# Integrated Week 1: what does the cart data actually test?

**Five 35-minute Science, mathematics and English sessions.** Partial Year 10 ACARA v9 links: Science `AC9S10U05`, `AC9S10I01`, `AC9S10I04`, `AC9S10I05`, `AC9S10I06`, `AC9S10I07`, `AC9S10I08`; mathematics `AC9M10ST01`, `AC9M10ST03`; English `AC9E10LA02`, `AC9E10LY06`. The [cart readings](../mathematics/MATERIALS.md) are **authored simulations** for a 0.50 kg cart; they were never measured. The supplied numbers cannot establish a wheel-finish effect. This is a safe paper/model route into Newton's laws and evidence quality, not full experimental coverage or a claim that eight points validate a law.

**Prepare:** eight-row table, [scatterplot frame](../print/scatterplot-frame.svg), paper arrows and a ruler. Screen optional only for local enlargement/plotting. No physical cart is needed. If a school adds a real cart, an approved science educator must plan apparatus, force measurement, surface, risk assessment, accessibility and repeatability; do not substitute this fictional table for actual readings. No images, recordings or names of children are collected.

## Day 1 — Name the system before using a formula

**Question:** What does `F_net = ma` mean for the specified cart? **Evidence:** force/mass/acceleration diagram and unit sentence.

1. **Start · 3 min.** Say: “A media claim uses a number. We first ask what quantity was changed and what was measured.” Display the three column names and 0.50 kg mass.
2. **Model · 5 min.** On paper draw a cart box and an arrow labelled **net force**. Explain that net force means the combined force after opposing effects, not merely a person's push. State `F_net = ma` for the simple model.
3. **Calculate · 8 min.** At 1 N and 0.50 kg, ideal acceleration is `1/0.50 = 2 m/s²`; at 2 N it is `4 m/s²`. Name each unit and what is held fixed.
4. **Compare · 10 min.** Pairs compute ideal values at 3 and 4 N (**6, 8 m/s²**) and compare with the two simulated readings at each force. They label “ideal prediction” separately from “authored reading”.
5. **Explain · 6 min.** Ask why 1.8 and 2.1 can sit near 2 without being equal. In a real investigation, measurement/method variation may matter; here the discrepancy was authored. Do not invent a specific error source as a fact.
6. **Exit · 3 min.** Everyone states: “For fixed 0.50 kg, doubling net force from 1 to 2 N doubles ideal acceleration from 2 to 4 m/s².” Teacher samples focus reasoning.

**Access:** tactile arrow, spoken units, large table or screen-reader text; student directs a partner's diagram if needed.

## Day 2 — Represent eight readings without losing repeats

**Question:** How does a representation reveal pattern and variation? **Evidence:** table-to-plot or exact text-coordinate map.

1. **Retrieve · 3 min.** Ask which variable belongs on each axis and why the table has two readings per force.
2. **Model · 5 min.** Place `(1,1.8)` and `(1,2.1)` on the graph. Do not merge them into one point; repeated x does not mean error.
3. **Construct · 8 min.** Pairs place the remaining six points, read them back from [Table A](../mathematics/MATERIALS.md), and label N and m/s².
4. **Analyse · 10 min.** Describe rising, near-linear pattern; compute paired means 1.95, 4.00, 6.05, 7.95. Compare to ideal 2,4,6,8 while keeping “simulated” visible.
5. **Check · 6 min.** Deliberately show a wrong graph with one 4 N point at 1.8. Students locate the transposition by checking the source row, not visual intuition alone.
6. **Exit · 3 min.** Everyone reports one coordinate and one pattern statement with fictional scope.

**Access:** text ordered pairs and tactile axes are equivalent representations for the scientific inference. Note if number transposition rather than scientific reasoning caused an error.

