Five Design and Technologies blocks and five Digital Technologies blocks, each 12 minutes. These are small paper decisions/prototypes and an offline rule lab, not certified products or a deployed service. No cutting tools, adhesives, food, live cables, personal data, network request or account is required. Route choices are in the clean learner page; the interactive full text route works without a browser. Every block uses 0–2 orient; 2–4 model; 4–10 A/B/C make/test/explain; 10–12 collect/next. Actual build, test or browser interaction is logged only if done. Ten practice activities are separate from the two publicly accessible fresh Technologies checks.
Technologies Day 11 · Recipe-card separator · AC9TDE10P01
0–2: Name a shared-kitchen card sorting need, not food-handling. 2–4: Model function vs decorative preference and one-sheet material constraint. 4–10: A/B/C writes a brief and testable criterion. 10–12 evidence/next: A good brief specifies user, grouping function, paper constraint and a way to see whether cards remain separate. If “looks good” is sole criterion, ask what a reader would observe. Home: paper brief with no material purchase.
Technologies Day 12 · Bookmark tab iteration · AC9TDE10P02
0–2: Use scrap paper/pre-folded blank, no scissors. 2–4: Show the same sample line before changing fold position. 4–10: A/B/C actually tests two positions or directs an equivalent manipulation. 10–12 evidence/next: Record first obstruction, specific fold change and whether the printed line is visible afterward. If no test happened, mark only design, not iteration evidence. Home: sketch two versions; no book damage.
Technologies Day 13 · Reusable gift sleeve criteria · AC9TDE10P04
0–2: The sleeve holds a paper card only, not a marketed product. 2–4: Model a criterion as “one sheet” or “opens twice in paper demonstration”. 4–10: A/B/C creates criteria including material use and evaluates a real/proposed paper idea with pass/unknown/fail. 10–12 evidence/next: Sustainability is a question about material/reuse, not proved by the word reusable. If learner assumes durability, request an actual repeated check. Home: no-purchase paper criteria list.
Technologies Day 14 · Game-token scoop prototype · AC9TDE10P02
0–2: Three paper counters on a clear desk only. 2–4: Model same start/destination for two versions. 4–10: A/B/C builds/directs, tests, changes lip/base and retests. 10–12 evidence/next: Compare counters transferred before/after; a single successful move does not prove product strength. If learners change both start and scoop at once, reset equal conditions. Home: plan an improvement without needing a game set.
Technologies Day 15 · Seed-packet divider audit · AC9TDE10P04
0–2: Empty paper envelopes, not seeds or soil. 2–4: State one-sheet and ten-second upright criteria. 4–10: A/B/C tests or clearly labels an untested review. 10–12 evidence/next: Two envelopes must remain upright for ten seconds to mark that criterion met in this paper trial; absent observation is UNKNOWN. If a learner writes “safe for real packets”, ask for actual materials/use evidence. Home: criteria grid only.
Technologies Day 16 · Page content, markup and style · AC9TDI10K02
0–2: The offline page is local and stores/sends no response. 2–4: Open its SHOW PAGE PARTS section: visible words, <h1> structure, CSS colour. 4–10: A/B/C distinguishes these representations by inspecting or using the exact text fallback. 10–12 evidence/next: A CSS colour change affects presentation, not heading meaning or text content; HTML h1 marks structure. If tags are called the message words, separate rendered text from markup. Home: paper sort of one tiny HTML snippet.
Technologies Day 17 · A two-condition rule · AC9TDI10P05
0–2: All parcel labels are invented and non-personal. 2–4: Say READY requires READABLE AND REVIEWED. 4–10: A/B/C builds a four-case truth table and optionally checks tool output. 10–12 evidence/next: Only YES/YES gives READY under the two-state rule; a single yes is insufficient. If an OR rule appears, test YES/NO. Home: paper pseudocode; no device needed.
Technologies Day 18 · Test-case challenge · AC9TDI10P06
0–2: The faulty OR program is provided for critique, not a student mistake. 2–4: Model expected AND and faulty OR for NO/NO. 4–10: A/B/C checks all four cases and picks a discrepancy. 10–12 evidence/next: YES/NO or NO/YES reveals faulty READY output; revise to AND and rerun/retable a regression case. A plan alone does not evidence actual program execution. Home: text truth table.
Technologies Day 19 · Parcel-rule user experience · AC9TDI10P07
0–2: Prototype only, no live parcel service. 2–4: Point to tool controls and result wording; ask what a new reader knows if colour is absent. 4–10: A/B/C makes a wireframe/transcript with input labels, status explanation and unknown-data state. 10–12 evidence/next: Prototype must let a reader distinguish NOT READY from CHECK DATA and know why. If it only displays a coloured dot, request text and source-status labels. Home: paper screen outline.
Technologies Day 20 · Unknown is not false · AC9TDI10P05, AC9TDI10P06
0–2: An unreadable field can be UNKNOWN rather than NO. 2–4: Model an early if readability unknown: CHECK DATA branch. 4–10: A/B/C designs and tests/paper-traces unknown+reviewed YES and known YES/YES. 10–12 evidence/next: Expected outputs are CHECK DATA and READY respectively under the explicitly stated policy. If a learner silently maps unknown to NO, ask what information was actually observed. Tool behaviour is only evidence if run; a flowchart/paper trace is design evidence. Home: two-case paper branch test.
Original resource rights: © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, SubjectNest, CC BY 4.0. Credit author, source, licence and changes. Tool/code rights are in source ledger.