Commit 839fc6

2026-04-12 20:15:37 jeremy: Add C01-2 checkpoint proposal for Gantt chart readiness Proposed self-check criteria for Checkpoint B (gates C1-2 writing test), teacher quick-check guide, and feedback prompts. Includes notes policy decision flag and suggested checklist integration. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

/dev/null .. SAT/C01-2-Checkpoint-Proposal.md
@@ 0,0 1,65 @@
+	# C01-2 Checkpoint Proposal: Gantt Chart / Project Board Ready
+
+	**Status:** Proposal (pending Jeremy's approval)
+	**Created:** 2026-04-12
+	**Source:** TKT-005 --- C1-2 Assessment Package
+
+	---
+
+	## Checkpoint B: Gantt Chart / Project Board Ready
+
+	This checkpoint gates C1-2 (Writing Test). A student who completes all items has a solid project board and genuinely understands their tasks before the writing test. A student who hasn't completed the checkpoint sits the test with limited knowledge of their own plan --- naturally lower marks.
+
+	### Student Self-Check Criteria
+
+	Students can check each item themselves before the lesson:
+
+	1. **Gantt chart format using software** --- Project plan is in Gantt chart format (GitHub Projects Roadmap View or equivalent). Each task shows as a bar with a start and end date on a timeline. Not just a task list.
+
+	2. **PSM stages for U3O2 covered** --- Chart includes tasks for Analysis (data collection, functional requirements, constraints, SRS) and Design (design ideas, evaluation criteria, detailed designs).
+
+	3. **PSM stages for U4O1 covered** --- Chart includes tasks for Development (setup, core features, GUI, documentation) and Evaluation (validation, testing, beta testing, evaluation against criteria).
+
+	4. **Reasonable task granularity** --- Each PSM stage has at least 2--3 specific activities. Not just 3--4 giant blocks. A teacher looking at the chart can see what the student is actually planning to do.
+
+	### Teacher Quick Check (circulating, <60 seconds per student)
+
+	| Check | What to look for |
+	|-------|-----------------|
+	| Gantt format | Tasks display as bars on a timeline in Roadmap View. Not a plain list. |
+	| Both units | U3O2 tasks (analysis, design) AND U4O1 tasks (development, evaluation) are present. |
+	| Task granularity | 10+ tasks across stages, not just 3--4 giant blocks. |
+	| Quick verbal | "Point to one task and tell me why it matters for your project." Specific answer = ready. |
+
+	### Feedback Prompts (done to strong)
+
+	| Area | Prompt |
+	|------|--------|
+	| Not Gantt format | "Switch to Roadmap View. Each task needs a start and end date so it shows as a bar." |
+	| Missing U4O1 | "Where is development and evaluation? Your chart needs both units." |
+	| Missing U3O2 | "Where are analysis and design? Those come first." |
+	| Tasks too coarse | "Break 'Development' down. What does development look like for your project?" |
+	| Tasks too vague | "'Do research' --- research what, specifically? What data are you collecting?" |
+	| Ready for depth | "In the writing test, you will need to explain why tasks matter to your project specifically." |
+
+	---
+
+	## Proposed Checklist Integration
+
+	**Where:** C01-2026 checklist, under "Project Plan (C1-2)" section, before the assessment tasks.
+
+	**Suggestion:** Group the existing learning tasks (PSM overview, set up GitHub Projects, add tasks, Gantt chart resources) under a "Checkpoint B tasks" heading. Add the self-check criteria above as the readiness gate before the writing test.
+
+	**Additional learning task proposal:** Add "Task relevance drill" --- pick 3 tasks from your board, write 2--3 sentences each explaining why they matter for your project. This is direct practice for the writing test and can be done as homework or in-class warm-up.
+
+	**Note:** The full assessment package (teacher protocol, marking guide, scoring guide) is in `SD26-Teachers/sat/C01-2026/C01-2-Assessment-Package.typ`. This wiki page covers only the checkpoint criteria suitable for the student-facing checklist.
+
+	---
+
+	## Open Decision: Notes Policy
+
+	The assessment package proposes **closed book** (no notes, no printed plan) for the writing test. This tests genuine understanding rather than ability to read a chart.
+
+	**Alternative:** Allow printed Gantt chart as reference. Shifts test from "do you understand?" to "can you explain?" --- less discriminating for authenticity.
+
+	Jeremy needs to decide before the test runs.