Integrated inquiry · ten 35-minute sessionsYear 7 Inquiry · T1 W3–4 · Lesson sequence

Ordinary rhythm: open 3 + model 5 + investigate 8 + one learner choice 10 + check 6 + evidence note 3 = 35 minutes. Day15/20 replace investigation/choice/check with an eight-minute preparation, ten-minute fresh check and six-minute transfer exit, plus open/model/note. Use the original fictional sources, clean learner pages, daily A/B/C choices, print/text/tactile routes and private staff key. Codes mark partial content-description encounters; see crosswalk. Record actual reasoning and access separately from a content hint.

Week 3 · Test an explanation by tracing a model key

The six baseline profiles, four T cards, Version 1/2 algorithms and test log are model inventions. A key can organise chosen visible traits but does not establish ancestry, actual biodiversity, real species identity or safety for plant handling. No card represents First Nations knowledge or a real place.

Day 11 · Read a test input before choosing a branch

Codes: AC9S7U01, AC9S7I04, AC9E7LY03. Goal: record all three traits for T1–T4 before any output. Prepare: profile board, source table, two-column trait cards.

1. Open · 3 min. Ask what would count as an observable card trait rather than a judgement; remind pupils these are invented outlines.
2. Model · 5 min. Read T1 as entirely smooth, rounded, short. Trace to S2 and verify all three baseline traits. Contrast “looks like S2” with three checkable fields.
3. Investigate · 8 min. Learners complete edge/tip/stem table for T2–T4 from print, full text or tactile profile cards. T4's mixed edge must be recorded, not forced into “entirely jagged”.
4. Choice · 10 min. D11-A/B/C: descriptor table, partner audio-description script or mismatch hunt. Each route names all traits and source card ID.
5. Check · 6 min. Trace T2 with a full-profile check (J2); ask why T3 is unmatched even though Version 1 reaches S3. Do not call a forced label evidence of a species.
6. Note · 3 min. Save one exact observation and one possible ambiguity. If traits were inferred from visual style rather than stated description, reteach from text.

Later/home: Optional Day11 extra uses paper traits; no real specimen is requested.

Day 12 · A nested key can still have a bug

Codes: AC9TDI8P05, AC9TDI8P06, AC9S7I06. Goal: represent Version 1 as nested flowchart/pseudocode and trace one input to an error. Prepare: blank key/trace mat and Version 1.

1. Open · 3 min. Ask what an IF choice needs: testable condition, two branches and an output or next test.
2. Model · 5 min. Put Version 1's outer edge choice in a flowchart diamond, then nested tip/stem choices; read corresponding pseudocode aloud. Trace T1 to S2.
3. Investigate · 8 min. Pairs trace T3 step by step: smooth → pointed → S3, then compare all three traits and find the long/short mismatch. Mark bug: missing final check.
4. Choice · 10 min. D12-A/B/C: draw flowchart plus pseudocode, act with rule cards, or trace an erroneous branch table. Require a state-by-state trace, not a guessed output.
5. Check · 6 min. Ask whether T4 should be J1 just because one edge has jagged section. No: mixed edge and short stem conflict with J1. Suggest “unmatched” branch and full-profile verification.
6. Note · 3 min. Record whether learner linked a specific condition to the wrong output; next use a fresh fictional input.

Later/home: An optional extra can rewrite one nested condition in plain words. Paper algorithm only; no programming account needed.

Day 13 · A percentage must name its test set

Codes: AC9S7I05, AC9M7N06, AC9E7LA02. Goal: calculate and evaluate Version 1/2 outcomes on ten fictional trials. Prepare: Version 1 ten-case log and a 10-cell tally strip.

1. Open · 3 min. “Eight safe outputs in ten model cases” is a count. Ask what population that statement does not describe.
2. Model · 5 min. Calculate 8/10=0.8=80% of these ten invented cases. Two mislabels make 2/10=20%; an unmatched output is not a mislabel if expected.
3. Investigate · 8 min. Compare Version 2 on exactly the same ten descriptions: 10/10 safe under the stated criterion. Difference is 2 of 10 cases, or 20 percentage points (100%−80%). Neither ratio predicts field accuracy.
4. Choice · 10 min. D13-A/B/C: tally chart, precise reader-facing caption or critique of “100% accurate for plants”. Require numerator, denominator, criterion and limit.
5. Check · 6 min. Repair “The revised key always works” as “It returned appropriate outputs for all ten tested fictional profiles; new profiles still need testing.”
6. Note · 3 min. Mark arithmetic and claim scope separately. If percentage is correct but generalised, give a fresh small test set to qualify.

