# Two fresh formative transfer checks · learner copy

**Teacher:** Introduce each section on its day; these prompts and their teacher key are publicly accessible, so they are formative practice rather than secure exams. If a first encounter is necessary, use an equivalent locally unseen case. Give the full source words and, if needed, a neutral read-aloud, enlarged text, screen reader, tactile/reference cards, sign/AAC, keyboard or learner-directed scribe. A neutral access route does not tell the learner which claim or reference to choose. Record content hints separately. These original texts are **fictional** and are not real observations, evaluations or public notices.

## Day 15 · new demo log and compressed draft

**New-case source H — invented paper-demonstration log:** At 11:00, a club placed three paper wheel diagrams beside a cardboard switch model. At 11:10, Rina swapped the labels on two diagrams. After the swap, at 11:20, one observer asked which diagram matched the switch. The log ends there. It gives no later test, total observer count or feedback from the person who asked.

**New-case draft H2:** “The correction of the diagrams removed confusion. This change secured understanding.”

1. Unpack the noun `correction`: who did what according to the log? Does the log establish that the swap **corrected** anything? Quote or point to an exact detail.
2. What does `this change` most likely point back to? Identify one outcome phrase in H2 that is not supported. Explain why simply adding `therefore` would not fix the evidence gap.
3. Revise H2 into **two or three linked sentences** for a reader who missed the log. Name the actor/action, use one precise summary noun or reference and a warranted connective, and state one thing still unknown.

## Day 20 · new studio report and miniature fiction

**New-case source J — invented book-binding studio log:** At 2:00, a group placed four instruction cards in order. At 2:15, Jo exchanged cards 2 and 3. Later, one visitor paused at card 3 and asked what came next. The log has no total reader count, trial after the exchange or interview about why that visitor paused.

**New-case draft J2:** “The reordering improved clarity. This success ended uncertainty.”

**New-case fiction J3:** “Rae lifted the third card, set it down, then watched the visitor trace the blank tabletop. ‘Maybe start again,’ Rae said. The room seemed to wait with them.”

1. Unpack `reordering` into actor/action. Identify what `this success` claims, and explain which exact information the log lacks before that claim could be made. Does `later` by itself prove a cause?
2. Compare `clarity` in J2 with a possible abstract noun such as `hesitation` for J3. Give a detail from **each** text and explain why a report outcome claim and an interpretation of fiction need different wording.
3. Write a **two-to-four-sentence** note for an absent reader about J. Give actor/action, one clear reference or useful summary noun, an honest connective and one limit. Add a short phrase that labels any inference from J3 as your **reading**, not a measured fact about Rae or the visitor.

These checks guide a next lesson. They are not validated measures or evidence of classroom impact. Original SubjectNest fresh texts and prompts © NeuroForgeIO Pty Ltd 2026, [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).