# Ten 35-minute decision-desk blocks · Days 11–20

These blocks add an application to the separate [English](../../../english/term-1/weeks-03-04/LESSONS.md) and [mathematics](../../../mathematics/term-1/weeks-03-04/LESSONS.md) lessons. Prepare the [two original sources](ORIGINAL-SOURCES.md), one blank [decision mat](print/decision-mat.pdf) or its [text/tactile route](print/TEXT-ALTERNATIVES.md), and the day's [learner card](LEARNER-CARDS.md). Keep the [teacher key](TEACHER-KEY.md) private. On Days 15 and 20, complete the subject packs' unseen checks first: this studio block is guided practice and revision, not a second independent check. Record the first child-led claim, number work, exact support and later change. The five numbered moves are 5 + 7 + 10 + 9 + 4 = **35 minutes** each day.

## Week 3 · How far can a plan and a source take us?

### Day 11 · A number sheet is not a visitor survey

**Aim:** separate the exact scope of Source A from the unsupported flyer, then choose a model question. **Prepare:** Sources A/B, blank mat, Card 11.

1. **Read · 5 min.** Read or hear both source labels. Ask who made the count sheet, who signed the flyer, and what each could know. Record independent reading or heard access.
2. **Model · 7 min.** Put “29 trays of 32 planned cards” under *source says* and “everyone's favourite” under *still unknown*. Do not treat a planner label as outside validation.
3. **Try · 10 min.** Child chooses one invented domain from Card 11 and places two exact source facts, one overclaim and one answerable next question on the blank mat, using speech, text or movable cards.
4. **Challenge · 9 min.** Partner or private adult asks where the number of unique visitors appears. Child reopens Source A and revises any guess. Then ask whether the garden plan fits the card limit yet; mark that as a calculation still to do.
5. **Keep · 4 min.** Save first and revised claim plus the source phrase. If a child equates a planned card with a visitor, contrast group/card units before Day 12.

### Day 12 · Estimate before promising

**Aim:** use a benchmark to anticipate a product while recognising when only an exact total settles a close limit. **Prepare:** Source A, estimate column on mat, Card 12.

1. **Retrieve · 5 min.** Child names the 900-card model limit and the two factors for their chosen plan; no real event or cost is implied.
2. **Model · 7 min.** For 24 boxes of 37, try 25×40≈1,000, then explain why a coarse estimate above 900 does *not* prove the exact plan is over. Record estimate before calculation.
3. **Try · 10 min.** Card 12 offers book, game or museum figures. Learner makes a visible benchmark and explains whether it lies above or below the planned product.
4. **Challenge · 9 min.** A peer proposes “about 1,000, so cancel it.” Child responds that the estimate is a warning to calculate, not a verdict. Invite another reasonable benchmark and a reason for its direction.
5. **Keep · 4 min.** Save benchmark, factor rounding and limitation. If an estimate is read as the exact answer, reteach the approximate sign and inspect the planned factors.

### Day 13 · Show the groups, then the total

**Aim:** calculate a larger two-digit product by an inspectable strategy and compare it with 900. **Prepare:** Source A, broad place cards or a blank mat, Card 13.

1. **Retrieve · 5 min.** Contrast 46 bundles with 18 cards *per* bundle; ask why adding 46 + 18 would answer a different question.
2. **Model · 7 min.** Partition 46×18 as 46×(10+8) = 460+368 = 828. Compare with 900: 72 model cards remain. Name cards as the unit throughout.
3. **Try · 10 min.** Learner uses Card 13 to show a product for book or game plan with partial products, grid, efficient written algorithm or tactile groups. Require an estimate and a second check.
4. **Challenge · 9 min.** Another reader checks whether the method kept the tens value. Child corrects a misplaced zero before writing a one-line decision limited to the paper-card cap.
5. **Keep · 4 min.** Save first method, corrected method and constraint conclusion separately. If the arithmetic is right but the decision is unexplained, ask “which exact rule did it meet?”

### Day 14 · A tidy poster can still exceed the rule

**Aim:** compute two contrasting plans and show that appearance or enthusiasm cannot decide the numeric constraint. **Prepare:** garden and museum rows, Card 14.

1. **Retrieve · 5 min.** Ask what an unsigned flyer says about the garden; locate the relevant figures in Source A without treating the claim as fact.
2. **Model · 7 min.** Partition 29×32 into 29×30 + 29×2 = 870+58 = 928. This exceeds 900 by 28; it does not prove real safety or cost.
3. **Try · 10 min.** Learner calculates the museum's 42×21 or tests an alternative garden revision with Card 14, showing method and rounded bound first.
4. **Challenge · 9 min.** Give the child the flyer again. They write a fair correction: name the source numbers and overclaim, then say that a revised garden plan could be explored rather than declaring the whole idea bad.
5. **Keep · 4 min.** Save exact total, unit, over-limit amount and revised wording. If “29 trays” becomes “29 visitors,” return to the table headings.

### Day 15 · A new plan after the subject checks

**Aim:** transfer the decision routine to a *different*, guided paper-card example after the separate independent subject checks. **Prepare:** only after English and maths checks, Card 15 and a blank mat.

