Writing an Honest Resource Preview

Worked example: write an honest resource preview

A useful resource preview helps a teacher decide whether a resource solves the job in front of them. It should say exactly what is included, show a representative sample and distinguish an inspected file from a promise. “Complete”, “editable” and “answers included” are factual claims that need evidence, not decorative selling words.

For this example, the resource comes first. PREVIEW01, Container counts, is an original two-page learning resource with three questions on the first page and explained answers on the second. Its PDF and editable DOCX source are supplied together. The fictional counts and questions are small enough to inspect in full, so every claim below can be traced to actual content.

Prepared example companions: the two-page example PDF, its editable DOCX source and the reusable preview template are prepared for this example. Website hosting and access are pending verification.

Inspect the sample before describing it

The resource gives three containers: P has 14 counters, Q has 9 and R has 17. Q1 asks how many more counters P has than Q. Q2 asks for the combined count. Q3 asks how many counters must move from R to Q so those two containers have equal counts, while P stays unchanged. These are three top-level questions; the request to explain Q3 is part of that question, not a fourth question.

The answers are 14 − 9 = 5 counters, 14 + 9 + 17 = 40 counters, and a transfer of 4 counters. For Q3, Q and R together contain 26, so each should finish with 13. Q gains 13 − 9 = 4 and R loses 17 − 13 = 4. Moving eight would reverse the unequal counts rather than equalise them.

That inspection supports “difference, total and equalising counts”. It does not support “all mathematics topics”, “a full examination” or a particular official curriculum level. Grade-neutral language is more accurate than adding a class label that has not been established.

Completed resource preview copy

Container counts: three original practice questions. Practise finding a difference, adding three counts and equalising two containers. PREVIEW01 version 1.0, dated 6 October 2026, contains two A4 pages: one learner page with three questions and response space, followed by one page of explained answers. The supplied formats are PDF and an editable DOCX source with text and a data table. The sample is grade-neutral; check its suitability for your learner.

Sample from Q1: “How many more counters are in P than in Q? Write the subtraction and its answer.” The data table gives P = 14 and Q = 9. Answers are included on page 2, so set that page aside for an independent first attempt.

Access status: these are prepared example files supplied with this worked example. A live website download, member entitlement or price is not being claimed. The resource is a short original practice sample, not a complete year pack or an official examination or marking scheme.

Claim-to-evidence record

The paths in this table identify files inside the supplied example package. They are evidence locators, not live download links. The DOCX and PDF carry the same resource ID and version; the PDF was generated from that source and its two pages were inspected.

Worked editorial case 1: replace breadth with a job

Before: “The complete mathematics pack for every learner, covering everything you need.”

After: “Three original questions on difference, total and equalising two counts, with explained answers.”

The revision keeps a concrete benefit while removing claims the files cannot support. It names the outcomes demonstrated by the actual tasks. A narrow resource can be genuinely useful without implying comprehensive coverage. Keep broader topics out unless they are actually added, checked and reflected in the inventory.

Worked editorial case 2: distinguish files from pages

Before: “Two worksheets and a separate answer booklet, all ready to download.”

After: “One two-page resource in PDF, plus its editable DOCX source. Page 1 contains the questions and page 2 contains their explained answers. The files are prepared example deliverables.”

Two pages do not mean two worksheets, and two file formats do not mean twice the teaching content. The answer page is part of the same PDF, not a separately supplied booklet. The revised wording also avoids implying that the example files have already been hosted on a website.

Worked editorial case 3: specify what is editable

Before: “Fully editable in any app, with automatic marking.”

After: “An editable DOCX source is supplied for the text and data table. The PDF provides a fixed-layout print version. Answers are written explanations; no automatic marking feature is included.”

The DOCX can be edited in software that supports its format, but the package does not establish identical behaviour in every application. The answers are ordinary text, not a scoring engine. Stating those practical details lets a teacher choose the right file without buying into an unsupported feature claim.

A reusable preview template

Complete these fields after opening the actual resource: title and stable ID; inspected version and date; narrow task scope; supported audience; top-level question and subpart counts; learner and answer page counts; actual formats; one representative sample; inspected answer support; access status; known exclusions; and file inventory with measured bytes.

For each factual phrase, add a private evidence locator to the publication record. “Three questions” points to Q1–Q3, “explained answers” points to page 2, and “editable source” points to the actual DOCX content. The supplied preview-template.txt leaves those fields blank for reuse. Do not fill uncertainty with optimistic language: resolve it or state the narrower verified fact.

Keep dates meaningful. The 6 October date here is the resource’s stated version date. It is not a curriculum date, future update commitment or proof of a website upload. If publication occurs later, record the actual upload event separately. If the file changes, repeat the count and sample checks instead of copying the old preview unchanged.

Three solved preview tasks

Task 1: rewrite two unsupported claims

A practice preview says, “Container counts v1.0 contains three questions and explained answers. It is KNEC-approved and members can download it instantly.” Identify the two unsupported claims and rewrite the preview.

Answer: neither official approval nor live member availability is supported. Write: “Container counts v1.0 contains three original grade-neutral questions and explained answers in a two-page PDF, with an editable DOCX source. These are prepared example files; check suitability before use.” Keep the supported question and answer facts. Do not replace one invented entitlement with another such as “free for everyone”.

Task 2: update a changed resource

An author adds Q4 to a new version and the learner material now occupies two pages, followed by one answer page. Can the v1.0 preview remain?

Answer: no. After inspecting the new export, state four top-level questions and three total pages, with two learner pages and one answer page. Record the new version and measured files, check Q4’s solution, and replace any old sample that no longer matches. This hypothetical revision is not an additional file in the supplied package.

Task 3: avoid misleading access language

A preview writer can open the local PDF but has not checked the published destination. May they write “Download available now”?

Answer: no. Local preparation establishes a file exists in the package, not that the website serves it or that a particular reader can access it. Use the prepared-file description until the exact hosted link and intended access route are verified. Do not infer entitlement from the fact that the surrounding page loads.

Review notes before releasing a preview

Read the preview alongside the exact files one last time. Recount the questions and pages, try the sample, inspect the answer match and confirm that the format claim describes what is actually supplied. A filename alone is insufficient: a file with a DOCX extension must contain a genuine editable document, and an answer claim needs actual matched content.

Check how the sample represents the whole. Q1 shows the subtraction style, but Q3 asks for more reasoning, so the preview also names equalising counts. A sample should not make a mixed resource look easier, broader or more interactive than it is. Clear wording serves both the publisher and the teacher’s planning.

Frequently asked questions

Must a preview include the entire resource?

No. Give a representative sample and accurate counts, formats and scope. The evidence behind those claims should still come from inspecting the whole relevant package.

Is an answer page a marking scheme?

Not automatically. This sample supplies explained answers without official marks or examination authority. Describe it that way.

Can I call a PDF editable?

Specify the actual format and editing route. Here the editable source is DOCX; PDF is the fixed-layout print version.

Does a recent date prove current syllabus coverage?

No. A version date identifies a revision. Curriculum applicability needs its own evidence.

Should the preview state file sizes?

It is useful when transfer size matters. Measure the supplied files and update the record when their bytes change.

Does prepared mean publicly downloadable?

No. Preparation, hosting, successful retrieval and access entitlement are separate facts.

What if one advertised companion is missing?

Remove or qualify that claim until the actual companion is supplied and inspected. Do not let a teacher plan around an unverified file.