C01-3 Checkpoint Proposal: Annotated Plan Ready
Status: Proposal (pending Jeremy's approval) Created: 2026-04-12 Source: TKT-006 --- C1-3 Assessment Package
Checkpoint C: Annotated Plan Ready
This checkpoint gates C1-3 (10-minute Interview). A student who completes all items has a genuine, annotated project plan and can walk the teacher through their planning decisions. A student who hasn't completed the checkpoint spends interview time trying to reconstruct their reasoning --- naturally lower marks.
Student Self-Check Criteria
Students can check each item themselves before the lesson:
Milestones defined --- Plan includes teacher-provided milestones (criterion due dates) AND at least 2 student-defined milestones (e.g., "Core features complete," "Beta-ready build"). Clearly marked on the Gantt chart.
Task sequencing shown --- Tasks are not a flat list. The order is intentional: tasks that depend on earlier tasks come after them. A reader can see why task X comes before task Y.
Time allocations present --- Every task has a start date and end date. Timeline is realistic --- not everything crammed into the last week.
Dependencies identified --- At least 2 dependencies are noted on the plan (annotated, colour-coded, or written next to tasks). A dependency means: "I cannot start task B until task A is finished."
Annotations explaining choices --- Plan has handwritten or digital annotations explaining why things are structured this way. Not just labels --- reasoning.
Artefact ready --- Annotated plan is printed or saved on screen. Student can show it during the interview and point to specific parts.
Teacher Quick Check (circulating, <60 seconds per student)
| Check | What to look for |
|---|---|
| Milestones | At least 3 visible (teacher due dates + student-defined). Prompt: "Where are your milestones?" |
| Sequencing | Tasks ordered, not random. Dependencies marked or implied. |
| Annotations | Handwritten notes, highlights, arrows explaining choices. Not blank. |
| Quick verbal | "Point to a dependency and tell me what happens if the first task is late." |
Feedback Prompts (done to strong)
| Area | Prompt |
|---|---|
| No student milestones | "Where are your milestones? What's a point where you'd stop and check progress?" |
| Flat task list | "Which task must happen before which? Draw an arrow or write a note." |
| No annotations | "Why did you put data collection first? Write a note explaining your reasoning." |
| Unrealistic timeline | "3 days for development and 4 weeks for analysis --- does that match reality?" |
| No dependencies | "Which tasks can't start until another finishes? Find at least 2 and mark them." |
| Ready for depth | "Can you trace your critical path? That's what I'll ask about in the interview." |
Proposed Checklist Integration
Where: C01-2026 checklist, under "Planning Detail (C1-3)" section, before the assessment tasks.
Suggestion: Group the existing learning tasks (add milestones/dependencies, "why monitor?" + peer review, annotate plan) under a "Checkpoint C tasks" heading. Add the self-check criteria above as the readiness gate before the interview.
Additional learning task proposals:
- "Interview rehearsal" --- Walk a partner through your annotated plan while they ask questions from a provided question list. 10 min timed. Direct practice for the interview.
- "Dependency mapping" --- For each dependency on your plan, write what happens if the predecessor is delayed. Builds genuine understanding for interview.
Note: The full assessment package (teacher protocol, question bank, scoring guide, worked examples) is in SD26-Teachers/sat/C01-2026/C01-3-Assessment-Package.typ. This wiki page covers only the checkpoint criteria suitable for the student-facing checklist.
Key VCAA Rubric Points for C1-3
The VCAA rubric (Indicator 3) has two important thresholds:
- 7--8 threshold: Student must explain why the project needs to be monitored (project-specific, not generic) AND document student-provided milestones.
- 9--10 threshold: Student must document dependencies and critical path AND discuss how progress will be monitored and documented (tools, frequency, what they record).
Monitoring is the key differentiator. Without monitoring reasoning, a student caps at 6.