P04 definite iteration taught from zero and taken to one solved Code Lab task, after a starter that retested P03 cold; stopped at her request ("time is up") with 'Add them up' fixed but unverified and the handwritten exit ticket not run. Starter 3 set, 3 attempted, 0 blank: if/elif/else at mark=50 → "merit" unaided; DIV/MOD names for // and % → "i don't know" (second consecutive session, told 8 and 15 Sep; hook given: DIV keeps whole numbers, MOD keeps the remainder); spot-the-error on `else score < 40:` → "< 40: is the eror" unaided, the fault named before it reached the app. P04 worked example built line by line: say-back of `for i in range(1, 6):` was "it shows numders in a range" — 'shows' corrected (the line counts, it prints nothing); listed 1 2 3 4 5 correctly. Typed print(i) unindented → SyntaxError, fixed after one prompt. Output came as 1–9 because she had typed range(1, 10); found by pasting her code, and she stated the stop-before rule from it. Predictions 2/2 unaided: range(3, 7) → 3 4 5 6; print(i * 10) over range(1, 4) → 10 20 30. Code Lab 'Times table' solved 3 runs, no hint (run 30, split out under a fresh id because the app re-sent client_run_id lab-mtwz56ci again — parent action still open); her fix was adding the product line, named `ha` (readability, P02 loose end). Running-total worked example traced 1, 3, 6 unaided. 'Add them up': after 6 min "times up and i din't work", all tests red; code pasted showed range(1, n+1) correct and `total = n + i` for `total = total + i`; compared side by side with the example, she replied "fixed and time is up" — verdict not seen. No handwritten code observed; fortnightly handwriting now two blocks overdue.
FIRST: confirm 'Add them up' (p04-sum) — she said "fixed" but no test verdict was seen; get the verdict in her first reply, then a 4-line handwritten for-loop program on paper, photographed, as the P04 exit ticket (overdue since W37). Starter, no notes: name DIV and MOD from // and % (third ask — a third miss is a demotion of the P08 names sub-skill); trace `total = 0; for i in range(2, 5): total = total + i; print(total)` with the values of total each time round; one P03 boundary prediction. Then P05 while loops only if the exit ticket passes; otherwise consolidate P04 with 'Star grid' (p06-grid) after a nested-loop worked example. PARENT: app still re-sends the stale client_run_id lab-mtwz56ci; Times table split out as run 30.
'Add them up' (p04-sum): bug found and reportedly fixed (`total = n + i` → `total = total + i`) but no test verdict seen. Handwritten P04 exit ticket on paper not run. Open on both.
| Topic | Name | Change | Evidence recorded |
|---|---|---|---|
| P03 | Gap → Developing | 17 Sep cold retest, later session, no notes: if/elif/else at boundary 50 → Merit unaided; spot-the-error named `else score < 40:` as the fault unaided. 2/2, 0 blank. This is the later-session confirmation the 15 Sep audit asked for (gap → developing, single level); secure still needs an independent harder retest. | |
| P08 | Secure → Secure | 17 Sep starter: asked the AQA names for // and % → "i don't know", second consecutive session (told 8 Sep, 15 Sep). Told again with a hook (DIV keeps whole numbers, MOD keeps the remainder). Operations themselves not tested today. | |
| P04 | Not started → Not started | Taught 17 Sep from zero: worked example for i in range(1, 6) line by line; say-back 'it shows numbers in a range' corrected; listed 1–5 unaided; predictions 2/2 unaided (range(3,7) → 3 4 5 6; i*10 → 10 20 30); Code Lab 'Times table' 3 runs no hint (run 30); running-total trace 1,3,6 unaided; 'Add them up' wrote total = n + i, fixed after a side-by-side compare, verdict unseen. No exit ticket, no handwritten code. Proposed developing; not moved. | |
| P02 | Secure → Secure | 17 Sep: named the product variable `ha` in Times table — second readability observation against the print(/naming loose end; told to use answer/product. Not a retrieval item. |