# Technologies · Years 7–8 band · optional Days 11–20

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](print/design-data-sheet.pdf). No sharp cutting, heavy loads, hot tools, real passwords, personal dataset or public sharing. Day 19 uses the original [offline Python starter](code/route_choice.py) 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](ASSESSMENT.md). 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](code/route_choice.py), 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](ASSESSMENT.md). 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.