The result is a complete planning example: a short source card, five activities with named outputs, a worked recommendation, and blank spaces for actual learner evidence. The accompanying HTML lets you revise planned actions and artifacts, check for empty entries, and practice identifying an unsupported claim. Its checks assess those specific tasks; teacher judgment still determines the quality of the reasoning.
Give the lesson one decision to investigate
Ask students whether a fictional club should keep four tables available for building at every meeting. Give everyone the same original source card:
| Source | Supplied information |
|---|---|
| S1 | The club has 12 tables. |
| S2 | Building needs 4 tables, and drawing needs 4 tables. |
| S3 | There are 8 participants today. |
Students can calculate that the two stated activity needs total eight tables: 4 + 4 = 8. Compared with the club's 12 tables, that leaves four tables outside those stated needs. The card does not describe their occupancy or other activities. Eight participants today also tells us nothing definite about attendance next week.
That distinction supplies the lesson's central inquiry: what information about the next meeting would justify reserving four building tables every time? A useful response asks for future activity needs and attendance information while keeping the question unanswered.
Plan actions that leave something to inspect
WICOR names Writing, Inquiry, Collaboration, Organization, and Reading. AVID's overview connects these methods with expressing thinking, questioning, shared responsibility, managing resources and time, and learning from text. The sequence below is an original application, not an official AVID lesson or certification.
| Time | Method and activity | Planned output and teacher check |
|---|---|---|
| 0–5 minutes | Reading: annotate S1–S3, separating current facts from unknown future needs. | A1 annotation notes. Check whether “today” remains attached to the attendance count. |
| 5–10 minutes | Inquiry: identify information needed before setting an every-meeting rule. | Q1 question linked to S2 and S3. Check that it asks for missing evidence. |
| 10–18 minutes | Collaboration: explain a cited claim, hear a counterreason, then exchange roles. | C1 comparison record. Check both partners' contributions. |
| 18–23 minutes | Organization: link sources to questions and recommendations; track materials, time, and revisions. | M1 evidence map. Check that another reader can follow the links. |
| 23–30 minutes | Writing: draft an individual conditional recommendation and explain a revision. | R1/R2 and reflection. Check the source, condition, and reason for change. |
The durations total 5 + 5 + 8 + 5 + 7 = 30 minutes, including reflection. Adjust the timing for your class; WICOR does not require these five separate phases.
Work through the recommendation before teaching
A teacher-prepared reading note is “S3 describes today only.” For Q1, write “Will the next meeting need four building tables?” A pair comparison can put “S2 supports four building tables” beside the counterreason “Current needs do not establish every meeting's needs.” Label these as illustrative answers and leave the actual contribution fields blank.
An initial illustrative R1 might say, “Keep four building tables whenever the stated building need applies.” After the comparison, R2 can become, “S2 gives a four-table building need. Keep four available at the next meeting if that need is confirmed; ask for future activity requirements before making a standing rule.” The revision makes the next evidence request explicit.
In M1, connect S2 to R2 and S3 to Q1. The same map can support Organization by arranging evidence and Inquiry by recording a missing-information question. Give it one record ID with two explained uses, so the plan does not imply that two observations occurred.
Use the checks to find a planning gap
Clear Organization's artifact field and run the planning check. The result identifies the missing artifact; restore “M1 evidence map with sources, questions, and revisions” and check again. Nonempty fields establish that an entry exists, not that the activity meets a framework standard.
The separate source exercise asks which claim is unsupported. Choose “Eight participants will attend every meeting” and check the answer. The explanation points back to S3's time limit. Before teaching, prepare the source card and record spaces, choose appropriate participation supports, and transfer the plan into any format your school requires. After the lesson, add observed work and use the unresolved question to choose the next source.
Prompt for a matching planning page
Build an original, self-contained HTML WICOR lesson planning page for a 30-minute fictional club decision. Ask whether four building tables should be available at every meeting. Use exactly these source facts: S1, “The club has 12 tables.” S2, “Building needs 4 tables, and drawing needs 4 tables.” S3, “There are 8 participants today.” Show the worked arithmetic: four plus four is eight tables; twelve minus eight is four tables outside those stated needs, with occupancy unknown. Do not invent future attendance or activity needs.
Use a warm paper-and-ink lesson notebook design, readable text of at least 16px, clear focus indicators, and a stacked mobile layout. Include all five planned activities: five minutes reading/annotations A1; five inquiry/question Q1; eight collaboration/comparison C1; five organization/map M1; seven writing/recommendations R1 and R2 plus reflection. Show each teacher observation question. Keep observed learner evidence blank and editable.
Provide labeled editable action and artifact fields for every method. A Check planned entries button must identify missing actions or artifacts, including whitespace-only entries. State that this checks field presence only. Keep the 30-minute timing visible. Include illustrative linked-map entries, both recommendation versions, a revision reason, pair roles with an exchange, and a materials/time reminder. Explain M1's two uses without counting it as two observations.
Add a radio-choice source exercise: building needs four tables; eight participants will attend every meeting; drawing needs four tables. A Check answer button explains why the middle claim is unsupported, handles no selection, and gives useful feedback for the other choices. Use type=button with explicit click handlers. All effects stay local to the open page. Include no remote dependencies, downloads, stored marks, certification, or invented learner results. Label teacher answers as illustrative. Output one complete HTML file.
Review the plan in NOS
If you keep an HTML planning copy in NOS, use its rendered page to review whether each activity has a usable output. When a colleague suggests clearer wording for a static teacher instruction, eligible text can be revised in visual editing mode without asking AI to regenerate the HTML. Carry the agreed instruction back into your teaching materials before class.