# Two-week English evidence check

Use Card D as unseen transfer during/after Day 10, plus prior source reading/writing observations. Score each item **0** = not yet with access, **1** = accurate after a content prompt/model, **2** = independently accurate. /16 is a next-teaching shorthand, not a Year 6 attainment score. Note independent reading versus adult read-aloud, response mode, and exact mathematical help if unit prices are discussed. The English target is critical source use and expression, not arithmetic speed.

| Item | Prompt | Key / acceptable evidence | If not yet |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Card D: “Who created this source and what does it try to make us do?” | Original **fictional model advert**; persuade someone to choose Pass Y | Revisit source label and imperative “Choose”. |
| 2 | “State two details Card D supplies.” | X $14/7 entries; Y $18/10 entries; or one each plus prices | Point to exact supplied figures, not invented use. |
| 3 | “Is ‘Everyone saves!’ a verified fact? Why?” | No; universal claim unsupported by usage/budget/other costs | Contrast listed unit price with untested personal outcome. |
| 4 | “What does the advert leave out that could affect a choice?” | Any: expiry, travel, opening times, actual use, accessibility/conditions | Model one missing-information question, then seek another. |
| 5 | “Which option has lower cost per included entry if all are used?” | Y: $18/10=$1.80; X:$14/7=$2.00 | Provide calculator or worked division as access; do not conflate with English reading score. |
| 6 | “If the fictional immediate budget is $15, which option fits?” | X $14 fits; Y $18 does not; this is not a global recommendation | Separate upfront total from unit cost. |
| 7 | “Write/dictate a 3–4-sentence source-based comparison with a condition.” | Labels advert's view, cites two correct details, names a limit, and gives conditional choice without ‘everyone’ claim | Use plan frame, then fade; mark adult-supplied wording. |
| 8 | “Revise one part for fairness or clarity and explain the change.” | Specific correction, e.g. replace “Y is best for all” with “Y costs less per included entry if all ten are used.” | Model revision on Card A, then let learner choose own line. |

**Decision rule:** Items 1–4 assess purpose/claims/limits; 5–6 support reading numerical evidence but are not a maths achievement judgment; 7–8 composition/revision. A 0 requires explicit source comparison and a **fresh** fictional card, not rehearsed answers. A learner who explains accurately after read-aloud may need a separate independent reading check. A learner who computes correctly but treats opinion as fact needs source language practice. Challenge secure learners with a second source and a differing criterion, not merely a longer advertisement.

**Fresh recheck card E, invented and kept outside lessons:** Sketchbook C is $9 for 90 pages; D is $12 for 150 pages. **Keys:** C 10 cents/page; D 8 cents/page; D $3 more upfront; C fits a fictional $10 immediate budget; no durability evidence. After reteaching, ask for a conditional comparison with one unsupported claim corrected. Do not ask for family purchase histories.

**Record:** learner ID ___; date ___; items ___/___/___/___/___/___/___/___; independently read or read aloud ___; response mode ___; prompts/calculation support ___; strongest evidence ___; next teaching ___; fresh recheck date ___. Store under school policy.

Original assessment © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, CC BY 4.0. Sources/ACARA separate rights in [README](README.md). Educator/EAL/D review pending.