# Desk run-through: teach it, use it, scrutinise it

**Status 29 September 2026:** adult desk simulation and file/print checks were completed; no live Year 3 classroom, child participant, specialist accessibility panel or state curriculum authority has endorsed this fortnight. These are practical review notes, not invented impact results.

## New teacher's Monday (Day 11) and Friday (Day 15)

With [Lesson 11](LESSONS.md#day-11--where-did-the-route-stop), [Story C](MATERIALS.md#story-c--the-arrow-with-two-endings), the [paper mat](print/garden-route-mat.pdf), a pencil and any small token, the teacher can follow the 2+5+6+7+3+2 sequence. On the mat, the original story clue “green shape” leaves a garden bed and shade tree. The revised clue reaches the tree from ENTRANCE by **one square up, one right**. A child who points to the author's wording has listening/comprehension evidence; the story was adult-read, so no independent fluency is claimed. The teacher can use route A, B or C without preparing a digital account.

**Friday logistics check:** [Check A](STUDENT-CHECKS.md#check-a--day-15--the-mail-table-map) is genuinely a different 3×3 grid and different word items. Following DOT → BELL → PEG → STAR gives the keyed destination. A single teacher cannot privately listen to every child's words and score composition in a seven-minute station; conduct focus conferences over rotations and mark others *not yet observed*. That constraint is in the lesson, not hidden from the buyer.

## Child's choice, including a child who avoids partner noise

In Day 14's [learner card](LEARNER.md#day-14--keep-both-drafts), the quiet solo replay keeps the same target as partner testing: find the place a reader would pause, change one word/label and compare drafts. The [text/tactile version](print/TEXT-ALTERNATIVES.md) makes all named cells and the page orientation available without colour or a printer. Both printed aids were rendered as one A4 page each and visually inspected for readable labels and writing lines; their PDF text also extracts. That is a desk check, not an accessibility user trial. A child may say, select, type, draw or move a token; record the actual route used rather than treating an adult scribe as independent handwriting.

## Funder or curriculum lead's challenge

There are **ten distinct scripted 25-minute English sessions**, **30 genuinely different core context choices**, [20 more optional daily tasks](DAILY-EXTRAS.md), three original shared texts, two reserved formative checks, separate teacher answers/next moves, two original A4 SVG/PDF aids and explicit plain-text/tactile equivalents. The [crosswalk](CURRICULUM-CROSSWALK.md) is generated from a hashed official ACARA workbook, while the [verifier](verify_pack.py) checks links, source, days, choices, held-out leakage, true arithmetic, assets and hashes. This makes the authored slice inspectable. It does **not** make the whole Year 3 sequence complete or supply specialist-reviewed multilingual translations. The original teaching content is reusable under CC BY 4.0; ACARA material and embedded font subsets keep separate rights.

## Fixes made during desk review

- The story's second direction was tightened to **one square up, then one square right**, matching the printed grid and removing a hidden geometric contradiction.
- The word `noticeboard` was replaced in word study with `bookcase` so the explicit compound example would not conflict with the story's conventional two-word `notice board`.
- Day 20 uses **13 204** on the fresh check and avoids the parallel mathematics pack's held-out **41 205** and **624 − 187**. The check supplies correct group labels, so it can assess explanatory language without requiring new five-digit computation.
- The number claim “more thousands” is paired with “same total” and a visible equal-value exchange; a learner repeating a label is not counted as independent place-value proof.

## Next human test

Ask one new teacher to set up Day 11 with this README only; observe preparation time and where directions are unclear. Ask at least one learner using each relevant access mode to try the mat/alternative. Ask a curriculum lead to review the local jurisdictional sequence and sample work against the current Year 3 achievement standard. Keep their actual feedback, revisions and dates in a future review log rather than filling this file with predicted praise.

**Original review text rights:** © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, SubjectNest, [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Credit, link and indicate changes.