Design notebook setup

H1: An organized record still needs evidence

A design notebook records questions, ideas, observations and revisions. An innovation portfolio is an organized collection of work showing how an idea develops. Evidence is information that supports a claim.

A traceable record shows where its information came from. Reproducible work can be repeated from enough stated methods and conditions; a date and tidy headings alone do not establish that.

Opening record O1 is fictional. A paper label reads Draft. A rough note says fine. An organized note says: February 1, 2027; O1 label reads Draft; this checks the word only.

The organized note names a date, source and observation. It does not prove who made the label, whether the observation is true or whether the label helps a user.

Use O1 to answer both opening questions: how does an evidence-quality entry differ from a rough doodle, and why date and organize each page? Explain the record’s limit too.

The teacher selects the route. With the genuine rubric, assigned entry inputs and enrolled folder instructions, use those for the actual work. Do not add the original fictional notebook and tree below.

Without those inputs, complete the original preparation and ask the teacher what you need for authentic requirements. Both routes use these opening questions and the final brief check. No prior reading is assigned.

W1: Four sections and an original checklist

Problem framing states the problem, purpose and requirement. Sketches show a planned layout with labels. Data records observations or supplied information. Reflection explains what the evidence supports, its limit and the next check.

Today’s four section labels are problem framing, sketches, data and reflection. A date locates an entry in time; an objective states what the work aims to do.

Original-route checklist: date the practice page February 1, 2027, copy today’s objective and use all four section labels. Mark the entry fictional. Do not add a real name to this preparation.

Use S1’s purpose and criterion in problem framing. Draw the layout you choose under sketches and label every box. Under data, cite S1 and record the supplied A/B differences.

Under reflection, state the supported choice, one limit and a next check. This original completeness checklist is not the PLTW or teacher portfolio rubric and does not assign a grade.

The real rubric needs the teacher’s criteria and levels. Ask the teacher for it before reviewing it. An original checklist cannot prove compliance with an unseen rubric.

S1: Complete fictional notebook input

S1 is invented paper-layout practice, not an experiment, learner record or actual device test. Purpose: help a reader find the three parts of a record. Criterion: show Plan, Record and Check in that order.

Layout A is one horizontal row with two boxes: Plan | Check. Layout B is one horizontal row with three boxes: Plan | Record | Check. These descriptions supply the full visual evidence.

The supplied rough note is: B better, done. Its record ID is S1 and its practice date is February 1, 2027. No reader trial, timing or measured benefit is supplied.

Original route: turn that rough note into one four-section entry using W1. Draw the layout you choose as boxes in the stated order; the words above are its complete text equivalent.

Compare each layout’s boxes with the Plan, Record and Check criterion. A count of printed labels is evidence about this fictional layout, not evidence of user performance.

Choose a layout only for the stated label-order criterion. A possible next check is to have the supplied labels checked against that criterion again. Do not invent a user test or measured improvement.

F1: A fictional folder tree with a complete rule

Original route only. The practice sequence has two projects in order: Paper Labels, then Page Layouts. These are invented project names, not the enrolled PLTW problem sequence.

Draw a root folder called Practice Portfolio. Under it draw 01 Paper Labels and 02 Page Layouts. Each of those two folders contains two child folders named Notes and Evidence.

The complete mapping rule is one numbered folder per supplied project, in the supplied order, with the same two children under each. A folder tree shows which folders contain others.

Check seven folders in total: one root, two project folders and four children. This paper tree is not an actual created folder structure or a screenshot.

The authentic course tree requires the enrolled problem sequence and teacher storage/naming instructions. Ask for those inputs; do not infer them from this sample. The actual route does not require this fictional tree.

Q1: Original-route check and recovery

Use W1 to check the same S1 entry you started; do not create a second copy. Check the date, objective, fictional label, four sections, cited record, labeled sketch, comparison and claim limit.

S1 answer check: did you mark Plan, Record and Check present or missing in A and B, and check that each entry keeps the required order? The data concern printed labels only; they cannot establish a real user benefit.

