Learner cards · choose… | Year 11 Health · T1 W1–2 · Learner prompts

Read or hear the matching fictional public message and desk note. Every route produces the same three things: (1) identify a health frame, resource/barrier, dimension or source claim; (2) cite an exact case detail and explain its meaning, with a denominator where needed; (3) revise the public line or form a narrow issue question and state what is unknown. A/B/C are different ways to work, not fixed learning-style labels. You may switch routes or choose another fictional context without explaining why. Read-aloud, large print, Braille, sign, AAC, typing and a directed scribe can support access; note support separately from the evidence you produced. Listening alone is not independent reading. Do not disclose your own or anyone else's health, family, finances, identity, diagnosis or support use. The two optional daily contexts are paper-only and need no purchase.

Day 1 · Rehearsal-room poster

A · Poster editor: Mark either/or and settled, list two dimensions the smile does not measure, then write a dynamic replacement sentence with one missing fact.
B · Dimension cards: Place PHYSICAL, MENTAL, EMOTIONAL, SOCIAL and SPIRITUAL labelled cards around the poster; select two possible lenses without rating a person and dictate a careful correction.
C · Fictional visitor reply: Privately record a short question to the invented club about its criteria, cite the programme opportunities, then correct the binary for other readers.

Extra 1 / paper home: Rewrite an invented gaming-club line “one good day proves permanent health” without discussing anyone real. Extra 2 / paper home: Make a museum-caption comparison between a static snapshot and a changing context, using a fictional character only.

Day 2 · Puzzle-league welcome

A · Two-lens table: In one column ask about the noisy entry as possible risk; in another ask how buddy/quiet space might be accessed; revise the welcome sheet without diagnosing.
B · Barrier/resource tiles: Sort NOISY ENTRY, OPTIONAL PEER and QUIET AREA onto labelled strips, then give a spoken or written two-lens explanation and bounded new line.
C · Welcome-script rehearsal: Privately dictate what a fictional newcomer could ask about the environment and choices, then replace “only risks” with an invitation that does not assume preferences.

Extra 1 / paper home: Apply both lenses to a made-up robotics club with a confusing door and a mentor option. Extra 2 / paper home: Write a strengths-oriented but evidence-limited reply to an imaginary orchestra poster focused only on mishaps.

A · Three-level map: Label preparation notes personal, volunteer buddy social and media room community; edit only confidence and name unknown uptake.
B · Resource sleeves: Move each named resource into PERSONAL, SOCIAL or COMMUNITY sleeves, then explain why an offered booking page might still need an access check.
C · Presenter interview script: Privately dictate three non-personal questions a club could ask about how resources are offered; use the answers in the desk note to draft an option-rich sign-up line.

Extra 1 / paper home: Sort an invented chess-club practice card, peer explainer and library room by resource level. Extra 2 / paper home: Give a fictional community garden three different kinds of support without promising any wellbeing outcome.

Day 4 · Tool-lending checkout

A · Access audit: Underline 10:00–11:00 weekdays and online-only form, circle guide/volunteer, then replace “everyone” with one testable question.
B · Pathway strips: Try a labelled USER ROUTE → HOURS → FORM → HELP DESK path for an imaginary user with unspecified circumstances. Mark barriers as possible, not proven exclusion, and rewrite the sentence.
C · Library staff memo: Privately dictate what the library knows, what it does not know about non-use, and one respectful way to ask whether its offer can be reached.

Extra 1 / paper home: Review a made-up sports-equipment desk open only at lunch, without guessing who can attend. Extra 2 / paper home: Add a fictional low-data option to a booking notice as a proposal, then name evidence needed before calling it effective.

Day 5 · BrightStep mock ad

A · Claim audit: Mark clinically proven, every and 80%; write what denominator, outcome measure, date and study link are missing; replace the ad line.
B · Evidence pockets: Put AUTHOR, DATE, SAMPLE, COMPARATOR, MEASURE and CONFLICT cards into “given” or “missing”; then explain why the badge cannot be repeated as a verified result.
C · Reader-to-maker message: Privately dictate three precise questions to the fictional ad maker, then compose a critical, non-promotional sentence for a reader.

