This is feedback for next teaching, not a whole-term or whole-year HPE judgment. Credit an accurate answer through a language the adult actually understands, sign, AAC, pointing, adult scribe or a private route. Record reading/access support separately from any content cue. Never infer a child moved or consented from a paper answer. A real concern follows school policy immediately.
Day 45 · Case L
Question 1. Four dots are labelled PATH and two STAY, but they count six illustrator-made paper dots. The first puppet's claim is unsupported because the illustrator explicitly says no child chose a route or played. Do not score a child on numeral reading alone; pointing to four versus two with the correct source distinction is sufficient for this HPE reasoning.
Question 2. Many invitations work. For example: “Would you like a suitable small action, a checked stay-in-place choice, a rest, or to pass?” Credit a real choice, accessible stop/rest and respectful acceptance of “not now.” A paper puppet's answer is rehearsal, not a real person's permission. Do not require a child to name or defend an access need.
Question 3. A locally responsible adult would need an approved setting, genuine child choice and a dated observation of the child's exact action and support. Fair-play evidence also needs the actual agreed rule and what the child did in a real activity. Outdoor participation needs an actual approved outdoor/natural setting and observed child action. The fictional board supplies none: PHYSICAL ACTIVITY NOT OBSERVED and OUTDOOR PHYSICAL ACTIVITY NOT OBSERVED from this case.
Next teaching: If paper tokens are read as real children, place PAPER beside the board and show an empty ACTUAL record. If consent is treated as permanent, rehearse a fresh ask and respectful no in a different fictional setting.
Day 50 · Case M
Question 1. FIRST has one turn box and FINISH. SECOND has two wide turn boxes, REST and FINISH. The maker says they added a second choice and rest because the first paper drawing lacked a rest place. FINISH remains the goal. Credit clear pointing to changed and unchanged marks.
Question 2. The puppet's real-play praise is unsupported: the source explicitly says NO REAL GAME WAS TRIED and records no response. A child might propose a STOP box, an ask-before-shared-space rule or another suitable action option; credit a fair reason and keep the goal. Do not require the key's example.
Question 3. Before an optional actual try, the adult checks local space/equipment/weather if relevant, consent, access, rest, stop cue and supervision. Record date, setting, exact child action, support, agreed rule and what was truly observed; report outdoor only if it occurred outdoors. The card alone shows paper revision, not child physical participation, fair-play conduct, a successful improvement or progress across the term. Without a real event: PHYSICAL ACTIVITY NOT OBSERVED.
Next teaching: If the child invents audience praise, compare maker intention with actual evidence. If a new rule is proposed but no reason is given, revisit Source E's source → change → unknown effect chain. Continue the school's broader HPE evidence collection rather than promoting this one check to a term rating.