# Learner studio · fictional mosaic display inquiry

All [Sources A–F](SOURCE-PACKET.md) and numbers are invented. Nobody visited or used this display. An internal paper-border check does **not** show that a design is accessible, safe, legible for everyone or ready to install. You can work through a large/reflowable text, high-contrast print, raised/tactile card set, AAC, sign, exact-word scribe or offline browser. Keep the same source, number, denominator and uncertainty demands. See [print and full text alternatives](print/TEXT-ALTERNATIVES.md).

## Week 3

### Day 11 · Name the actual question
From A, state what one record counts and the two variables. Replace “clear for everyone” with a paper-check question someone could answer. Write two criteria for an honest report. Choose annotation, tactile unit/variable cards, or an exactly transcribed spoken/signed explanation. At home invent a precise check for an imaginary pattern; no test is needed.

### Day 12 · Read what the maker did
Mark D in two columns: **recorded** and **not recorded**. Plan six steps for a second maker to repeat a paper check; specify a border rule, print setting, paper, labels, two independent reviewers and disagreement record. Choose ordered procedure cards, an annotated method mat, or a spoken/written protocol. Mark future results `not observed`. At home describe the missing method detail most likely to change a judgement.

### Day 13 · Rebuild the whole register
Use Source B to fill a [blank two-way register](print/full-register.pdf). Check its row totals, column totals and 48-paper grand total in two directions. Choose counters in a raised matrix, a large-print table, or a spoken/digital cell-by-cell audit. Keep Solid in the register. At home make a wholly fictional two-by-two table.

### Day 14 · Say “of which”
Compare 23/36 for selected Hatch/Ring with 25/48 for all paper mock-ups. Explain which 12 were omitted from C's largest claim and why the same team's promotional card is not independent proof. Rewrite C's first line with its full scope and a method limit. Choose denominator frames, high-contrast markup, or a source-claim-limit transcript. At home make a fictional subgroup headline that names its group.

### Day 15 · New public practice case
Your teacher introduces [Check A](STUDENT-CHECKS.md). Save your first answer before discussion. Use your usual access tools; mark who/what was counted, the whole register and the method limit. At home explain why a correct subgroup calculation can still mislead.

## Week 4

### Day 16 · Move the denominator, keep the data
Use the [offline filter](interactive/index.html) **or** the [paper denominator mat](print/denominator-mat.pdf). Compare all, Hatch+Ring and one single pattern family. For each, record the pass numerator, group denominator, percentage and source label. Which original cells changed? None. Choose a keyboard/screen-reader toggle, tactile count cards, or a calculator/table. At home do a paper-only subset comparison.

### Day 17 · Test the first glance
Read Source F and the [visual comparison](print/layout-contrast.pdf). Mark the largest text, where its denominator appears, and where a reader finds the method limit. Make a small original thumbnail that brings the complete register into view; ask for one specific critique and revise it. Choose visual annotation, tactile top/middle/footer strips, or a typed/dictated reverse outline plus panel sketch. At home sketch two title orders; no computer needed.

### Day 18 · Improve the plan without inventing results
Choose one paper mosaic pattern and propose one visual change (for example spacing, line weight or contrast). Write a measurable **paper** criterion and a controlled way to check it twice. Peer-test whether your steps are precise enough to follow. Choose a labelled sketch, tactile line/space tokens with dictation, or an offline vector/text sketch. Write `not observed` for outcomes you did not actually record. At home plan one safe paper change in words.

### Day 19 · Make the editor's two-panel brief
Source E wants a decision about another **paper prototype check**, not public approval. Make [panel one](print/two-panel-brief.pdf) show 25/48 and what “pass” means; panel two can show 23/36 if you label its subgroup, then state a method limit and exact next paper check. You may draw, direct a tactile layout with transcript, or make an offline visual/text brief. Explain your visual choices and make a visible revision after feedback. At home write `because / however / next paper check` about this fictional case.

### Day 20 · New public transfer case
Your teacher introduces [Check B](STUDENT-CHECKS.md). Save your independent first response. Afterwards compare a full-register figure, selected-group figure and one missing method detail. Choose count tiles, an annotated table, or a spoken/signed report structure. At home distinguish a mock-up print pass from any real person's experience.

## Before you share a conclusion

Can someone find the source, counted unit, full numerator/denominator, any omitted category, observed action, untested outcome and next check **without hunting for tiny text**? Revise if any are missing. A polished panel is not evidence that real viewers found it usable.