Extra 1 / paper home: Critique an invented study-app badge “90% successful” that supplies no definition of success. Extra 2 / paper home: Turn a fictional music-stream advert's “scientifically guaranteed focus” into a specific evidence request, without recommending a product.

Day 6 · Makerspace schedule

A · Single-cause audit: Mark motivation alone, then cite 07:30, heavy webpage and step as possible contextual determinants before drafting a non-blaming correction.
B · Access-route cards: Place TIME, DIGITAL PAGE and ENTRY beside a fictional route; add INTEREST as only one possible factor and name the missing attendance evidence.
C · Coordinator dialogue: Privately dictate two questions about how the session is offered, using no personal profile, then write a statement that does not rank causes.

Extra 1 / paper home: Audit a fictional volunteer roster published only as a large download. Extra 2 / paper home: Reframe a made-up cinema workshop claim “no one came because they lacked interest” using two possible access conditions.

Day 7 · Community arts timetable

A · Dimension annotation: Connect making, conversation, quiet route and meaning to at least three possible dimensions, then strike fixes every and note absent outcome data.
B · Five-dimension sleeves: Put offered opportunities beside labelled dimensions without forcing one-to-one matches or assigning a religion; dictate an opportunity rather than treatment claim.
C · Public-audio revision: Privately script a 30-second correction for the fictional arts centre that leaves participation optional and does not say a one-time visit changed anyone's health.

Extra 1 / paper home: Discuss possible dimensions in an invented astronomy club without claiming it treats anyone. Extra 2 / paper home: Write a careful museum-card line about a fictional dance workshop's opportunities, including one reason not to infer impact.

Day 8 · Senior-transition handout

A · Blame-language edit: Cross out never and lack, cite the planning tool, tutor and room as different possible resources, then revise with an access question.
B · Support map: Place PERSONAL, SOCIAL and COMMUNITY labels under the three offers; add a separate UNKNOWN UPTAKE card and explain why using support is not a weakness score.
C · Supporter-facing note: Privately dictate how a fictional centre could invite choices without prescribing a path; include one case detail and one thing not known about effects.

Extra 1 / paper home: Reframe an invented apprentice orientation notice that calls questions “failure”. Extra 2 / paper home: Make a choice-respecting resource menu for a fictional exam-preparation club without asking anyone to self-rate resilience.

Day 9 · Book-cart feedback

A · Denominator check: Compute 8/12 and 4/12 for the responding volunteers, then rewrite most local young people with the sample boundary and missing nonresponse details.
B · Twelve-response tiles: Sort eight HARD and four EASY tokens, state the fractions and percentages of 12, then explain why the wider population is not measured.
C · Editorial fact-check: Privately dictate a correction including 66.7% and 33.3% approximately, the voluntary sample, and a question about how the responses were gathered.

Extra 1 / paper home: For an invented maker-club mini-poll of 3 of 10 volunteers, compute 30% while avoiding population claims. Extra 2 / paper home: Write a question about nonresponse for a fictional film-club survey with no response count.

Day 10 · Timetable-board proposal

A · Issue-question builder: Replace “solve resilience for all” with a question naming the fictional after-school programme, schedule access and different information routes; list two evidence needs.
B · Four-card frame: Arrange CONTEXT, POSSIBLE BARRIER, RESOURCE and EVIDENCE NEEDED cards; construct a narrow question before anyone designs or judges an action.
C · Council briefing: Privately dictate a cautious question and two non-intrusive ways to learn about information access; say explicitly that no new board has been tested.

Extra 1 / paper home: Narrow an invented community-radio “fix all wellbeing” proposal to a single question about finding programme times. Extra 2 / paper home: Turn a fictional rehearsal-room “everyone can join” claim into a question about entry information, without asserting a local policy breach.