Evidence & accountability

Useful, not just polished.

We use AI to help draft and build these materials. That does not make them independently reviewed, validated or authoritative.

Our publication commitments

Link important factual claims to sources and distinguish observations, scenarios and advocacy.
Never invent interviews, testing, testimonials or local outcomes. Label hypothetical examples.
No job-risk probabilities, readiness certification or arbitrary severity scores.
Give each resource a useful output, observable checks, limitations and a fallback.
Use qualified people for specialist, legal and cultural review; an AI critique is not a substitute.
Publish corrections and version changes. Do not claim reader testing until it happens.

What changed in this edition

On 8 October 2026 we removed unsupported business-testing claims, revised legal and policy wording, recalculated reading times, replaced job-exposure scoring with a task planner, removed ungrounded threat rankings, and introduced original worksheets. The previous guide was a short prototype; it is now a workshop with real downloadable materials.

The 9 October Learn, Try, Share edition adds three positive practice activities, a learn-together session kit, a named founder introduction and blank sharing handouts. Two independent AI second opinions informed the revision; their crawler limitations were checked in a browser. They are not human peer review or reader testing. Legal source links now sit beside important claims, and additional precautions are distinguished from agency advice.

Edition 2026-10-09.2 introduces Small Missions, Real Confidence: optional young-explorer, everyday-confidence and learn-together pathways, four-step fictional challenges, Comfort view, browser-reported on-device read-aloud where available, and printable mission cards. Practice markers are self-reported, not assessments. No new tracking, child accounts or mission submissions are added. Automated checks do not replace testing with children and appropriate adults, older readers, or assistive-technology users; that testing is still pending.

Edition 2026-10-09.3 responds to a fresh AI usability/content audit and selected browser verification. It adds three distinct skills (callback verification, input protection and task choice), new transfer situations for all six missions, shorter mobile framing, preference continuity without browser storage, accessible labels/headings, host checklists, a reader-pilot protocol and a proposed reviewer brief. Human recruitment, review agreements and measured learning outcomes have not been completed or invented.

Reviewer scope and terms Proposed reader-testing protocol

Editorial influences

The nine Nate B. Jones resources below informed our task-first structure, context stewardship, evaluation and dependency questions. Our worksheets, prompts and fictional exercises are original adaptations. These links are not evidence for all claims in those resources, permission to reproduce them, or an endorsement or partnership. Forecasts, pricing, universal ratios and platform-specific deadlines were not adopted.

How to check or challenge a claim

Use the source links on the relevant page. Ask who the claim concerns, which date and jurisdiction apply, and what evidence would change the conclusion. We have not yet appointed independent reviewers or published a reader-test report. Use the issue form below for specific, non-sensitive corrections. It records a report for maintainer review; it is not urgent support.

Sources & scope

Edition 2026-10-09.3. AI-assisted editorial revision; independent specialist and reader review pending. Educational material, not legal, medical or financial advice. Examples are hypothetical unless explicitly documented.

How we publish and correct →