Five classes, 350 minutes, 0 formal IA minutes. The real inquiry is the school briefing on recommendation, discovery and user control. Main responses remain in the original workbook. No new task IDs or Forms.
Trace before trusting
Work: Trace Lab after paper trace; separate teacher-held Sprint 2 retry.
Budget: retrieval and quiz repair 5 · explicit teaching 12 · guided search sort filter 10 · independent trace application 15 · fresh transfer retry 20 · feedback and transition 8 = 70 min
Success: the search trace names each inspected record and stops; a sorting pass names comparisons and swaps. Stuck? Write the current list after each swap, and never divide by zero.
Fresh check / next step: Complete the existing d10 trace boxes before the teacher releases the fresh Sprint 2 task. The /8 retry is 20 minutes, closed-book, no AI or Coach, calculator and agreed access supports. It remains task ibds-26-s02-d08, attempt 2; preserve attempt 1.
Feedback route: Circle the earliest mismatch, name the assumption or instruction that caused it, then repair only that step. Keep first and corrected traces.
Who moves when a weight changes?
Work: TikTok stated signals + paper Loopline ranking; Tune the Feed for exploration.
Budget: retrieval 5 · explicit teaching 12 · inquiry or lab 30 · independent application 15 · feedback and transition 8 = 70 min
Success: a score for each eligible item and a reproducible descending order. Stuck? Check length, topic normalization, the selected setting and ties: higher c, then ascending item_id.
Fresh check / next step: Choose a library feed or a sports feed as an equivalent practice context. Propose one changed weight, explain a rank consequence and defend a cost. This is unscored changed-case practice; use original d03 response boxes for the Loopline trace.
Feedback route: Swap one row with a partner; diagnose a calculation rather than replacing their decision. Return to the simulation limits question: which real decisions or signals does this model omit?
The feed changes its own evidence
Work: Four Vs and Roundtable; A/C risk comparison and L platform-work lens.
Budget: retrieval 5 · explicit teaching 12 · inquiry or lab 30 · independent application 15 · feedback and transition 8 = 70 min
Success: the displayed item gets the bonus, not every item. Stuck? Label the current versus next-round scores. Keep clean/small (20 complete records) and messy/large (200 records, 60 duplicated, 40 without exposure context) distinct; state what you would check before combining them.
Fresh check / next step: Model an alternative: an unseen item receives one discovery slot. Explain one gain, one cost and one model limit. Add who supplies moderation or labelling labour and who controls the rule. This is collected practice with feedback, not proof of intent.
Feedback route: Debate in Student OS: Should one in five slots be reserved for discovery? Post a mechanism-based claim first; reply by asking what evidence would change the claim. No journal receipt is claimed by copying text.
Explain the mechanism independently
Work: Registered quiz and correction; algorithm dilemmas; original independent P1 explanation.
Budget: quiz and correction 17 · explicit teaching 8 · inquiry or lab 25 · independent application 15 · transition 5 = 70 min
Success: a connected explanation with an intermediate operation and a case-specific result. Stuck? Point to the row or arrow your sentence explains. Replace “the algorithm did it” with the operation.
Fresh check / next step: Write the existing d05 Paper 1-style paragraph independently for 15 minutes. It receives separate formative feedback and adds no marks to the quiz. Keep it beside your first version. Short fresh check: a music feed increases freshness weight; explain one plausible change and one claim the available data cannot support.
Feedback route: Use one evidence-linked next action from the teacher. Tomorrow, write a new two-sentence explanation of the same weakness on a different context. Do not overwrite the quiz or first paragraph.
From visibility to a defensible consequence
Work: Business/work chapter review; Y revenue bases; A/C P2 questions 1–3, then independent consequence chain.
Budget: retrieval 5 · explicit teaching 12 · inquiry or lab 30 · independent application 15 · feedback and transition 8 = 70 min
Success: one claim traceable to each source and a relationship between them. Stuck? Use the section heading and paragraph opening; distinguish “provider states”, “regulator preliminarily finds” and “I infer”.
Fresh check / next step: Choose creator income or cultural visibility. Write a sourced impact → implication chain with a counter-perspective and a conditional judgment. Then transfer independently: a fictional local music feed doubles opportunities to be displayed, but supplies no earnings data. Explain one likely opportunity and one unresolved consequence. Use original d06 boxes for the main chain.
Feedback route: Ask a partner which claim goes beyond its source. Repair the weakest link, preserving version 1. Schedule a no-notes return at the opening of d07 (13 October): explain a feedback loop and source limitation on a new case.
What is recorded?
Monday: ibds-26-s02-d08, attempt 2, /8, ibds-26-s02-bundle; retain attempt 1. Thursday: ibds-26-s03-d05, registered quiz /12, ibds-26-s03-bundle; eight MC /8 plus two teacher-reviewed responses /4, four older items inside ten. The d05 paragraph receives separate feedback only. Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday are collected formative evidence. Partial paper practice does not produce a predicted grade.
Observation: a corrected trace or a controlled trial. Conversation: which term or evidence supports a choice? Product: saved trace, loop, source passport or sourced consequence chain. Record actual evidence references when observed; do not equate these planned opportunities with achievement.
Use the existing project-specific Form released by the teacher, and export work if access fails. The journal button is an explicit hand-off, not a submission receipt. Coach may help vocabulary, access and a parallel process example; independent evidence selection, calculations, analysis and judgement remain yours.
Chapter reading checks
Wednesday: 3.1 pp. 72–74. Thursday: 3.2 pp. 81–89. Friday: 4.2 pp. 213–219. Use the four-response independent check for each assigned section, then correct after feedback and cite a supporting passage. Each check fits inside six minutes of the existing guided/inquiry block. No marks are added to the /12 quiz.
Open registered Google Forms and the Student OS reflection route. Dedicated chapter capture is specified locally and awaits registration.