# Ten integrated inquiry sessions · 35 minutes each

**Week 3:** compare source claims and test how a tabletop sign plan might be checked. **Week 4:** use same-whole fractions and design criteria to make a responsible recommendation. These sessions extend the current [Year 6 English](../../../english/term-1/weeks-03-04/README.md) and [mathematics](../../../mathematics/term-1/weeks-03-04/README.md) lessons; they do not double-score those daily lessons or establish whole-subject coverage. Read the [fictional source packet](SOURCE-PACKET.md), [clean learner page](LEARNER.md), [fresh checks](STUDENT-CHECKS.md) and private [staff key](teacher/ANSWER-AND-NEXT.md). The optional contexts stay fictional and keep the same data unless explicitly changed.

**Common preparation:** ordinary paper/card, pencil, paper tabs folded from scrap, ruler and the [original A4 aids](print/TEXT-ALTERNATIVES.md). No mains electricity, public installation, personal survey or purchase. If actual prototype testing is not permitted, use the fictional paper record and mark science investigation as **planned**, not conducted. Offer a stable desk, large print, AAC/sign, tactile counters, adult scribe recording exact words and extra processing time. Routes are choices of access and output, never learner labels. Record which evidence was independently produced.

## Day 11 · Who is speaking? · AC9E6LY01 · AC9HS6S04

**Question:** Does the large number on a poster tell the whole story? **Kit:** Source A poster and Source B sheet; [source audit](print/source-audit.pdf). **35 = 3 launch + 7 model + 12 inquiry + 8 revise + 5 exit.**

1. **0–3 launch:** Display A without reading B. Ask learners to state only what they notice: the headline number, the small condition and who made it. Accept a pointing response.
2. **3–10 model:** Read the poster's “18 upright at closing” alongside “6 after a removable tab”. Say: “The poster is made by the team asking for another trial. That purpose may explain the large heading. It does not make the count false; it tells me to read the condition.” Model `claim → exact source phrase → missing question`.
3. **10–22 inquiry:** Pairs mark A's origin, intended reader, purpose and one selection. They consult B and distinguish the 12 unchanged signs from all 18 upright at closing. Ask whether A and B are independent; both come from the same team.
4. **22–30 revise:** Learners replace “18 reliable signs” with “18 upright at closing, 6 only after tabs” and write one question about repeat testing. **Routes:** annotate the printed poster; arrange tactile/text strips `maker/purpose/count/limit`; dictate or sign a two-sentence comparison while an adult records the exact wording. Each route must include origin and the limiting detail.
5. **30–35 exit:** Ask: “What was the poster made to do, and which detail prevents a bigger claim?” **Response move:** if a learner calls any promotional source a lie, separate *purpose* from *accuracy*; if they trust A as independent of B, draw a single line from both to the same team.

**Another domain:** Substitute an invented museum table label or game instructions poster with the same A/B provenance; keep the numerical conditions attached. **Home invitation:** ask how a title guides attention in any freely available, nonpersonal text; no photo or upload.

## Day 12 · A tally needs a denominator · AC9E6LY05 · AC9HS6S02 · AC9HS6S04

**Question:** Which statements follow from the closing sheet? **Kit:** B and C; 24 counters optional. **35 = 3 + 7 + 12 + 8 + 5.**

1. **0–3:** Recap that B is the recorder's sheet, not an independent test. Point to its three categories.
2. **3–10:** Model `12 + 6 + 6 = 24`, then distinguish “12 upright unchanged” from “18 upright with or without adjustment”. Ask whether a selected comment can establish what all viewers felt. No.
3. **10–22:** Learners copy B's numbers into a three-row table and label the denominator `24 signs tried`. Match C1/C2 to possible design questions, not outcome counts. Check that no category overlaps at closing.
4. **22–30:** Compare three candidate sentences: “18 upright at closing”; “18 never tipped”; “all viewers found them clear”. Keep only the first, with source attribution and adjustment note. **Routes:** counters in 12/6/6 groups; accessible text table with calculator; oral/AAC card-sort of `supported / not supported / unknown` with exact source wording.
5. **30–35:** “How many were not upright at closing? What do the two selected slips tell us?” **Key:** 6; the slips suggest questions, not prevalence. **Response move:** when a learner uses 18/18 or 12/18, return to the `total tried` cell and mark numerator/denominator.