Later/home: Optional tally extra; no classmate attributes or real biological records are collected.

Day 14 · Design an explanation another reader can use

Codes: AC9S7I08, AC9E7LA04, AC9E7LY06, AC9AMA8C01. Goal: structure a short visual/text/audio-described explanation of a model key and its limits. Prepare: blank explanation storyboard, Version 2.

1. Open · 3 min. Name a younger/new reader who was absent; no actual younger child is asked to test it.
2. Model · 5 min. Four-panel order: what the model is → first decision → full-profile check → what “unmatched” means. Say why an overview and concluding limit help navigation.
3. Investigate · 8 min. Learners inspect the two different claims “T3 reaches S3 in V1” and “T3 is S3.” The first reports a trace; the second omits the mismatch. Evaluate using source traits.
4. Choice · 10 min. D14-A/B/C: text storyboard, low-ink visual layout with alt script, or 40-second spoken/AAC script. Each has accurate rule, source ID, reading order and scope limit.
5. Check · 6 min. Swap with one peer or use a self-blind step-through: can another reader tell what to do with T4? Revise an ambiguous line. Record whether actual peer feedback occurred.
6. Note · 3 min. Save first and revised line; plan a specific next clarity test. Do not score voice, accent or drawing polish as classification evidence.

Later/home: Draw four boxes on scrap or dictate the panels; no recording or public upload required.

Day 15 · Fresh model-key transfer check

Codes: AC9S7U01, AC9S7I06, AC9TDI8P06, AC9E7LA02. Goal: transfer trace, mismatch and claim-scope reasoning to unseen U cards and a new small log. Prepare: sealed learner check, private key.

1. Open · 3 min. Say the check helps choose a next teaching move; a neutral read-aloud or tactile traits are available.
2. Model · 5 min. Revisit different T1: smooth/rounded/short → S2 with three-trait verification. Put model away.
3. Prepare · 8 min. Rehearse how to record input → branch → candidate → full-descriptor check using T2. Keep fresh U descriptions closed.
4. Independent check · 10 min. Open unseen Day15 Items 1–2. Do not supply the branch, label or percentage.
5. Transfer exit · 6 min. Item 3 asks for a bounded statement from a new log. Preserve first responses before teaching; D15 practice is later.
6. Note · 3 min. Score trace, mismatch reason and claim scope separately. Access interruption is not observed, not a failure.

Later/home: Use D15 choices after the first check; do not send the held-out U cards for coached home completion.

Week 4 · Explain a number and choose a responsible format

The same habits transfer: show each step, verify an output, name a limit and make a version for a real reader. The numeric examples are invented. Core accessible routes are provided in every option; discretionary communication extras are an economic choice, not a choice about whether someone gets access.

Day 16 · Make powers checkable

Codes: AC9M7N02, AC9E7LY03. Goal: explain 72=2³×3² to a new reader, with a multiplication check. Prepare: number explanation storyboard, number Drafts A/B.

1. Open · 3 min. Ask which draft a reader could verify and why a true equation alone may be insufficient instruction.
2. Model · 5 min. 72=8×9=(2×2×2)×(3×3)=2³×3²; 2³=8, 3²=9, 8×9=72. Explain base and exponent separately.
3. Investigate · 8 min. Find Draft B's false 2³=6, 3²=6; evaluate each and mark where the argument breaks. Draft A is accurate but skips explanation.
4. Choice · 10 min. D16-A/B/C: factor-card proof, annotated error correction or younger-reader dialogue. Every route expands powers and multiplies back.
5. Check · 6 min. Evaluate 3²×2³=9×8=72. Ask why changing order of factors does not change product.
6. Note · 3 min. Separate arithmetic from audience clarity; prompt a new factor product if a memorised line conceals confusion.

Later/home: Optional prime-card extra; no calculator required, though a post-solution check is allowed by local plan.

Day 17 · Shape the explanation for an audience

Codes: AC9E7LA04, AC9E7LY06, AC9AMA8C01. Goal: plan an accurate four-frame print/audio-described mini-explainer for a younger reader. Prepare: blank storyboard.

