Days 11–15 sample Design and Technologies; Days 16–20 sample Digital Technologies. Every 12-minute block has an observable product or trace, with a clear plan-versus-implementation label. Use design and data sheet. No sharp cutting, heavy loads, hot tools, real passwords, personal dataset or public sharing. Day 19 uses the original offline Python starter only in a teacher-approved local environment; if no environment exists, record pseudocode as design, not implemented code.
Day 11 · A book rest with a real user · AC9TDE8P01, AC9TDE8P04
Kit: light paperback, recycled card, tape, foam blocks; no blades. 0–2: Brief: hold a light book open on a desk without blocking text. 2–4: Ask user needs (viewing angle, grip, stability) rather than assume one posture. 4–10: Sketch two shapes and collaboratively set a safe measurable criterion, such as “stays upright with this specified paperback for ten seconds.” 10–12: Check: user/test named, but no making claim today. Routes: shape cards; tactile fold; verbal brief. Response move: if “good” is criterion, ask what a tester would see. Home: notice one support that holds an object steady.
Day 12 · Fold and test a support · AC9TDE8P03, AC9TDE8K06
Kit: same light paperback/card/tape, tray and soft landing. 0–2: Clear bench; no heavy book. 2–4: Predict whether flat or triangular fold resists slipping better under this load. 4–10: Make both mini supports, test one at a time with book low over tray, measure upright seconds, note fold/material property. 10–12: Check: actual build/test logged; one sample does not prove every book’s stability. Routes: fold; hold/test with support; observe/time partner. Response move: if supports differ in card thickness too, repeat with matching card. Home: sketch a safer fold, no heavy test.
Day 13 · Trade-offs beyond strength · AC9TDE8K01, AC9TDE8P04
Kit: fictional option A reused cardboard replaced often; B new rigid board lasts longer; no lifecycle numbers. 0–2: Name strength, access, cost and resource use. 2–4: Predict what missing evidence could reverse a choice. 4–10: Build a criteria matrix and mark unknowns (actual durability, production impact), then make a conditional recommendation for a named fictional user. 10–12: Check: “reused always wins” is unsupported. Routes: tokens; matrix; spoken defence. Response move: turn an absolute claim into a question/test. Home: ask an adult what they repair rather than replace.
Day 14 · Improve the weak joint · AC9TDE8P02, AC9TDE8P05
Kit: Day 12 result: top slips after 4 seconds; same safe card/tape. 0–2: Locate the failing joint. 2–4: Choose one change (wider base or extra fold), not both. 4–10: Plan roles/time, make revised support if materials ready, rerun the same ten-second test, record result and next idea. 10–12: Check: a plan alone is distinct from a tested iteration; log whichever occurred. Routes: build; direct; document/time. Response move: if test conditions shift, reset same book/angle. Home: describe how one change helps isolate cause.
Day 15 · Technologies Check A · AC9TDE8P02, AC9TDE8P04
Kit: fresh light-item stand brief in ASSESSMENT. 0–2: Recall criterion and fair test. 2–4: Model a different material choice. 4–10: Independent Tech A. 10–12: Check: staff uses private key; physical making evidence is separate. Routes: draw; write; dictate. Response move: ask for a user test when only a nice-looking sketch is offered. Home: notice a design trade-off in a shared object.
Day 16 · Images can be numbers · AC9TDI8K03, AC9TDI8K04
Kit: original 4×4 black/white grid and sequence of 0/1 cards; no real photos. 0–2: Agree 0=white, 1=black, row-major order. 2–4: Predict how changing one digit changes image. 4–10: Decode an invented 16-digit sequence into 4×4 squares, change one bit and compare; explain why an agreed grid size and code matter. 10–12: Check: this is simplified monochrome representation, not all image formats. Routes: flip tiles; tactile raised squares; type/dictate digits. Response move: if row order differs, state convention and retrace. Home: find one digital image and ask how it might be stored, no upload.
Day 17 · Trace a nested decision · AC9TDI8P05, AC9TDI8P06
Kit: original route algorithm: for each fictional request, if access route available then if quiet needed choose Q else choose S; otherwise refer to staff. 0–2: Name inputs and outputs. 2–4: Predict result for access=yes, quiet=no. 4–10: Trace three cases including access=no; identify one missing case, add a branch and trace again. 10–12: Check: nested “if” sits inside first condition; a trace is not a running program. Routes: flowchart cards; pseudocode; oral step trace. Response move: if a case disappears, mark its branch in a different shape. Home: explain a nested everyday if/then without personal data.
Day 18 · Design for usefulness and privacy · AC9TDI8P07, AC9TDI8P14
Kit: fictional school-room finder wireframe asking name, birthday and preferred quietness. 0–2: Define user task. 2–4: Separate required input (quietness/access needs as optional choices) from unnecessary identifiers. 4–10: Redesign two screens with clear back/confirm controls, remove unneeded data and peer-test paper route; do not collect real access needs. 10–12: Check: privacy improves when unnecessary data are never requested; paper screen is a design. Routes: movable tiles; tactile labelled controls; spoken walkthrough. Response move: if identifier remains, ask what function actually needs it. Home: no app permissions changed without adult advice.
Day 19 · Debug real code, locally · AC9TDI8P09, AC9TDI8P06
Kit: teacher-approved offline Python runtime and original starter, with fictional test cases only. 0–2: State expected outputs for three room requests. 2–4: Run starter and notice the intentionally wrong quiet-route branch. 4–10: Learner edits the function, reruns all supplied cases and adds one edge case; staff records actual code change/output. The staff key keeps the reference fix private. 10–12: Check: only observed run/debugging supports implementation; reading code is a trace. Routes: keyboard/switch; pair programmer who makes an actual edit; teacher-scribed code under learner direction. Response move: if learner fixes one case only, run all tests again. Home: no software installation required.
Day 20 · Technologies Check B · AC9TDI8K03, AC9TDI8P06, AC9TDI8P14
Kit: fresh pixel, branch and data-minimisation cases in ASSESSMENT. 0–2: Recall agreed encoding and trace order. 2–4: Work a different two-cell example. 4–10: Independent Tech B. 10–12: Check: staff separates paper reasoning from observed Day 19 code and gives private next move. Routes: tile grid; write; dictate. Response move: retrace a new case or run an approved program if needed. Home: explain why a code needs an agreed convention.