HCD.2:5.4 - Two Unfinished Lines and an Attractive New Start
In this constructed case, Lena has six learner-hours and two 45-minute sessions with a suitably qualified teacher in the coming week. The sessions can each return feedback early enough for a learner correction and subsequent check. The programme must preserve preparation for Friday’s report. A second line concerns work next month; a simulation method might open a further project option.
Recover the remaining contribution of each line:
| Line | Existing evidence and remaining useful result | Remaining burden in this window |
|---|---|---|
| A — justify a dashboard anomaly | Lena computes the indicator correctly. She still needs to distinguish two plausible explanations, select a discriminating observation and correct her reasoning on a changed case under the allowed reference. This is needed for Friday’s report. | Two learner-hours for attempt, feedback use, correction and check; one 45-minute teacher session, including preparation and review. |
| B — adapt a data query | A query works on the practised structure. The remaining task is to adapt it to a changed structure and check the result with the permitted reference. No further topic reading is needed on the stipulated evidence. | Two learner-hours and one 45-minute teacher session for the remaining attempt, correction and check. |
| C — explore simulation | This is a proposed start, not an acquired contribution. One supported model and a contrast with the current analysis would inform whether a further simulation programme is worth constructing. That decision ends this exploration. | Two learner-hours and one 45-minute teacher session for the bounded exploration and its review. |
All three fit the six learner-hours but need 135 teacher-minutes; only 90 are available. Counting A’s completed calculation and B’s completed query as closed learning would conceal this competition. There are at least two comparable continuations that preserve Friday’s requirement:
- Continue A and B; defer C. Four learner-hours and 90 teacher-minutes are allocated to the two remaining task contributions. Completion is intended, not guaranteed by those allowances.
- Continue A and open C; pause B. The same four learner-hours and 90 teacher-minutes supply A and the exploration. On the stipulated pause arrangement, preserving B’s partial work takes another half-hour now and returning to it requires a further half-hour next month. Its remaining practice is still owed, and its later use must tolerate that delay.
The two continuations have different closure, option and transition consequences. HCD.2 returns those differences and a boundary of these two compatible active lines, not a universal maximum of two or a choice made for Lena. If the next project now requires simulation while B’s later use is cancelled, opening C and retiring B can become preferable; unfinished status is not a reason to retain obsolete work.
Under the original work estimates, a confirmed third timely teacher session would make the three-line candidate feasible at six learner-hours and 135 teacher-minutes. This widens the available comparison without establishing that taking all three is preferable.
Suppose instead that A’s next attempt reveals another correction requiring one learner-hour and a further 45-minute teacher session before Friday. A now consumes three learner-hours and both sessions. The previous two-line continuations no longer fit. With the same help, a candidate can keep only A active and pay B’s half-hour pause cost: 3.5 learner-hours and 90 teacher-minutes. Retaining B or starting C as described requires additional suitable help or a changed arrangement. HCD.9’s result changes the remaining work; HCD.14/.15 reopen the affected comparison.