HCD.23:4.4 - Choose a coherent interaction variant
The following are alternatives with different dependencies, not interchangeable names for discussion.
| Variant | What makes it useful | Condition that changes the choice |
|---|---|---|
| Paired explanation of the same case | Each learner can inspect the full basis while testing a different account. | If both lack the prerequisite, provide preparation or competent help. |
| Team-Based Learning construction | Preparation, individual and team readiness work, feedback and application connect personal preparation with team judgement. | Use the coherent design when those contributions fit; a single group quiz does not supply the whole construction. |
| Jigsaw construction | Participants prepare different contributions with others working on the same part, then teach those contributions in their home groups before personal checking. | The parts must be teachable and join into an intelligible whole; a missing or unprepared explainer needs recovery. |
For a Jigsaw adaptation, identify what each part contributes to the whole and what its explainer must be able to answer. Have expert groups check a consequential misunderstanding before home-group teaching. Provide an accessible qualified account and help if a contributor is absent; then restore that learner’s explanation opportunity separately. Merely distributing a missing answer sheet can restore information without performing the missing teaching or learning.
For a Team-Based Learning adaptation, preserve the point of the readiness work and the application challenge. Let participants use timely feedback to resolve a preparation gap; subsequent team decisions should require applying the relevant concepts. Do not infer that the named design has been implemented from the presence of a readiness quiz alone. The official designs supply their fuller instructions; select them for their contribution rather than impose them on every task.