HCD.12:11 - SoTA-Echoing

Working question: how can an unfamiliar task distinguish useful transfer from repeated execution, while allowing learning resources when the intended work uses them?

Selected line — adopt and adapt. The workplace-instruction review by Kraiger and Ford distinguishes instructional activity, learning and later transfer. HCD.12 turns that distinction into the prior-claim and changed-condition comparison in §4.1–§4.4, with the action-versus-refusal test in §5.1.

Serious alternatives: repeat the same exercise under new labels, or remove all resources to avoid assistance. Repetition is useful for practising execution but leaves consequential adaptation untested. A resource-free test is useful for an independently required core but can omit the ability to learn with a source. At comparable task time, a decision-bearing variation gives a more relevant answer than cosmetic novelty; source access remains a declared condition rather than a hidden advantage.

The historical Schwartz and Martin preparation-for-future-learning study showed why assessment with a later learning resource can distinguish outcomes missed by a resource-free test in ninth-grade statistics. HCD.12 adapts that design distinction in §4.5. It does not use that study as evidence that a particular adult programme accelerates learning.

This selected line requires a task whose criteria discriminate the contribution, not an automatic claim of transfer. Reopen the comparison if prior exposure defeats the novelty claim, the variant changes an unacknowledged prerequisite, or source access and feedback cannot be separated from the claimed independent contribution.