HCD.28:4.5 - Compare complete alternatives at a finite scale

Give serious alternatives the same intended output, audience assumptions, assistance conditions, observation purpose and time horizon. Construct enough of a less documented alternative to make that comparison meaningful; do not reward the most elaborate mock-up merely for having more pages.

Include the learner’s search, orientation, preparation, participation, practice, correction and waiting, alongside authoring, material production, provider preparation, delivery, checking, coordination, recovery and update work. Keep different people’s hours distinguishable. Money, elapsed time, scarce expert time and displaced work may select different options.

Count shared development once for the declared number of uses. Count recurring human checks wherever they occur. If a mentor’s booked session already contains six minutes of direct help, do not add those six minutes again as extra booked time. If a peer replaces that help, count the peer’s activity and verify that it supplies the needed contribution. A low tool price is not the total service cost.

Check peak demand and the shared timeline as well as totals. Show when the participants produce the inputs for help, which named provider can respond then, and when the learners use that response. Include movement or connection and preserve every required personal action. Thirty minutes of mentor availability tomorrow cannot repair a question that must be answered during today’s shared task. Compare an additional qualified provider, viable staggering, a changed task or a narrower offer; report any changed learning or timing condition.

A product may be infeasible on the present assumptions. Return the specific constraint and surviving alternatives to the offer decision. Do not quietly remove practice or checking while retaining the same promise.