**Another domain:** Treat categories as fictional costume tags or game-card stands; do not recast the slips as real learners. **Home:** make a three-category invented tally using 24 marks and check the total.

## Day 13 · Factor arrays for a fairer setup · AC9M6N02 · AC9TDE6P01

**Question:** How should 24 trial cards be laid out so each is checked? **Kit:** 24 paper squares/counters, [array mat](print/array-and-fraction.pdf). **35 = 3 + 7 + 12 + 8 + 5.**

1. **0–3:** State the design need: label every prototype, keep the whole count visible and make checking orderly. This is planning, not evidence that one layout is scientifically fair.
2. **3–10:** Model `24 = 4 × 6 = 3 × 8 = 2 × 12`: all make equal rectangular rows. Compare `23`, which is prime, and `25 = 5 × 5`, a square number. Twenty-four is composite, not square.
3. **10–22:** Children arrange 24 tokens in two different arrays, record factor pairs and explain which arrangement leaves room for a label beside each. The choice of row count must be justified by a criterion, not presented as mathematically “best”.
4. **22–30:** Give a hypothetical 24-prototype retest: two fold designs, 12 each. Can `4 × 6` place equal numbers of each in two labelled halves? Yes, 12/12. Discuss why equal quantity alone does not hold surface, paper size or check time constant. **Routes:** move large paper squares; write factors with a calculator/check grid; direct an adult or peer to form a tactile 4-by-6 array and explain it by speech/sign/AAC.
5. **30–35:** “Is 25 prime because its factor pair is 5 by 5?” **Key:** no; 25 is composite and square. **Response move:** show 1×25 and 5×5; if 24 called square, ask for equal row and column length.

**Another domain:** Use fictional seed-label cards, event menu cards or exhibition captions as the 24 objects. **Home:** draw arrays for 24 on scrap paper; no physical kit needed.

## Day 14 · Plan and, if permitted, run a tiny test · AC9S6I02 · AC9S6I03 · AC9S6I05

**Question:** What would make a second sign trial repeatable? **Kit:** ordinary scrap paper, ruler, flat desk, two paper folds; teacher-approved only. **35 = 3 + 7 + 12 + 8 + 5.**

1. **0–3:** Show D's proposed test. Name the question: which of two folds remains upright for one agreed short check on the same table? This is a classroom model, not product certification.
2. **3–10:** Teacher models a record line: `design label / same paper size? / same surface? / check time / upright at check?`. Explain changing the fold while keeping paper size, surface and checking time as similar as practical. No pushing, dropping, blowing, water or scissors are required. Ask learners to flag any unstable workspace or access need.
3. **10–22:** In permitted classrooms, pairs fold two small paper signs and perform **one brief, supervised** comparison. Record their own observed result, time and deviation; do not pool it with fictional B. If testing is unavailable, learners write a paper protocol and label all outcome cells **not observed**.
4. **22–30:** Partners compare methods and findings, naming one possible source of error (placement, fold precision, air movement, uneven surface) and one further check. A different outcome is not “wrong”. **Routes:** fold and measure; use a pre-folded sign with tactile/ruler markers while directing the trial; write or dictate a repeatable protocol with `not observed` for data. Only an actual observation supports the I03 measurement evidence.
5. **30–35:** “Can B's 18/24 prove our fold works everywhere?” **Key:** no; B is fictional, one indoor trial with adjustments and missing controls. **Response move:** if a learner states a universal material property, narrow it to their observed setup or a proposed test.

**Another domain:** Plan a paper menu tent or library shelf label test with the same controls. **Home:** explain the test plan to someone; no experiment required. **Safety:** do not install signs, survey people or claim public accessibility from this trial.

## Day 15 · First held-out source check · AC9E6LY01 · AC9HS6S04 · AC9M6N02

**Question:** Can learners transfer source and factor reasoning to a new invented case? **Kit:** sealed [Check A](STUDENT-CHECKS.md), answer paper. **35 = 3 launch + 5 task briefing + 12 independent + 10 review + 5 close.**

1. **0–3:** Tell learners the case is fictional and new. Do not preview its values or give the source packet as an answer template.
2. **3–8:** Read access instructions only: cite the source, show number work, mark uncertainty. Offer read-aloud, enlarged text, calculator or exact-word transcription; record which was used.
3. **8–20:** Learners complete Check A independently in a chosen output mode. Do not coach the concept during the first response.
4. **20–30:** Collect first responses before partner talk. Ask each learner to mark one claim they would verify next. Use the [private key](teacher/ANSWER-AND-NEXT.md) to choose the next teaching move later, not to change the original check.
5. **30–35:** Name a general transferable habit: “source, count, limit”. **Routes after collection:** paper annotation; tactile token reconstruction; oral/AAC explanation of the source choice. The routes may support learning after assessment; they do not overwrite independent evidence. **Response move:** use the private key after collection to target source provenance, factor arrays or inference as needed.

