# Year 8 editorial run-through — 29 September 2026

This is an **author simulation and artefact check**. No teacher, learner, family or funder has independently trialled the sequence. It records what a teacher can verify now and what still needs people in a real setting. The [English](english/term-1/weeks-03-04/RUN-THROUGH.md), [mathematics](mathematics/term-1/weeks-03-04/RUN-THROUGH.md), [integrated](integrated/term-1/weeks-03-04/RUN-THROUGH.md) and [five-area](supplementary/term-1/weeks-03-04/QA-RUN-THROUGH.md) records contain the separate Weeks 3–4 desk routes.

## Teacher at the start of the day

I followed the [start guide](README.md) into [Day 1 English](term-1/weeks-01-02/english/LESSONS.md) and [Day 1 mathematics](term-1/weeks-01-02/mathematics/LESSONS.md). The same fictional price card supplies an ambiguous headline for English and a precise fixed-plus-rate model for maths. Materials are Text A, a four-column claim mat or paper, and a calculator/counters if useful. Every subject lesson totals 25 minutes in six timed moves; the integrated lesson is a separate 35-minute application. The teacher can ask “what does seven mean?” and has the exact answer: the per-repair charge. These times have not been measured in a real class; printing and display setup are before session time.

## Learner examples checked independently

- **Model:** `A(n)=18+7n`, `B(n)=10n`, `n` a non-negative whole number. At `n=5`, A=$53 and B=$50, so B is $3 lower. Equality `18+7n=10n` gives `n=6`, checked as $60 each. At `n=8`, A=$74, B=$80. With the integrated *hypothetical A-only* $9 parts fee at eight, A=$83 and B=$80; that changes the result. A same $9 fee for both would leave A $6 lower.
- **Source reading:** the flyer correctly states a lower marginal charge for A but could make a reader think its total is lower at every count. At two repairs A=$32, B=$20. The Day 5 key demands a bounded result, source label and missing terms, not an opinion about a real business.
- **Sampling:** the travel model's pseudorandom A and B were reproduced with seeds 1 and 67 from 100 fictional IDs. Bicycle proportions are `3/20=15%` and `4/20=20%`, a five percentage-point difference equal to one person. Rack C is a constructed convenience result: `16/20=80%` is arithmetically correct **for C** and cannot justify a whole-school claim. The fictional population is 20/100=20% bicycle. Across 1000 seeded simulations, average absolute error was 8.95 percentage points for size 10 and 3.92 for size 40; this illustrates a usual sample-size effect without promising any one sample is exact.
- **Fresh assessment:** arts-club model random seeds 5 and 4 give 11/20=55% and 14/20=70%; the constructed meeting sample is 18/20=90%; the known fictional model population is 60/100=60%. These values match both independent [English](term-1/weeks-01-02/english/ASSESSMENT.md#day-10-check-b) and [maths](term-1/weeks-01-02/mathematics/ASSESSMENT.md#day-10-check-b) keys.

## Print/access check

All three editable SVGs were exported as A4 landscape PDFs, inspected as rendered pages, and checked for extractable text. The first graph export had an unintended filled triangle because its axis path inherited an SVG fill; that was fixed and the page re-rendered. PDFs embed subsetted DejaVu Sans, whose separate [font licence notice](term-1/weeks-01-02/print/FONT-RIGHTS.md) is included. These are **untagged print PDFs**; the exact [text alternatives](term-1/weeks-01-02/print/TEXT-ALTERNATIVES.md) and tactile/card routes are the accessibility route pending actual user testing. No mode is presumed to fit every student.

## Weeks 3–4 cross-pack desk pass

- I followed the Year 8 [maths](mathematics/term-1/weeks-03-04/README.md) and [English](english/term-1/weeks-03-04/README.md) teacher routes into their clean learner pages, fresh Day 15/20 checks and public teacher keys. For maths Check A, `4(q+3)+2q=6q+12`, so a total of 42 gives `q=5`; 39 gives `q=4.5`, outside its whole-card domain. Check B crosses at `r=6`, with both layouts at 31 tokens; `18−2r≥6` permits whole `r=0…6`, so an attractive seven-batch comparison is outside the stated pin rule.
- In English Check A, the two width forms both give **84 cm** for four cards in the paper model; they say nothing about clips or every real wall. In Check B, `7+11×3=40` minutes, while four runs need 51; the notice's passive “distribution will be arranged” does not name an actor or prove it happened. A neutral read-aloud supports analysis of the text as heard but is recorded separately from independent print reading.
- I inspected the [Open Page Lab inquiry](integrated/term-1/weeks-03-04/README.md) as a source-and-model task: Check A distinguishes **33 cm per ribbon** from **99 cm combined**; Check B keeps demonstrations `r` separate from kit count `c`. The [offline model audit](integrated/term-1/weeks-03-04/interactive/model-audit.html) has a paper route and uses only fictional inputs. Its author records desktop/mobile and invalid-input checks; publication must preserve its program and stylesheet under the site's script rules.
- The [optional five-area menu](supplementary/term-1/weeks-03-04/README.md) is treated as a short supplement. A paper plan, drawing or score cannot stand in for an observed experiment, movement, built object or performance when a selected description requires one. Each area needs local time, equipment, safety and access decisions.

## Funder/release reading

The [manifest](manifest.json) pins the official ACARA workbook retrieval and description hashes, original asset hashes and file-level rights. Every scenario is labelled fictional. Source material, SubjectNest originals, code licences and embedded font subsets have separate notices. Weeks **5–40** are **plan only**, and no student outcome, state compliance, external endorsement or verified translation is claimed. These four weeks are an inspectable authored slice, not evidence of a complete Year 8 product.

## Human work still required

An experienced Year 8 teacher must actually run the days and review timing, explanation load and learner work. The curriculum leader must check the applicable syllabus and full learning-area timetable. Learners using AAC, screen readers, braille, large print, another language or alternative response modes must test the access routes in context. Any real survey or price example needs current source, consent/privacy review and school approval. No local First Nations knowledge or language should be added without relevant authority and attribution. Record resulting revisions and rerun the [pack verifier](verify_pack.py).

**Rights:** Original editorial note © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, SubjectNest, [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/); credit, source and changes required.