The worked scene provides two different knowledge records for one event. Mia sees a closed box move and hears Jon answer a question. Jon also saw its contents earlier. The example checks fixed claims against those access records, then adds a clearly labeled second-version fact. Learners can use the comparison to revise their own retellings without an automatic prose grade.
Read the scene with stable fact IDs
In V1, S1 says Mia sees Jon lift a closed box and carry it to a shelf. S2 says Jon alone saw red paper stars inside earlier. S3 says Mia asks whether the box is empty and Jon replies “No.” Give every learner the complete scene, then issue a narrator card. Reading S2 as a learner does not make that information something Mia personally observed. The narrator card controls the information available to the retelling, even when the class knows more.
Mia's authored account can say, “I saw Jon carry the closed box to the shelf. I asked if it was empty. He said no.” A further sentence can attribute the conclusion: “His answer indicated that it was not empty.” The wording matters because her route is a heard reply, not a view inside. She cannot identify red paper stars from that exchange alone. Keep the inference and its source together so the reader can follow how she arrived at it.
Give Jon the information he actually has
Jon's account can begin, “Earlier, I saw red paper stars inside the box.” He can then describe carrying it and answering Mia. Preserve “earlier” instead of claiming the contents never changed. Nothing in V1 supplies a promise about every intervening moment. S2 gives Jon an observation that Mia lacks. Ask partners to underline the phrase that establishes that observation's timing.
For the fixed claim “I saw the red stars,” select Mia and V1 in the example: the result is unsupported direct access. Select Jon and the same claim: it is supported as an earlier observation. The page checks that declared claim, not the literary quality of a whole paragraph. For a free retelling, a teacher should review source support, event consistency, attribution, and wording. A defensible paraphrase need not reproduce the teacher model word for word.
Change a fact openly
V2 adds S4: Mia opens the box and sees red paper stars. With Mia selected, adding S4 changes the direct-observation claim from unsupported to supported after that event. Removing S4 restores the earlier boundary and clears the old claim feedback. Keep V1 as its own scene, rather than quietly inserting the opening into an old retelling. The comparison makes the new source of knowledge visible and gives a partner a concrete reason to request a revision.
Try a third-person-limited Mia version as a separate writing turn. “She saw Jon carry the closed box to the shelf” changes person without changing her access. Do not add S2 merely because the account now uses her name. Finish by choosing one sentence, naming its source ID, and explaining the access route. Leave actual drafts and teacher observations on their own records. The current-page selections are a reading exercise; they neither store student writing nor certify a learning outcome.
Make your own working example
Create an original narrator-access game using V1 facts S1 Mia sees Jon lift a closed box and carry it to a shelf; S2 Jon alone saw red paper stars inside earlier; S3 Mia asks whether it is empty and Jon says No. Supply Mia and Jon narrator buttons, V1/V2 buttons, and fixed claim choices for seeing red stars, seeing the box move, and hearing the reply.
V2 adds S4 Mia opens the box and sees red paper stars. For the direct-observation claim, Mia/V1 is unsupported, Jon/V1 is supported as an earlier observation, and Mia/V2 is supported after S4. Preserve timing and attribution. A claim about seeing movement is supported for Mia; describe Jon as performing that action rather than borrowing Mia's observation. Explain each check with its source ID, not a general score.
Changing role, claim, or version clears feedback until Check. Start with Mia/V1 and a completed authored example of her observed movement. Show the current claim visibly in context and mark the selected claim button with aria-pressed and a visible selected state. Reset restores Mia/V1 with the movement claim selected and displays its worked result. Include a static role-card instruction about Mia’s S1/S3 access and Jon’s S2 observation, both teacher retellings, and a third-person-limited Mia comparison as labeled examples. Do not grade free prose or invent character motives.
Use one self-contained HTML file with no remote dependency. Keep the initial sample, output, and labeled controls near the top. Use at least 16px text, strong contrast, visible focus, and a stacked layout at 360px without horizontal overflow. Use explicit type=button click handlers and explicit DOM selectors; do not depend on native form submission. Clear stale feedback when task inputs change. Render entered text safely. Keep practice data local to the current page; do not imply saving, sending, or production integration. Return only the finished HTML.
Prepare the next class copy
When a partner confuses the learner’s knowledge with Mia’s, revise the static role-card instruction to say exactly which facts Mia can use. In NOS, eligible static instructions can be revised in visual editing mode without asking AI to regenerate the HTML. Keep the teacher's source packet and actual learner work separately; use the reading copy to clarify the next activity.