HCD.2:6 - Bias-Annotation

Lenses: Gov, Arch, Onto/Epist, Prag, Did. Scope: personal human-capability programme composition and comparison under qualified later-Work, participation, support, and evidence conditions.

Recurring bias	Likely drift	Repair
course-solution bias	The requested course or familiar programme is treated as the answer before later Work and baseline are recovered.	Begin from the holder, complete work tasks, current configuration, and supplied development stake.
detailed-candidate bias	The most documented candidate appears superior to sketches.	Compare one minimal closed-task fragment on the same positions before expanding the candidates.
topic-count bias	Coverage or PatternID count substitutes for contribution to later Work.	Trace every included element to task closure, a prerequisite, a support contribution, an evidence need, or a future option.
role-average bias	Audience or role assumptions become one person’s current profile.	Require compatible same-holder evidence or issue the learning-product design return.
support invisibility	Teacher, assessor, specialist, AI, access, and preparation are assumed free and available.	Record access allocations, actual availability, peak load, and missing enablement separately.
assistance attribution	Helped output is treated as independent human capability or learning.	Preserve permitted, available, received, independent, changed-condition, and delayed evidence states.
sunk-curriculum bias	Existing content is retained because it was expensive to create.	Compare the finite contribution and displacement of retaining it under the current task and budget.
technique-brand bias	A pedagogy label is assumed to work across holders and tasks.	State its proposed mechanism, source limit, required observation, and serious alternative.