# Author desk run-through · Foundation Science Weeks 1–2

**29 September 2026; author simulation and file inspection only.** No child, practising teacher, access specialist, family or funder has piloted the pack. [The verifier](verify_pack.py) checks exact official rows, timing, route/extra counts, held separation, A4/PDF text, local links and hashes. Actual local observations and safety decisions cannot be supplied by an authoring test.

| Lens in desk run | Action and result | Correction / remaining work |
|---|---|---|
| New Prep teacher, Day 1 | Followed README → preflight gate → safe-notice poster → one real-object/date blank log. The teacher can run 25 minutes with a broad local paper/card/fabric object, or accurately mark a model-only day if unavailable. | Site safety, verified material and individual access must be checked for the actual room. No result is prefilled. |
| New Prep teacher, Day 3 | Read the prediction/check mat before trying a gentle edge-lift. Predicted and actual result have separate fields and NOT TESTED is a legitimate outcome. | Object size/method changes can affect comparison; the teacher notes those conditions rather than claiming a material rule. |
| Child using nonvisual/no-touch/AAC route simulation | Read exact linear rectangle/oval/line model, directed adult placement of broad line cards, used `?` for untested feature and verbally attributed adult-described real information. | An adult report is not recoded as child's own direct sensory observation. Real AAC vocabulary, tactile size, hearing/vision access and fatigue need child/support-team review. |
| Week 2 picture/science boundary | Compared invented diagram C with blank real-observation fields. The model allows a precise mark description, but no material, actual hole or bend claim; generic room signs remain English/design unless tied to actual dated observations. | The Week 2 Science task needs a new actual source/date if a material claim is wanted. |
| Fresh-check view | Day 5's approved new envelope and Day 10's zigzag/two-bar model are absent from prior learner/practice sources. The keys accept variable actual-object features and give fixed answers only for the fictional drawings. | Human teacher must choose safe objects and check local familiarity; without them, mark paper-only evidence. |
| Time-poor family | A five-minute approved broad household-object question could be reported, but classroom routes are complete without it. | Home involvement is optional; no purchase, photo, upload, personal story or forced touch. |
| Potential funder/reviewer | Followed pinned workbook hash, QCAA Science links, seven exact rows, original rights boundary and empty evidence templates. Six PDFs visually inspected as A4 with embedded selectable text. | No adoption, outcome gain, full state mapping, accessibility certification, translation, local data or school approval is claimed. |

**Specific critique:** A safe-looking printed object might tempt a teacher to write “paper feels smooth”; the diagrams are conspicuously labelled MODEL and every real claim needs source/date/method. A symbol can be mistaken for an official safety sign; D says the straight/curve/? key is temporary and locally explained. A first-year child can give a strong question without a test result; the record preserves NOT TESTED and a sensible next lesson. Day 8 requires at least two comparable actual results before calling anything a small local pattern.

**Still required:** local practising teachers review material selection, safety, pacing, inquiry judgment and actual school Science/Prep requirements; children and support teams test the modes. Any First Nations language/cultural work requires relevant language-owner/community authority and specific reviewed sources. Original SubjectNest QA narrative © 2026 NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd, [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).