Skip to learning
THE CAT CODE™Cat Academy · A little knowledge. A better connection.

Learning materials / Facilitator guide

60-minute session · guide-home

A home seen from a cat’s point of view

Adult caregivers, community educators and supervised teen learners; no live cat is needed.

Illustrative tabby leaving a low open hide, with a stable scratching post and clear walking space.
Notice the separate hide, scratching surface and open route. Offer choices your cat can reach.Teaching illustration.

Session outcomes

  • Distinguish observation from interpretation in a fictional case.
  • Redesign one resource bottleneck within a modest budget.
  • Choose a safe next action when a health warning appears.

Session flow

  1. 5 minutes

    Welcome and boundaries

    1. Say: ‘Today we will practice noticing, planning and knowing when to ask for help. No cat has to perform, and we will not diagnose a real animal.’
    2. Explain that learners may speak, write, dictate or pass. Keep real veterinary histories private. If someone describes an active emergency, pause participation so they can contact a veterinarian.
  2. 10 minutes

    Observation sorting

    1. Read the fictional case: ‘Luca lives with one adult cat, Juniper. At 7 pm the washing machine starts. Juniper pauses outside the laundry-room doorway, turns and rests behind a chair. Her food, water and litter box are all inside that room.’
    2. Ask learners to list three observations and two unknowns on ws-care-01. Contrast ‘turned away after the machine started’ with ‘is afraid of all machines.’
    3. Invite two responses. Ask what additional ordinary observation would help without deliberately running the machine or moving the cat.
  3. 15 minutes

    Map the home

    1. Draw or describe a living room, hallway and laundry room. Mark the resources, the chair, traffic and an exit route.
    2. In pairs or individually, complete ws-care-02. Require one safe no-cost change, one practical limitation and an explanation of which choice the change adds.
    3. Offer the constraint: ‘The caregiver cannot lift heavy furniture and has a small budget.’ Encourage reachable floor-level options, not a shopping list.
    4. Have each group explain how they would retain a familiar resource and check voluntary use.
  4. 15 minutes

    Make the care handoff usable

    1. Add this fictional event: ‘Two adults both assume the other checked the food bowl. No one knows whether Juniper ate breakfast.’
    2. Use ws-care-03 to assign a primary and backup caregiver and write a factual sample entry. Ask learners to include unknowns rather than invent intake.
    3. Discuss how shared responsibility can be checked without collecting more private information than necessary. Have each participant read one clear handoff sentence.
  5. 10 minutes

    Referral decision practice

    1. Read two separate prompts: ‘Juniper chooses the old bed instead of a new safe bed’ and ‘Juniper repeatedly strains in the box with almost no urine.’
    2. Ask learners to write the next action for each on ws-care-06 before discussing.
    3. Debrief: an ordinary preference can be observed without forcing a choice; possible urinary obstruction requires immediate emergency veterinary care. Do not wait for more data or treat the box layout as a diagnosis.
  6. 5 minutes

    Exit reflection

    1. Ask: ‘What did you observe, what would you change, and what would make you stop or call for help?’
    2. Invite a private self-reflection score using the course rubric only if the learner wants one. End with one realistic next action, not a promise to buy equipment.

Discussion prompts

  • Which details are facts, and which explanations remain uncertain?
  • Does your proposed change improve usable access or just add another object?
  • How can the plan fit a caregiver’s budget or mobility without lowering welfare expectations?
  • What finding means you should stop gathering observations and seek help now?
Facilitator answer notes
  • The case establishes a sequence and a resource bottleneck; it does not establish a diagnosis, temperament label or exact cause of avoidance.
  • A separate accessible food or water location and a quiet resting option are reasonable plans; retain suitable familiar choices and review use. There is no single correct floor plan.
  • A good handoff identifies responsibility, time and uncertainty. ‘Food offered’ is different from ‘food eaten.’
  • The urinary prompt is an emergency. An excellent answer acts promptly and does not propose punishment, a litter experiment or waiting for a complete log.
  • Score the learner’s reasoning and safe next action, not the beauty of the drawing or the cat’s willingness to use a new object.

Adaptations

  • Read the case aloud and provide written text; allow a verbal map instead of drawing.
  • Use a one-room or single-cat scenario when that fits the group; larger homes are not the standard for success.
  • Allow observers, breaks and anonymous fictional answers. Do not ask learners to disclose finances or pet loss.
  • For younger supervised learners, focus on observation and asking a trusted adult; adults retain care and referral decisions.

Welfare and facilitation boundaries

  • Use fictional cases and props. Do not bring cats into a group to test reactions.
  • No learner should manipulate a painful area, provoke resource guarding or delay veterinary care for an activity.
  • This workshop and its scores are educational self-reflection, not veterinary review, professional certification or a welfare inspection.

Facilitator notes

  • Record which prompt caused confusion and which explanation resolved it; do not record identifiable veterinary histories.
  • If learners confuse silence with comfort or observation with diagnosis, reteach that distinction before adding more content.
Session sources
Open assessment rubric

Loading browser progress…