HCD.2:5.1 - Constructed Personal Case: Learner-FP6
Learner-FP6 is a constructed pedagogical holder. The stipulated entry attempt shows that this person can build a device model but confuses a flow unit, the recipient of the result, and the organizational permission needed for the proposed action. The intended later-Work outputs, mandatory tasks, 340 learner-hour limit, available teacher and worked examples, and protected critical errors are held fixed for this comparison. No observation of actual learning is claimed.
Two six-hour candidates replace harder optional cases rather than add time:
| Candidate | Finite change and intended contribution | Burden, dependence, and evidence gap |
|---|---|---|
| focused preparation | Allocate two hours to selecting the result recipient, two to checking the required organizational permission and tracing consequences for other systems, and two to checking flow units and constraints before the next whole task. The mandatory tasks, later variation, and final result remain unchanged. | Uses an explicit prerequisite route and keeps teacher feedback inside the existing arrangement. It may isolate the three weaknesses clearly, but the comparison still needs a changed-condition whole-task attempt to show whether the contributions combine. |
| supported whole-task preparation | Use the same six learner hours for a complete decision task in which the person must calculate with the flow unit, address the right recipient, and obtain or respect the required permission. A worked example and bounded teacher questions support the first attempt; a changed case then removes answer-revealing help. | Tests integration earlier but may conceal which prerequisite failed. Selecting, demonstrating, and reviewing the extra case consumes teacher preparation and feedback Work that must fit an established capacity or be priced separately. |
HCD.2 returns two comparable descriptions, the common output and evidence plan, and the unresolved provider-load and changed-condition evidence. It does not choose between them. An independent attempt showing three separable errors would strengthen focused preparation; success on the components but failure to combine them would strengthen the whole-task candidate. Either observation reopens only the affected comparison claims.