Teacher-targeted and publicly accessible by URL. Keep this page out of the learner handout until first responses are recorded. These are fresh cases relative to lessons, not secure exams. If prior access matters, author a parallel fictional case. Pointing, speech/sign/AAC, drawing and child-directed adult placement can show equivalent HASS reasoning; record exact prompts and assistance. No real child/classroom outcome was observed by the author. Never score refusal to share private family/event material as lack of understanding.
Day 75 · Paper Theatre Day
- Order: Source 1 puts the paper stage built in the first year, the first puppet story later that day, and the new paper tickets in the next year. Accept whole-picture placement rather than spoken date vocabulary. The ticket drawing marks an earlier event; it is not the first puppet story again.
- Purpose: Source 1 says some families drew the next-year tickets to remember the first puppet story. A child may say “to remember the first story” with a source point. Do not invent an annual rule for all families.
- Speaker/attendance: Source 2 is Ada's own note. Ada says the later day mattered to Ada because Aunt Lou let Ada choose the ticket picture. Ada explicitly says I was not at the first puppet story. The note does not explain why; avoid guessing.
- Question/conclusion: Accept “Did Lou see the first story?”, “Which other families drew tickets?” or “Why did the theatre open?” as source gaps. A sound conclusion gives an exact first/later fact and a missing person's participation or reason. A fictional family in a check is not evidence of the learner's real family events.
Next move: If same-day and next-year blur, use three broad whole-scene spaces with FIRST / LATER TODAY / NEXT YEAR. If a child treats Ada's later note as eyewitness evidence of first day, ask which words say she was there; they say the opposite.
Day 80 · Message Wall Day
- Order/purpose: Source 1 draws the wall opening in the first year and new notes in the next year to remember the opening. It does not show a real place or attendance by everyone.
- Attribution: Source 2 says Sol came with Dad and put up a paper note in the next year; Sol liked the blue border. Source 3 says Lee helped open the wall in the first year and did not come back the next year. Neither note speaks for an unnamed visitor.
- Careful message: A is supported: Sol and Lee report different participation times. B contradicts Lee's note and invents universal attendance. If the child chooses B, ask which exact source says both came in both years or all families did; none.
- Question/conclusion: Accept “Who else came?”, “Why did Lee not return?”, “What did other families think?” or a question about an approved real source. A bounded conclusion keeps first opening, later remembering, individual voice and unknown attendance separate. No real family practice or wall outcome can be inferred.
Next move: Sort whole note panels under SOURCE / PERSON / TIME / WHAT THEY SAY / STILL UNKNOWN. For stretch, ask whether Sol's liking for the blue border says why Lee valued the wall; it does not. K02 remains held for a suitable voluntary authentic family-shared event source.
Private teacher recording line
Record day, exact first child response/point, named source, access route and adult support, one evidenced strength, one unresolved distinction and next move under school privacy rules. Do not upload completed child or family records to this public pack.