Teacher lens
Write the rule before you need it.
The same spacecraft model at all six academic depths. Nothing below is written by hand — every cell is read from the disclosure layer the lesson actually uses.
← PrepareSunlight to energyOrbit pass and linkPower through the shadowTruth and measurementDeployment to first contactCommanding attitudeStabilising the spinSurviving the environmentPlanning the observationConfiguring the spacecraftDiagnosing the missionWriting a safe policyProving it against evidence
What each depth is asked to produce
These requirements drive which inputs the learner sees.
| Depth | Prediction | Two cases | Plot or table | Explanation | Limitation | Provenance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grades 11–12 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| University | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Which evidence channels are visible
A channel hidden at a depth is removed on the server. It never reaches the learner's browser.
| Channel | Grades 11–12 | University |
|---|---|---|
| mission state | Yes | Yes |
Learner wording and curriculum wording
Learners read the mission in plain language. The curriculum phrasing signed off in the frozen academic layer is unchanged, and is shown here so you can map one to the other.
| Step | What the learner reads | Academic phrasing |
|---|---|---|
| Mission question | The spacecraft met a fault it had no rule for. What should the rule have said? | Can a bounded policy make repeatable decisions without violating mission safety/constraint rules? |
| Theory | A mission policy is a set of rules written in advance: when this condition holds, take this action. The spacecraft follows them alone. | Frame the trade using performance criteria and bounded policy/language where allowed. Stage intent: bounded policy. |
| Prediction | Before you look: what do you think a spacecraft should do first when something goes wrong, and why? | Predict the trade outcome against named criteria. |
| Run | Run the mission and collect its readings. | Use existing safe grammar or bounded controls only; never arbitrary hosted code. Runtime remains the frozen Twin; this plan does not execute physics. |
| Analysis | Find the moment things changed, then ask what a rule could have checked before that point. | Evaluate and optimise within the frozen Twin limits. Evidence intent: policy/state artifact + scenario tests + safety/verification rationale. |
| Decision | Write one rule, as a condition and an action, and cite the reading that justifies it. | Record an engineering memo decision that remains software-authoritative. |
| Limitation | Name one thing this model does not tell you about whether your rule is safe to fly. | Name at least one frozen-model limitation that this experiment cannot answer. |