# Week 34 · Test the claim, then say what happened

**Foundation / Queensland Prep · five optional 35-minute integrated blocks, Days 166–170.** Use alongside [English Days 166–170](../english/term-4/weeks-33-34/LESSONS.md) and [mathematics Days 166–170](../mathematics/term-4/weeks-33-34/LESSONS.md). The English source is **one invented paper-roof report**, not a test done here. The mathematics direct-comparison tasks need *actual*, adult-preflighted strips, school-approved plastic cups and a working adult-operated pan balance. Keep those evidence streams distinct. Run Day 170 after both fresh subject checks; the integrated block is follow-on practice, not a second assessment.

**Prepare safely:** The adult cuts broad strips and seals broad paper parcels ahead of time; children do not handle blades, tiny parts, open water or an unstable balance. Inspect and preflight each physical pair **before** relying on a predicted comparison. Offer a dry paper/text route to prepare vocabulary or direct an adult, but defer any *direct capacity or mass* evidence if the real equipment is unavailable. No material needs to be bought, and nobody needs to take a design home. A toy shelter is a low-stakes model, not a safety-rated shelter.

| Day | Thirty-five-minute sequence | Keep this evidence; use it for the next move |
| ---: | --- | --- |
| **166 · The report and the strip** | **5 min** adult reads English source C aloud, naming its same gap and same broad disk, changed strip and *reported* result; **7 min** child orders SAME / CHANGE / REPORTED RESULT cards and labels the report fictional; **8 min** child directs a fair direct comparison of two *new*, teacher-prepared roof-edge strips, nominally 70 and 100 mm, with one end aligned; **10 min** child selects a strip for an imaginary toy model and explains the *length* decision using aligned ends, separately from any prediction about strength; **5 min** name one thing the English report cannot establish about these new strips. | Save aligned-end decision, source-bound retell and explicit “strength not tested” limit. If strips were not actually aligned, the child has only a prediction, not a direct length observation. Adult nominal dimensions are preparation notes, not the child's measurement score. |
| **167 · One change at a time** | **5 min** compare English explanation D's bounded “this reported trial” with its unsupported “always”; **7 min** child says what a *new* toy-shelter test would hold the same and change; **8 min** compare a separate pair of broad physical strips that the adult prepared at the same nominal 85 mm length, first staggered and then with ends aligned, asking whether position had made one *look* longer; **10 min** child draws or directs a safe paper shelter revision and writes “I predict…” before any optional approved adult test; **5 min** record a real result only if the test was actually performed under known conditions, otherwise leave RESULT blank. | Keep the prediction, aligned-strip reason and blank or factual actual-result line. A sketch is a design idea; it cannot prove strength or a material's performance. Do not infer that the English fictional outcome repeats with local paper. |
| **168 · Which cup holds more?** | **5 min** adult recalls that source C says nothing about cup capacity; **7 min** child names the attribute *capacity* and predicts which of two large school-approved cups may hold more, with prediction visibly labelled; **8 min** adult operates a preflighted full-cup transfer over a tray while the child directs and observes or receives a neutral, accessible description; **10 min** child makes a tiny shelter-rain-catch note with “We saw…” and the exact observed spare space or overflow; **5 min** compare initial prediction with result and name what would invalidate it (spill, partial fill, wrong cup). | Keep the actual transfer observation and a reason tied to it, not external cup appearance. If no safe transfer occurs, keep vocabulary/prediction only and defer the direct-comparison claim. The English fictional roof report remains a separate source. |
| **169 · Which parcel has more mass?** | **5 min** adult shows two same-size broad sealed paper parcels; **7 min** child states a prediction as a prediction and identifies *mass* as today's attribute; **8 min** adult puts verified parcels on a stable pan balance at the child's direction, then swaps pans and observes whether the same parcel descends; **10 min** child dictates a bounded toy-delivery note: what the actual balance showed, what visual parcel size did not prove and one still-open question about shelter strength; **5 min** choose a useful next move if the device stuck or the observation changed after swapping. | Record which parcel went down on both placements and the child's source-bound explanation. A failed preflight or inconsistent result means repair/repeat later, never silently score the expected relation. No child lifting is required. |
| **170 · Explain only what was checked** | **5 min** after the two teacher-held fresh checks, show an unrelated broad-paper toy shelter sketch; **7 min** child labels three statements: “The roof will hold” as *prediction*, “these two physical strips end together when aligned” as *observed* only if the adult actually makes that comparison, and “Which design would stay dry?” as *question*; **8 min** child makes the safe direct comparison of two adult-prepared equal nominal 90 mm strips and explains the aligned ends; **10 min** child makes a small before/after model design note with one chosen revision and a blank actual-test box unless a separate safe adult test occurred; **5 min** name the next classroom test or information needed before recommending a design. | Save the child's revised idea, actual length observation and honest blank/result field. This uses different objects from both held-out Day 170 cases. It is extra practice, not a second fresh check or evidence of a completed technologies design cycle. |

**Curriculum and limits:** The [English crosswalk](../english/term-4/weeks-33-34/CURRICULUM-CROSSWALK.md) covers bounded explanations, source detail and a meaningful next question. The [mathematics crosswalk](../mathematics/term-4/weeks-33-34/CURRICULUM-CROSSWALK.md) pins AC9MFM01 (official workbook row 17187): identify and *directly compare* length, capacity and mass with reasoning. Duration is not sampled. A paper plan or fictional report does not satisfy direct comparison. A child-designed shelter may offer a Technologies opportunity only where a real locally approved make/test/revise process occurs and is recorded; this guide alone does not claim one. Source: [official ACARA v9 workbook](https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/downloads), retrieved 29 September 2026, SHA-256 `db446882d2c00cf7c085a03e250e2442fda6c44011fc114680c46c1dc7a822c3`; [QCAA Queensland v9 entry point](https://www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/p-10/aciq/version-9). Check the school's adopted syllabus and safety plan.

**Access:** A child can make every reasoning decision by voice, sign, AAC, pointing or directing an adult. Describe visual outcomes neutrally. Record adult help and first/revised wording separately. The physical comparison still needs a real accessible observation; a text-only rehearsal is useful preparation but is not the same evidence. Original SubjectNest scenarios and prompts © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): credit SubjectNest, link the licence and indicate changes. ACARA wording retains its terms. Human educator, child, accessibility and local review remain pending.