Field Notebook: Seeing Before Explaining

The hand-in

What leaves your desk

A six-entry observation notebook, a one-page baseline portrait, and a short commentary revising one early interpretation.

Purpose#

Before you can interpret change, you need something sturdier than memory. This task tests whether you can create a record another caregiver could read without having to guess what clingy, odd, or fine meant that day.

The brief#

Make one week of ordinary life precise enough to become a trustworthy baseline.

Use the supplied observation set or a tutor-approved, non-invasive record from a cat you already live with. Cat ownership is not required, and no animal should be disturbed for the assignment.

What you submit#

Submit the notebook, the baseline portrait, and a commentary that revisits one interpretation you were initially tempted to make. Identify the observed detail that supported it, the evidence that complicated it, and the more careful wording you would now use.

Basic expectations#

Strong work is selective rather than exhaustive. It notices repeatable patterns, records context, and says when the evidence is incomplete. It does not turn a short observation window into a personality verdict or a home diagnosis.

Timing#

Due at the end of Part I, after Capture 04. Feedback arrives before the larger consultation task so you can repair the quality of your baseline before it carries more analytical weight.

The spec

These expectations are the fixed part of the brief. They make the work inspectable without reducing the quality of judgement to a checklist.

• six dated entries use concrete behaviour, context, frequency or duration rather than personality labels
• the baseline names what is typical while acknowledging gaps or uncertainty in the record
• one revised interpretation explains what changed after comparison with course evidence
• no diagnosis or treatment claim is made from household observation alone

How it is marked

Criterion	Weight
Observable specificity	40%
Separation of observation and interpretation	35%
Usefulness of the baseline	25%