The completed planner switches between an optional familiar-place path and an Elm Square model. Bench and fountain buttons produce two worked routes to the library under the same start/action/order criteria. A separate permission control keeps unconfirmed contributed context out of the reuse preview. The 35-minute plan stays unchanged across the choices.
Offer a choice with the same academic goal
The target is to write directions using a landmark, an action and an ordered sequence. Both choices use the same criteria: name the starting point, give a clear action and put route steps in a coherent order.
Choice A: Voluntarily describe a familiar public place. No address, identity detail or cultural disclosure is required. Confirm permission before reusing any contributed context in teaching materials.
Choice B: Use the supplied fictional Elm Square map. The library is north of the central bench; the fountain is south of the bench. This route-writing alternative is available without explaining why a learner chooses it.
Cornell's coaching toolkit discusses connecting lessons to student-expressed experiences and prior context. That concept informs the input-to-adaptation record here; it does not support guessing group traits or guaranteeing educational equity from one lesson. Coaching Toolkit, Culturally Responsive Education
Model two starting points in the same fictional geometry
For the original map, use north at the top and these relative locations:
North: Library / Center: Bench / South: Fountain
This is a fictional writing diagram, not a real walking route or safety instruction. Two separately labeled fictional model inputs lead to different orientations:
| Model input | Proposed direction | Evidence against the unchanged criteria |
|---|---|---|
| F1 chooses the bench as a landmark. | “Start at the bench, walk north to the library.” | Names the start and action; library is north of bench. |
| F2 suggests the fountain as the starting landmark. | “Start at the fountain, walk north past the bench to the library.” | Names the start and action; orders fountain, bench, library. |
Neither model represents actual student input or a community trait. Both starting points can support coherent directions. Do not treat one as culturally correct and the other as deficient.
Alternative wording can meet the criteria. The teacher reviews the route meaning and sequence rather than requiring an exact match to the sample sentences.
Record what informed the teaching change
Leave actual learner and teacher entries blank:
Exact voluntarily supplied input: ______ / Input source/version: ______ / Permission to use this context: ______ / Teacher assumption still to check: ______ / Prompt before adaptation: ______ / Prompt change and reason: ______ / Academic target retained: ______ / Planned work evidence: ______ / Actual evidence, when observed: ______ / Perspective not yet represented / follow-up: ______
These notes help you ask “Whose words informed this change?” A supplied preference can guide the example's starting point without changing the objective. An unconfirmed view remains a question; it cannot become invented learner testimony.
If permission is unresolved, keep the fictional alternative available and leave the reuse decision open. Do not infer needs from names, ethnicity or an assumed shared experience. The responsible teacher should consider whose perspective is missing and what remains to be confirmed.
Plan a 35-minute session
| Elapsed time | Phase | Intended output |
|---|---|---|
| 0–5 minutes | Explain both choices | Optional context and equivalent fictional path understood |
| 5–12 minutes | Model starting point/action/sequence | Compare F1 and F2 as fictional examples |
| 12–22 minutes | Draft directions | Learner work, actual entries initially blank |
| 22–30 minutes | Compare perspectives and route meaning | Criterion-based observations, not cultural rankings |
| 30–35 minutes | Reflect | Name a useful change and an unresolved perspective question |
The model totals 5 + 7 + 10 + 8 + 5 = 35 minutes. It is a preparation plan, not a completed lesson or an observed participation result.
Compare work from either choice using the same start/action/order criteria. Record actual wording and evidence only when observed. Keep the lesson plan, adaptation notes and work samples in your teaching files. When the context changes in this planner, the reuse preview keeps unknown permission visible and clears the previous feedback.
Prepare the next prompt
Use the fictional alternative while permission is unknown. The preview records a local planning choice; it does not collect student responses or verify consent. Select a starting landmark, compare the resulting route, and keep the writing criteria constant when discussing alternative wording.
Copy a prompt for this example
Create a directions-lesson planning companion with two equal choices. A is voluntary familiar-public-place context with no address, identity detail, or cultural disclosure requirement. B is fictional Elm Square with library north, bench center, fountain south and north at top. Fictional model F1 starts at bench: walk north to library. F2 starts at fountain: walk north past bench to library. Provide bench/fountain buttons and a labeled map with text equivalent. Both use named start, clear action, coherent order; no cultural ranking or automatic free-writing grade. Provide blank volunteered-context and adaptation notes plus a permission checkbox initially unchecked. Unknown permission keeps the fictional route in the reuse preview; checking it records only the user’s planning assertion. Preserve input provenance, unchanged target and missing perspectives. Show 35-minute plan 5 choices +7 model +10 draft +8 compare +5 reflect. No actual learner testimony, equity guarantee, real walking directions or student-data collection. Reset restores fictional bench with blank actual entries.
Return one complete HTML file. Put the selected fictional route beside the unchanged learning target, with volunteered-context notes and the reuse-permission control clearly labeled. Stack those areas on a phone. Make the current reuse preview readable and keep the teacher discussion separate from the learner route description.
When reviewing the lesson with a colleague, NOS can display this prepared HTML plan. Compare the two fictional routes first, then identify the exact volunteered input and permission record needed before reusing a familiar-place contribution.