This is an agent-led document and asset trial, not a teacher, child, family, disability-access or funder field trial. I used the cards as each role would, checked the separate keys and revised specific issues before handoff.
Teacher route
I selected one unfamiliar block in each subject, read its preparation and code boundary, handed over only the learner page and blank mat, followed the 2/7/3 phases and compared a plausible response against the separate teacher check. The 12-minute timing is plausible for a small-group station, but a whole class needs rotation or more time. These blocks supplement the existing Year 2 maths/English/integrated sequence; they are not a day's timetable.
| Trial card | Plausible learner response | Exact teacher action |
|---|---|---|
| Science Day 8, invented observation C | “The card moved, but the listener wrote not heard. I want to check it again.” | Credit the exact observation and question. Do not replace “not heard” with “silent,” or score a fictional note as a child's sound experiment. Try a new consented real flap later. |
| HASS Day 4, typewriter claims | “A is from the museum. B says everyone, so I need another source. C is Mara's made-up opinion.” | Credit A/B/C with source labels; D also needs a local source. If the child generalises, underline the word every and ask what the museum note actually shows. |
| HPE Day 5, Ren and a loose marker | “Okay, another time. I would keep clear of the busy path and tell an adult.” | Credit permission and safe help decisions independently. If only one part is right, practise the other with different fictional names. No real incident is elicited. |
| Arts Day 8, paper-only frames | Child orders near and whole drawings and names a viewer, but no approved device is used. | Value framing/sequence reasoning, record paper preparation, and leave Media Arts technology/construction/presentation codes unobserved. Offer school-managed offline tool later if appropriate. |
The subject assessment files contain all 40 day-specific checks and concrete next moves. I verified that learner cards contain prompts and source notes but no keyed response table. The HASS tool fact is credited to the museum; fictional voices and map names are visibly labelled, with local significance and First Nations Country/Place work deferred. A school could substitute checked, rights-cleared local material through its own process.
Learner and home/access route
I read the student pages without opening teacher keys. Each task allows a private or adult-read route, and the four text mats repeat every printed label and the HPE route's spatial arrangement. Science distinguishes prediction from observed action; HASS distinguishes real source, invented card and source-to-seek; HPE accepts no to optional participation; Arts records what art form and mode were actually used. All blocks have a paper/low-material option, without purchase or required account. Some evidence is necessarily not observed on that route, and the keys say so rather than inflating coverage.
No child user or assistive-technology user has tried these materials. Large type, tactile source boxes, child-directed adult marks, AAC and low-sound choices are design routes needing real access review. PDF text is selectable, but PDF tagging and screen-reader reading order have not been manually tested. SVG title/description and the complete Markdown alternative offer another route.
Printable aids and correction pass
I generated the four original A4 SVG/PDF pairs from print/generate_print.py and rendered the PDFs to page images. I visually checked all four: clean black text, no clipped headings or footer, generous blank space, clear HPE start/block/finish positions and eight Arts pulse boxes. Text extraction and font embedding are checked mechanically. During content review, I corrected HASS's model to four nested levels and used map of a larger area rather than the ambiguous technical phrase “larger-scale map.” Science evidence language now keeps movement, vibration and hearing reports separate. Arts and HPE code gates distinguish planning from action actually observed.
Parent or funder route
From README, a reviewer can open a subject sequence, hand out a learner card, inspect a separate check, then print or enlarge the original aid. Crosswalk shows pinned code, official level, subject, source row and exact description; source/rights ledger names the origin of each factual claim and the licence boundary; manifest makes file changes visible. The pack demonstrates 40 original, executable short blocks and audit paths. It does not establish full-year coverage, state-syllabus sign-off, accessibility certification, learning impact, uptake, translations or classroom readiness.
Executed checks and next human review
The read-only verifier checks 40 scripts, 40 learner cards, 40 teacher checks, code identity/level/wording against the pinned official import, local links, four generated SVG/PDF pairs, selectable PDF text, A4 size, font notice and a SHA-256 manifest. Its executed result on 29 September 2026 was PASS: 4 subjects, 40 blocks, 40 pinned codes, 4 SVG/PDF aids, 81 local links, 28 hashes. Run it from the project root with python products/curriculum-studio/content/year-2/supplementary/term-1/weeks-01-02/verify_pack.py.
Before classroom rollout, ask a current Year 2 teacher, local HASS source owner, HPE lead and arts educator to trial timing and evidence choices. Have learners and access specialists test the modes they actually use; check paper print sizes and PDF reading order; get local authority and community leadership for any First Nations content. Refresh the official workbook and state implementation when updating the pack. A verifier pass cannot establish these human outcomes.