## Day 3 — An association is not the proposed cause

**Question:** Does Table A test a silver wheel finish? **Evidence:** claim–evidence–missing-comparison note.

1. **Read · 3 min.** Display [Text B's headline](../english/MATERIALS.md). Ask what change it claims caused what outcome.
2. **Model · 5 min.** Point to 8.1 at 4 N and 1.8 at 1 N. Both force and acceleration differ; the table has no wheel-finish column. It cannot isolate a finish effect.
3. **Question · 8 min.** Pairs form an investigable question: “At the same cart mass and **applied push**, do otherwise comparable finish conditions give different acceleration readings?” Label the finish as the proposed factor, acceleration as outcome. A finish could change resistance and therefore net force; do not pretend that holding net force fixed would test that route.
4. **Plan on paper · 10 min.** Sketch comparable trials: same cart mass, same applied-force method, same track/measurement method, repeated readings for each finish. This is a **design critique**, not an invitation to conduct an unapproved experiment. Measuring applied force, resistance and acceleration would each need a valid method; this classroom sheet supplies none of those measurements.
5. **Challenge · 6 min.** Ask whether comparing only the highest silver trial with the lowest other trial would be fair. No: select like conditions and consider all repeated readings.
6. **Exit · 3 min.** Everyone writes the missing comparison and one reason a single extreme is weak evidence.

**Access:** three-column factor/outcome/held-comparable board, oral/AAC route, quiet written option.

## Day 4 — Make a caption that can survive scrutiny

**Question:** How do we communicate a result without a result we never obtained? **Evidence:** peer-audited caption with limit.

1. **Set purpose · 3 min.** “A corridor reader may see the headline before the table. What must the first line say honestly?”
2. **Model · 5 min.** Contrast “Silver finish quadruples speed” with “In simulated data, acceleration rose with net force for a fixed-mass model cart.” Mark quantity, conditions and scope.
3. **Draft · 8 min.** Students make a 50–70 word caption, print or accessible text, citing two points or means and a limit. No real photo or child voice is needed.
4. **Peer audit · 10 min.** Partner checks source, units, no speed/acceleration swap, no finish claim, and readable limit. Author revises; criticism targets the claim, not the person.
5. **Discuss · 6 min.** Ask what extra valid evidence would be needed before a finish claim. A planned comparison is not evidence of an outcome; a reader should know the difference.
6. **Exit · 3 min.** Everyone submits the corrected title plus one uncertainty sentence. Teacher observes planned focus learners.

**Access:** caption in large print or text; dictation/AAC with a local transcript; assess scientific reasoning separately from decorative skill.

## Day 5 — Check a new ideal model and the old claim

**Question:** Can a learner use the law and still reject an unsupported claim? **Evidence:** individual calculation and evaluation.

1. **Orient · 3 min.** Say: “The next values are an **ideal calculation**, not another measured trial.”
2. **Retrieve · 5 min.** Revisit `F_net=ma`, units and why Table A did not test finish. Teacher gives no new-check answer.
3. **Independent item · 8 min.** Give the [learner Week 1 check](STUDENT-CHECKS.md). New model: 1.0 kg cart, 3 N net force. Calculate ideal acceleration and compare with a 0.50 kg cart at the same 3 N. Then answer whether the finish headline is proved.
4. **Explain · 10 min.** In pairs, learners read each other's reasoning and ask one specific question; original learner answers or revises. Teacher samples 2–3 focus learners, documenting any prompt.
5. **Feedback · 6 min.** If mass/force are swapped, return to units and inverse relation. If the learner treats a paper plan as completed evidence, ask what was actually observed. Keep a later independent recheck.
6. **Exit · 3 min.** Everyone submits calculation and one supported caption sentence.

**Key:** 3 N / 1.0 kg = **3 m/s²** ideal; at 0.50 kg and 3 N, **6 m/s²** ideal. Same net force with double mass gives half the ideal acceleration in this model. Table A still has no finish comparison, so cannot establish the headline. **Later independent recheck:** at 2 N, a 0.25 kg ideal cart has `a=8 m/s²`; a 0.50 kg cart has `4 m/s²`. Ask the learner to label ideal, not observed, and explain the mass comparison. A correct number without the model/units needs an interpretation prompt.

**Teacher record:** `day | local learner code | exact calculation/claim | independent/prompted/not yet observed | access | next teaching | recheck`. Keep at school; SubjectNest does not collect child data.