**Another domain:** After scoring, transfer the same reasoning to an invented theatre-program stand. **Home:** explain why a closing tally needs its total.

## Day 16 · Fractions on one whole · AC9M6N03 · AC9HS6S05

**Question:** What share of the *same 24* signs does each statement describe? **Kit:** B and [fraction line](print/array-and-fraction.pdf). **35 = 3 + 7 + 12 + 8 + 5.**

1. **0–3:** Hold one bar labelled `all 24 tried`. A fraction comparison needs that same whole.
2. **3–10:** Model `6/24 = 1/4`, `12/24 = 1/2`, `18/24 = 3/4` on a 0-to-1 line. Then add `8/24 = 1/3` **only as a hypothetical allocation for a later retest**, not B's observed outcome. Explain equivalent parts by partitioning 24, not by changing the whole.
3. **10–22:** Children place 1/4, 1/3, 1/2, 3/4 on the same blank line; justify `1/4 < 1/3 < 1/2 < 3/4`. Label each source fact or hypothetical. A learner may use 24 counters to show 6, 8, 12 and 18.
4. **22–30:** Consider the claim “three quarters stood, so every design should be used.” Reject that leap: 3/4 describes closing status **including adjusted signs**, not repeated durability or permission. **Routes:** 24 counters in equal groups; tactile 0–1 line with raised quarter/third/half markers; written/signed/AAC justification and a same-whole labelled diagram.
5. **30–35:** “Does 18/24 mean 18/18? Why not?” **Key:** no, 24 tried is the whole; 18 is a part. **Response move:** if 1/3 is placed at 1/4, divide the same bar into 12 equal units and locate 3/12 versus 4/12.

**Another domain:** Use 24 fictional exhibit labels, recipes cards or game prompts without changing the fractions. **Home:** mark halves, thirds and quarters on a single 0–1 line.

## Day 17 · Visual meaning and a fair headline · AC9AVA6C01 · AC9E6LY06

**Question:** Can a poster attract attention without overclaiming? **Kit:** Source A and [recommendation canvas](print/recommendation-canvas.pdf); pencil, plain paper. **35 = 3 + 7 + 12 + 8 + 5.**

1. **0–3:** Compare A's largest text with its smallest condition. Ask what a viewer meets first.
2. **3–10:** Model an original alternative headline: “Small indoor test: 18 of 24 upright at closing, including 6 after tabs.” Show the count and adjustment at readable size. Say that visual emphasis is an author decision, not a change to the data.
3. **10–22:** Learners plan and actually create a paper poster or accessible text-led layout for a second *fictional* test request. Include a clear hierarchy, source label, denominator, adjustment note and at least one next question. No real school logo or photograph.
4. **22–30:** A peer names the first idea they saw, then checks whether the smallest text hides a necessary limit. Learners revise one visual or wording choice and document why. **Routes:** draw/type a high-contrast layout; assemble movable text strips or tactile borders; direct an adult layout in speech/sign/AAC and verify the final order. A merely described idea is planning evidence; visual arts creation requires an actual artefact produced under direction.
5. **30–35:** “What detail must remain visible?” **Key:** source/denominator and the six after tabs; a responsible headline cannot imply unadjusted success. **Response move:** if the headline says “proven”, replace with what the one-day record actually shows.

**Another domain:** Design an invented museum caption or game invitation with the same evidence limits. **Home:** sketch a hierarchy using three blank rectangles; no screen needed.

