’s intention.
Possible response: The provider programme statement is a real dated note; Sam’s label account is fiction. No classroom design success or actual learner experience follows.
Different next-teaching account: Teri reads a different fictional library programme note and an invented arranger story. The note concerns the provider; the story’s visitor is invented and has no real attendance receipt.
Teach next: Label Teri’s two source roles and one claim each supports. Use a new local adult-reviewed note if available, with unknown dates/experience left open.
Look for next: Next evidence is source-role/claim separation in a new ordinary example, not reciting the museum page.
D-first-D2
Exact prompt: If you want, explore a feature of an approved display you genuinely know. Otherwise use a new practice picture and say that it is new.
Own heading: My component 2: If you want, explore a feature of an approved display you genuinely know. Otherwise use a new practice picture and say that it is new.
Criterion: For genuine K01 opportunity record actual known example and actual exploration. A new picture, declined response or Sam’s fiction leaves the child’s actual familiar evidence open; no fabricated response required.
Possible response: There is no fixed correct object or obligatory familiarity answer. A genuinely known classroom label plus an own feature/question may supply actual exploration; a new drawing remains practice.
Different next-teaching account: Ula knows an approved classroom choice face and points to its marked edge, asking why it is placed there. Varo chooses a new original practice picture instead; that route supplies no prior familiarity.
Teach next: Offer a genuinely known appropriate example without household disclosure; let the learner notice and ask. If unavailable, teach with a new picture and record the distinct scope.
Look for next: Next evidence is actual familiar exploration where genuinely offered, or a clearly labelled new-source practice; do not score decline as design failure.
D-first-D3
Exact prompt: Keep one maker/design question about a noticed display feature. What maker reason is actually supplied here?
Own heading: My component 3: Keep one maker/design question about a noticed display feature. What maker reason is actually supplied here?
Criterion: An own question relates to a feature, with the fictional label maker’s reason unknown. Asking is not an actual reply or permission to claim intent.
Possible response: “Why did the maker bend the base?” is a possible question, not a supplied answer. The museum programme note does not answer the classroom maker’s reason.
Different next-teaching account: Wira sees a bend on an original fictional card without a maker note. Wira asks whether the bend was intended to change the viewing position; nobody answers.
Teach next: Separate Wira’s question from a maker reply. Invite a feature-based question for another own/approved display and keep any actual reply exactly attributed.
Look for next: Next evidence is an own relevant question and honest unanswered/answered status.
D-first-D4
Exact prompt: Propose an own display purpose and a feature inspired by a noticed relationship. What would still need checking?
Own heading: My component 4: Propose an own display purpose and a feature inspired by a noticed relationship. What would still need checking?
Criterion: Own purpose-feature communication with a specific unknown effect, without copying external artworks or claiming provider endorsement/universal access.
Possible response: A child might propose a face for an invented picture at a chosen location and ask whether it can be seen there. No museum layout, artwork or actual visit is required.
Different next-teaching account: Xeno proposes an unrelated invented animal-mark face aimed towards a chosen seat. Xeno keeps visibility as a question, not a measured result.
Teach next: Link Xeno’s own purpose and planned feature, then offer a new own picture job; keep inspiration, manufacture and check outcomes separate.
Look for next: Next evidence is an own purposeful feature and relevant next question, plus actual making/familiarity only when independently observed.
Modified from Prep alignment, Prep standard elaborations and Prep techniques and conditions, © State of Queensland (QCAA) 2023, CC BY 4.0, subject to item exceptions. Guidance is adapted; SubjectNest stories, prompts, criteria and teaching moves are original. No endorsement.