1. **Confirm · 5 min.** Put away both subject check sheets and keys. State that this project response can be discussed and revised openly.
2. **Model · 7 min.** On a different 12×14 sample, estimate first, calculate 168, and point to the factor/unit labels; cover the sample.
3. **Try · 10 min.** Card 15 uses 33 groups of 26 cards. Learner estimates, chooses an inspectable strategy, compares with 900 and writes one bounded sentence.
4. **Visitor test · 9 min.** Willing listener or private teacher role-play asks if the numbers say anyone prefers the plan. Child may revise a claim and record what question remains.
5. **Keep · 4 min.** Save estimate, product, limit decision and first/revised claim. Mark this as guided application, not an unseen assessment score.

## Week 4 · Can a fair recommendation survive a question?

### Day 16 · Two priorities, neither a survey

**Aim:** paraphrase two imagined viewpoints and avoid presenting them as real visitor evidence. **Prepare:** Source B voices, Card 16.

1. **Read · 5 min.** Revisit the imagined reader and organiser. Ask what each values and what neither has measured.
2. **Model · 7 min.** Rewrite “Everyone wants lots of cards” as “The imagined organiser wants each planned group represented; actual visitor preference is unknown.”
3. **Try · 10 min.** Learner chooses one valid plan and makes a two-voice note from Card 16 with a possible response to each priority and one honest unknown.
4. **Challenge · 9 min.** Partner paraphrases before objecting. Learner points to the source phrase for each viewpoint and removes any invented poll or guarantee.
5. **Keep · 4 min.** Save the first and revised wording. Spoken presentation evidence is recorded only if a learner actually presents; AAC/writing remains legitimate communication.

### Day 17 · Use an inverse to find a mistake

**Aim:** check a product with an inverse fact or a truly different route, not copied digits. **Prepare:** game row, Card 17.

1. **Retrieve · 5 min.** Recall 24 boxes of 37 cards and ask whether reversing the factor order changes the product or the meaning of the groups.
2. **Model · 7 min.** Check 24×37 = 888 with 888÷24 = 37. Also compare 25×37 = 925, so one box fewer gives 888. Both checks expose an accidental 8,880.
3. **Try · 10 min.** Learner chooses a book, museum or game product and records an inverse number fact or second inspectable partition. Do not require long division as the sole route.
4. **Challenge · 9 min.** A visitor offers 8,880 as a plausible total. Child names the scale error using a benchmark and shows which written place needs repair.
5. **Keep · 4 min.** Record original product, independent check and explanation. A copied reversed equation without explaining its group relationship needs another prompt.

### Day 18 · Repair a plan without hiding the change

**Aim:** solve an unknown group count, check by substitution, and label the revised plan as new. **Prepare:** garden row, 900-card limit, Card 18.

1. **Retrieve · 5 min.** Re-establish 29×32 = 928, over the model limit. Ask which factor could change while cards per tray stay at 32.
2. **Model · 7 min.** Try 28 trays: 28×32 = 896; it fits with 4 cards below the limit. Write ?×32 = 896, so ? = 28, and substitute to check.
3. **Try · 10 min.** Learner solves Card 18's alternative unknown equation, showing why the original and revised plans must not be silently blended.
4. **Challenge · 9 min.** A partner asks whether removing a tray still represents every planned paper-plant category. Child says the number model alone cannot settle that design choice; ask the fictional organiser.
5. **Keep · 4 min.** Save original and revised factors, exact check and new unknown question. If a child writes 29×32 = 896, line up the changed factor explicitly.

### Day 19 · Write the recommendation someone can question

**Aim:** create a short audience-aware argument with source, product, model limit, alternative view and honest unknown. **Prepare:** both sources, Card 19, blank mat.

1. **Choose · 5 min.** Learner chooses a book, game, museum or *clearly revised* garden plan and a consenting audience or private role-play.
2. **Model · 7 min.** Teacher drafts a different sample opener: “For this paper model, 12 packs of 14 make 168 cards.” Add one limitation; do not supply the child's chosen answer.
3. **Create · 10 min.** Learner writes, types, dictates or makes a similarly developed multimodal guide with a message-first opening, inspectable multiplication, constraint comparison, another possible viewpoint and a question the sources cannot answer.
4. **Test · 9 min.** Visitor follows the guide, paraphrases the recommendation, asks one genuine question and identifies any unsupported phrase. Learner revises one sentence, number or visual order; keep first version.
5. **Keep · 4 min.** Note which mathematical and language moves were actually observed. A polished poster without a reason for the product/limit is not sufficient mathematical evidence.

### Day 20 · A last model, then a fair handover

**Aim:** apply the same routine to a new guided case *after* the fresh subject checks, then explain what a real decision still needs. **Prepare:** subject checks completed and closed, Card 20.

1. **Confirm · 5 min.** Put away both Day 20 English/maths checks. Invite a private or willing visitor; public display is optional and requires school permissions.
2. **Model · 7 min.** On 12×14 again, point to the four mat fields—source, estimate, exact product, limit—without solving today's numbers.
3. **Try · 10 min.** Child tests 22 groups of 41 paper cards against 900, then chooses one transparent revision and updates their claim. Compare before and after rather than overwriting.
4. **Visitor test · 9 min.** Listener checks the arithmetic and asks whether the model establishes real cost, safety or preference. Child gives a bounded answer and one next question for a real organiser.
5. **Keep · 4 min.** Retain first calculation, revision, support and next teaching move. This is guided project work, not proof of Year 5 achievement or a school-approved event plan.

**Status and rights:** These ten additional 35-minute blocks do not make a full school day or complete Year 5 curriculum. Original SubjectNest teaching script © 2026 NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd, [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/); credit, link and indicate changes. Source code links are partial and [auditable](CURRICULUM-CROSSWALK.md).