Skip to content

Teacher lens

Point the spacecraft. Change the power.

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.

What each depth is asked to produce

These requirements drive which inputs the learner sees.

Evidence requirements by academic depth
DepthPredictionTwo casesPlot or tableExplanationLimitationProvenance
Grade 6YesYesYes
Grade 7YesYesYesYes
Grade 8YesYesYesYesYesYes
Grades 9–10YesYesYesYesYesYes
Grades 11–12YesYesYesYesYesYes
UniversityYesYesYesYesYesYes

Which evidence channels are visible

A channel hidden at a depth is removed on the server. It never reaches the learner's browser.

Visible evidence channels by academic depth
ChannelGrade 6Grade 7Grade 8Grades 9–10Grades 11–12University
attitude quaternionYes
battery socYesYesYesYesYesYes
composition compile identityYes
composition semantic hashYes
coupling policy hashYesYes
equivalent solar incidenceYesYesYesYesYes
geometry limitationYesYesYesYes
solar energyYesYesYesYesYesYes
thermal exposureYesYesYesYesYes

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.

Learner-facing wording against the academic phrasing
StepWhat the learner readsAcademic phrasing
Mission questionDoes the way a spacecraft faces change how much electricity its solar panels make?How does spacecraft attitude change generated solar energy on the accepted WSC-A6.1 coupling, and what does that coupling not include?
TheoryTwo runs, one difference: which way the spacecraft is pointing. Everything else stays the same, so anything that changes is caused by the pointing.Name what you will observe in familiar language. Stage intent: observe battery/solar when sunlight/orientation language is disclosed.
PredictionBefore you run anything: which way of pointing do you think will make more electricity, and why?Predict a simple trend (higher/lower, sooner/later) before running the Twin.
RunRun the first way of pointing, then the second. Same orbit, same spacecraft, same length of time — only the pointing changes.Run the Twin once and describe what you see. Runtime remains the frozen Twin; this plan does not execute physics.
AnalysisLook at what changed between the two runs, and what stayed the same. The energy and incidence lines are the clearest signals.Explain the trend without using hidden hashes or professional jargon. Evidence intent: solar/SOC comparison + coupling limitation statement.
DecisionWhich way of pointing do you recommend, and which number in your evidence backs it up?Choose a simple next action and say why it is safer or clearer.
LimitationName one thing this software cannot tell you about a real spacecraft.Name at least one frozen-model limitation that this experiment cannot answer.

What stays constant