For F1, check the root and both numbered projects, then Notes and Evidence under each. Both numbered folders belong inside Practice Portfolio, not inside each other.

If stuck, first write the four section labels. Put the supplied purpose and criterion in problem framing, then use W1 to finish the remaining sections. Adding a date alone does not supply missing evidence.

Repair one gap or explain why each required part is supported. The actual route uses teacher feedback on authentic work; these fictional checks are not extra tasks.

Optional original-route extension: rewrite the short rough note as two precise summary sentences after finishing the full entry. Use only S1’s supplied facts and include its limit.

P1: Keep actual setup and submission distinct

Original route: use twelve short rows with brief evidence of what you did or a next action you need. Begin them during the block, then update changed rows when you finish.

Separate original written practice, real rubric review, actual four-section notebook and genuine dated first entry. A practice page does not establish the actual assigned work or its rubric quality.

Keep the enrolled sequence/storage instructions separate from actual portfolio folders. Also separate the required genuine capture, official setup guidance, official completion and permitted pair/solo check.

Finish separate confirmed-assignment and actual-submission rows. A saved file is not proof it was received. Keep identifying screenshots and actual classroom identity marking on the approved private route.

The actual route uses the teacher’s real notebook, folder and submission records instead of this duplicate twelve-row practice form. Ask for missing authentic requirements on either route.

Open the linked BI February 1 assignment and follow its posted instructions and deadline. Save the practice locally and ask the teacher for help if access or required inputs are unavailable.

Problem 1 notebook-setup instructions and completion requirements need the actual enrolled guidance. Neither a sample tree nor opening the course proves official completion.

Finish any January 29 safety work you have not actually completed through the teacher's directions. February 2 is the next BI class day, First evidence entry in the notebook. No homework is due before this class.

R1: A brief final check without invented peer work

Both routes finish by checking a date and the four section labels. With a permitted partner, inspect the allowed artifact and report only what was actually checked.

On the original route, a solo learner checks the practice page against W1 and the supplied M1 model. No partner comment, signature or participation needs to be invented.

On the actual route, follow the teacher-confirmed partner or solo check for the real notebook. Keep any identity marking private. Do not submit an invented review.

Record one confirmed section/date check and one remaining gap or limit. Keep this close brief; the detailed Q1 review comes earlier on the original route.

Both routes: compare rough and organized notes

Use O1 in H1 to answer both opening questions. Explain one difference and why the date/source help checking; include one limit.

H1 supplies the entire opening record. No later case, legal claim or personal history is needed.

Original route only: start one practice page

On one page, write February 1, 2027, today’s objective and fictional practice. Add problem framing, sketches, data and reflection.

Use W1. Leave space to complete these same sections with S1; do not make duplicate pages. Actual-route learners use their real notebook instructions.

Original route only: turn S1 into an entry

Use W1 and S1 to complete the four sections on the page already started. Draw your chosen layout with its labels and cite the supplied comparison and limit.

M1 models a different complete entry. Use today’s objective, not M1’s practice objective. The actual route does not require S1.

Original route only: draw the practice tree

Use F1 to draw all seven folders with the stated order and containment. Label it fictional paper practice.

All project names and the mapping rule are supplied. Actual-route learners use the enrolled sequence and teacher instructions, not this tree.

Original route only: check and repair

Use Q1 to check your same notebook page and tree. Repair one gap or justify completeness using the supplied records.

The two-sentence rough-note extension is optional. Actual-route learners use teacher criteria and feedback; the fictional check is not required.

Original route only: twelve work checks

Use P1 for twelve brief rows describing what you did or need next. Start them during each interval and update changed rows at closing.

Actual-route learners use their real teacher records instead. Do not include names, private screenshots or invented completion.

Both routes: brief section and date check

Use R1 to record one actual date/section check and one remaining gap or limit through the permitted partner or solo route.

Original solo route: compare with W1/M1. Actual route: use teacher-confirmed rules. Do not invent peer feedback.