Educator desk run, not classroom evidence. I placed five large A tokens, checked that “three book, two table” is a statement about these five, and asked why each person chose; A could not answer. I read Ada/Bo notes without attaching their names to anonymous tokens. D's first count clause is checkable against A, but “everyone wants quiet” and table closure are unsupported. Days 127–129 keep an affected person's use and missing permission/source visible. Fresh checks use different token patterns and cases, with worked guidance kept in teacher/. A teacher still needs actual HASS allocation and authentic K01–K04 teaching.
Learner desk simulation, not a child result. I tried printed, oral and raised-token routes. For Day 123, I could say “Ada says why Ada likes the nook; A does not name Ada.” For Check A, I could reject “nobody needs the mat” because one token selects it and Iri gives a reason, yet I still could not attach Iri to the anonymous token. For Check B, I could sort four/two as count, everyone as unsupported, closure as proposed. Real child comprehension, access and engagement remain untested.
Family/carer desk pass. Ten bridges use only pack fiction and are optional, needing no device, money, home survey, translation, answer return or adult availability. Skipping cannot block a lesson. Home-language and First Nations language versions require competent language/cultural review; none is supplied.
Potential funder desk pass. The authored draft visibly includes ten timed scripts, 30 access routes, 20 worked domain swaps, 10 bridges, eight original A4 pairs, two independent public checks with separate key, exact ACARA/QCAA pins, rights ledger and SHA-256 receipt. That supports a draft completeness/reproducibility claim. It does not show children learned, teacher time saved, a real space was made fair/accessibly designed, a community approved a change or a whole year was covered. Those require actual use, local permissions and evaluated evidence.
Self-critique and next revision: The visual tokens are intentionally simple; a child may still identify a named visitor with an anonymous token. The teacher should keep those cards physically separate, as the scripts require. A small majority cannot settle significance or fairness, and the pack does not claim to teach formal Civics content beyond Foundation HASS source inquiry. Local educators should test language and tactile routes before accessibility claims. This is a verified draft, not a 10/10 classroom outcome.