1. Open · 3 min. Ask what a reader needs before seeing 2³×3²: a question/overview and what each symbol means.
2. Model · 5 min. Frame 1 goal; 2 split 72 into8×9; 3 expand primes and group repeated factors; 4 multiply back and invite one new check. Give each frame text-first reading order.
3. Investigate · 8 min. Compare a tiny unlabeled tree with a large captioned one; discuss meaning of font size, labels and an alt script without treating design as proof of arithmetic.
4. Choice · 10 min. D17-A/B/C: low-ink panel layout, complete audio-description script without recording, or tactile card sequence. Each uses equal mathematics and a labelled check.
5. Check · 6 min. Have a partner or teacher follow the sequence without oral hints; note one ambiguity and revise. If no real partner tested, label it a self-test.
6. Note · 3 min. Record actual audience/feedback and mathematical accuracy separately. A storyboard alone is design evidence, not publication impact.

Later/home: Paper four-box draft; no home printer or recording needed.

Day 18 · One optional outreach slot, two useful choices

Codes: AC9HE7K01, AC9HE7S04, AC9M7N06, AC9E7LY06. Goal: make a conditional choice under one slot/$25 cap, naming monetary cost, possible benefit and opportunity cost. Prepare: fictional optional outreach brief.

1. Open · 3 min. Core large-print/text/tactile access is already provided; ask what scarce resources remain for an extra: one showcase slot and $25 discretionary funds.
2. Model · 5 min. A practice station costs $18 and leaves $7; B take-home cards cost $24 and leave $1. Both fit cap. Price is monetary cost; next-best option's possible benefit is opportunity cost under a stated ranking.
3. Investigate · 8 min. List A's possible immediate-feedback benefit and B's possible repeat-practice benefit; both are unmeasured predictions. Choose two decision criteria without pretending access is optional.
4. Choice · 10 min. D18-A/B/C: committee note, ranking cards or cost/benefit board. State rank1/rank2, exact arithmetic, one given-up benefit, condition to verify.
5. Check · 6 min. If ranked B>A and B chosen, what is forgone? A's possible immediate-feedback benefit, not $24. Ask what still needs checking before an actual choice.
6. Note · 3 min. Record whether price, remaining funds and opportunity cost stayed distinct; recheck with reversed ranking if not.

Later/home: Compare A/B on paper only. No real procurement or family cost disclosure.

Day 19 · Test the explanation, then revise the confusing step

Codes: AC9E7LA02, AC9E7LY06, AC9AMA8C01, AC9M7N02. Goal: evaluate one number explanation against accuracy, navigation and access criteria. Prepare: Day17 draft and a private review partner or self-check route.

1. Open · 3 min. Say a useful critique identifies a line and evidence, not “bad design” or a judgement of the maker.
2. Model · 5 min. From Draft A, note equation true but symbols unexplained; from Draft B, show arithmetic wrong. Suggest one line: “Three 2s make 2³=8.”
3. Investigate · 8 min. Learners use three criteria: correct prime factors/product, traceable frame order, complete text alternative. Test each against actual draft evidence.
4. Choice · 10 min. D19-A/B/C: peer audit, self-audit with cover-and-reveal, or two-version comparison. Make one justified revision and preserve the earlier line.
5. Check · 6 min. Ask why a larger font cannot rescue 2³=6, and why correct math may still need a reader-facing explanation. Require one example from the source drafts.
6. Note · 3 min. Record content revision versus presentation revision; later test with an actual target reader only with school review/consent.

Later/home: Show a chosen adult a practice explanation if they wish; do not claim this is a field usability test.

Day 20 · Fresh cross-domain transfer check

Codes: AC9M7N02, AC9E7LA02, AC9E7LY06, AC9HE7K01. Goal: use a new prime-product explanation and a new optional choice to distinguish exact maths, reader needs and bounded opportunity cost. Prepare: sealed new learner check, private staff key.

1. Open · 3 min. Say this is a new scenario; use first work to plan the next lesson, not rank the learner.
2. Model · 5 min. Revisit 72's expanded powers and multiply-back. Put 72 away; do not display check values.
3. Prepare · 8 min. Rehearse a different small optional choice from Day18 by changing only the ranking, not the prices. Keep fresh check figures unseen.
4. Independent check · 10 min. Open unseen Day20 Items 1–2. Offer neutral reading or blank storyboard, no factor or decision hint.
5. Transfer exit · 6 min. Item 3 asks for an accurate, reader-facing revision with one limit. Save first version; D20 choices come later.
6. Note · 3 min. Mark prime arithmetic, source critique, clarity and opportunity-cost relation separately; access problems mean not observed.

Later/home: Optional routes after the first response use other numbers and contexts. No publication or real purchasing is implied.

The ten optional supplementary cards extend the timetable. The two fresh checks are internal formative tools, not validated assessments. Original SubjectNest lessons © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, CC BY 4.0.