## Day 18 · Agree design criteria before recommending · AC9TDE6P02 · AC9TDE6P04 · AC9S6I05

**Question:** What would count as a useful improvement, and what is still unknown? **Kit:** D, source audit and blank paper. **35 = 3 + 7 + 12 + 8 + 5.**

1. **0–3:** Retrieve D's request: a second supervised trial, not public installation.
2. **3–10:** Model four criteria to negotiate: readable headline and instructions in the agreed viewing setup; upright at a fixed check; simple paper use; safe setup. These are proposed criteria, not proven accessibility or sustainability measures. Ask who would need to review them locally.
3. **10–22:** Small groups sketch or physically draft **two fold or layout versions**. Label which feature changed. Select a common paper size, table, check time and recording method; note what remains uncontrolled. If no making occurs, mark both as design drawings. No actual audience testing is required.
4. **22–30:** Groups exchange criteria and use them to evaluate only what can be observed or inferred from the design. They revise one criterion if ambiguous (e.g. “good” → “upright at one agreed short check”). **Routes:** paper mock-ups; large-print/tactile component cards; structured oral/AAC negotiation recorded word for word. Record who proposed a criterion and the group's agreement without personal data.
5. **30–35:** “Can ‘uses less paper’ be claimed without measuring two designs?” **Key:** no, calculate/measure or state as a goal. **Response move:** split each note into `observed`, `planned` and `needs evidence`.

**Another domain:** Design tabletop story prompts, exhibition labels or event menus. **Home:** name a testable criterion for any imaginary paper stand.

## Day 19 · Make a conditional recommendation · AC9E6LY02 · AC9E6LY06 · AC9HS6S05

**Question:** What should the fictional manager do next, and why? **Kit:** A–D, notes, [recommendation canvas](print/recommendation-canvas.pdf). **35 = 3 + 7 + 12 + 8 + 5.**

1. **0–3:** Choose one of three defensible positions: permit a small supervised retest; defer pending a clearer protocol; or revise the proposal and then retest. Do not recommend public use from the existing record.
2. **3–10:** Model a concise memo to the fictional manager: “Allow a small repeat test, if the same paper, surface and check time are used. B records 12 of 24 upright unchanged and 6 only after tabs. One indoor closing count cannot show long-term performance. Compare two folds and ask for a legibility review before deciding about use.” Attribute the source; avoid a universal claim.
3. **10–22:** Learners draft a written, oral, signed/AAC or child-directed visual recommendation with `decision / two source details / opposing concern / limit / specific next step`. Maths evidence may use the accurately labelled same-whole fraction line. No child is asked to disclose home spending or access needs.
4. **22–30:** Pairs question and clarify one claim using formal, respectful language for a manager. The author edits one line; a scribe preserves original and revised wording. **Routes:** write/edit a memo; assemble evidence and limit strips then dictate; rehearse a short spoken/sign/AAC brief with a visible source card. Record actual speaking/interaction only if observed.
5. **30–35:** “Which sentence keeps your advice responsible?” **Accept:** a source-bound condition and a next test/review. **Response move:** if evidence is only “18 worked”, return to adjusted six and closing-time limit.

**Another domain:** Make a recommendation for an invented gallery label or game table after a small paper trial. **Home:** tell someone a `because / however / next` argument using an imaginary object.

## Day 20 · New-case recommendation check · AC9E6LY05 · AC9E6LY06 · AC9M6N03 · AC9HS6S05

**Question:** Can learners use a new source set and same-whole fractions to decide responsibly? **Kit:** sealed [Check B](STUDENT-CHECKS.md). **35 = 3 launch + 5 briefing + 12 independent + 10 audit reflection + 5 close.**

1. **0–3:** Explain that the badge-pocket case is fictional and unrelated to an actual school purchase.
2. **3–8:** Read access instructions only. Supply an unmarked 0–1 line, calculator, text read-aloud or exact-word scribe as needed, and record the mode. No content hint or key is shown.
3. **8–20:** Learners independently complete Check B. Collect the first response before collaboration.
4. **20–30:** Learners mark one sentence as `source fact`, `inference` or `unknown`, then compare a method with a partner **after collection**. Use the private key later for specific reteaching, not a single attainment label.
5. **30–35:** Close with a choice of next inquiry question. **Routes after collection:** draw a line with 32 counters; read a structured text table; explain the recommendation by speech/sign/AAC. These routes are teaching follow-up, not revisions to the first check score. **Response move:** use the private key to reteach same-whole placement, source limits or conditional writing separately.

**Another domain:** After scoring, use an invented display sleeve case with new numbers. **Home:** make a cautious recommendation about an invented paper design using `evidence / limit / next`.