Each swap is an extra 5–15-minute task, not compulsory homework. It gives another example or a longer lesson while keeping the same day's source target. A–E are practice cards. F–H remain unseen before the public checks. Analogies in the example bank are teaching scaffolds, not new historical facts. Do not turn a paper engineering puzzle into a Budj Bim reconstruction or a game of locating heritage features.
| Day | Swap 1 · another evidence move | Swap 2 · another evidence move |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | A: write a question about living custodianship that this public page can answer; name a question it cannot. | C: ask what a government overview can add to A without replacing A's community authorship. |
| 2 | B: mark which sentence reports excavated material and which makes an inference about construction. | D: classify a public visit protocol as a contemporary source; explain why it matters for an ancient-place inquiry. |
| 3 | B: invent a different possible sample context (loose topsoil) and explain why its date would support a weaker feature claim; label it hypothetical. | B/C: compare a precise excavated feature's phases with a government “at least 6,600 years” landscape summary. |
| 4 | C: produce a text-only three-component list and say what it omits about local access. | A/D: ask whether a culture page plus a visitor protocol can be read as a public invitation to all physical sites. |
| 5 | After submission, use B to identify what field evidence a listing decision F does not itself provide. | After submission, use D to test the claim that recognition changed Traditional Owner permission rules. |
| 6 | A/C: compare the audience and emphasis of custodian and government descriptions; quote no protected prose. | B: write two different research questions, one B answers well and one requiring an unexcavated feature or different source. |
| 7 | E: draft an image-reuse request to the museum without assuming permission; state why attribution alone is insufficient. | D: revise a class proposal to mark exact sites on a public map into a location-free source-method display. |
| 8 | E/A: draft two alternative first sentences for a museum label, each attributing the source and avoiding an invented voice. | C/D: compare an institution's management summary with a current visitor instruction; say which guides a school visit. |
| 9 | A/B/D: argue how a published date, a custodial account and a protocol answer different parts of the inquiry. | B/C/E: diagnose “all features were excavated and dated” by tracing what each source actually covers. |
| 10 | After submission, compare G's digital candidate with B's excavated sample and mark “possible” versus “dated.” | After submission, use H/D to plan an authorised, guided visit inquiry without coordinates or assumed booking. |
Larger assignment seed: a pair develops a 600-word or 4-minute source audit of a school-approved archaeological question. They must use a public custodian source, an original research report and a later institutional interpretation; record maker, date, precise evidence, what is unknown and rights. The teacher checks the source/permission log and discusses a draft before any public exhibition. A distinct Topic 2 ancient-society assignment remains for the school to design; this seed does not substitute for it.
Original SubjectNest evidence swaps © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, CC BY 4.0.