Teacher lens
Did you watch it long enough?
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 9–10 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 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 9–10 | Grades 11–12 | University |
|---|---|---|---|
| attitude angle | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| mission state | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| solar energy | Yes | 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 | Your evidence supported a conclusion. Does it still, once you look for longer? | Where does the model agree with measured evidence, where does it differ, and what conclusion is justified? |
| Theory | Two runs of the same model with the same seed. Nothing about the spacecraft changes. Only how much of its mission you have seen. | Define quantities, units, and the comparison you will calculate. Stage intent: differences. |
| Prediction | Run the short version, write down what you would conclude about the spacecraft power margin, then predict whether that conclusion will survive. | Predict a quantitative difference between baseline and candidate. |
| Run | Run the short version first and commit to a conclusion before running the long one. | Execute baseline/candidate Twin runs and export a table or plot. Runtime remains the frozen Twin; this plan does not execute physics. |
| Analysis | Compare the two battery figures. Then ask what the short run could honestly have supported. | Calculate, model, compare, and test using simulated evidence only. Evidence intent: model/hardware correlation report + discrepancy analysis + V&V conclusion. |
| Decision | What claim would you now make about this spacecraft, and what evidence supports it? | Recommend the candidate with quantitative support and stated uncertainty. |
| Limitation | The long run is better evidence. Name one thing it still does not establish. | Name at least one frozen-model limitation that this experiment cannot answer. |