fpf.tools
Library / Music and Dance Practice Engineering Principles Framework
Jump to passage
In this reading
Source · lines 4909–4922

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 08:25:59 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 08:26:43 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 08:35:10 UTC

MDPE.19:3.4 - Select a useful test of a relevant change

First ask whether uncertainty about a credible change affects the current decision and whether an obtainable test could distinguish the possibilities well enough to justify all its work, delay and cost. Available evidence can suffice for continuation under the supported conditions while replacement remains unknown. If a test is selected, choose a change relevant to the stated horizon. For example:

  • another teacher, performer, partner, organizer, venue, instrument, controller, or software version;
  • a delay before the next occurrence;
  • different material, tempo, audience, partner, stage, or social setting;
  • loss of one provider or support relation; or
  • a different receiving population.

Do not remove a legitimate constituent merely to claim independence. If safe withdrawal is impossible or harmful, use a rehearsal, simulation, historical comparison, or other qualified evidence and state the weaker conclusion.

Varying context is especially important when literal repetition can conceal cue dependence. A performer who succeeds only with one teacher, one partner, one exercise order, or one room may have learned a narrow context-response relation rather than the capability needed by the continuation promise. MDPE.17 and Human Capability Development govern stronger transfer claims; this test only reveals whether the continuation decision needs them.