# Course brief: Evidence-informed campus decisions

## Learners and setting
First-year university students from mixed disciplines. They can read a simple table and calculate an average, but may confuse a small convenience sample with representative evidence. A 20-minute class segment, adaptable to online study.

## Learning outcome
Compare two campus transport proposals and justify a recommendation using at least two relevant pieces of supplied evidence, one tradeoff, and one limitation.

## Student work
A 150–200 word recommendation or an annotated comparison with an equivalent explanation. Both use the same evidence-and-reasoning criteria. Where oral performance or writing itself is assessed, the instructor must revisit the format choice.

## Approved teaching inputs
- APPROVED_READING.md: original fictional teaching scenario, written for this workshop. This is not a published research study.
- sample-data.csv: synthetic individual commute records for teaching; no real people or actual university measurements.
- sample-responses.md: fictional responses for rubric calibration and feedback practice.
- Instructor-selected verified readings may be added under sources/. The starter kit does not contain a reviewed literature collection.

## Requirements
Use only the supplied facts for claims about the scenario. Label the dataset as synthetic where learners encounter it. Preserve uncertainty. Do not fabricate citations, institutional policy, or evidence about intervention effectiveness. Do not collect identifiable student information in the demo.

## Preferred outputs
Markdown or CSV for text and tables. For an interactive activity, prefer a single HTML file with inline CSS/JavaScript that opens locally and needs no accounts, external packages, or network connection. Keep drafts in drafts/ and instructor-approved work in release/.

## Review criteria
1. The student task elicits the stated outcome.
2. Claims can be traced to the supplied scenario or dataset.
3. Instructions, evidence, and expected response are clear.
4. The artifact works when opened and used as a learner.
5. Keyboard use, headings, labels, contrast, zoom, and text alternatives are checked where relevant.
6. The instructor reviews disciplinary meaning and teaching suitability before release.

## Agent instructions for a task
Read this file explicitly. Summarize the intended output and identify missing information. Plan substantial builds before implementation. Report the checks actually performed and the unresolved questions. Preserve original inputs.