# Fictional student responses for calibration

These are authored teaching examples, not actual student work. Use the same assignment and criteria for both; do not treat the labels as grades.

## Task
Recommend one campus transport pilot using at least two relevant details, a tradeoff, a limitation, and a plan to evaluate the pilot. See APPROVED_READING.md and sample-data.csv.

## Sample A
I recommend cycling support because cycling is always the fastest and everyone can do it. The cycle trips are cheaper than car trips, so the college will save all of its transport costs. The repair station is clearly the best option, and we do not need any more information.

## Sample B
I would pilot the evening shuttle because the proposal explicitly targets evening learners, although the supplied dataset does not tell us how many students attend at that time. The four bus records have a mean journey time of 39.25 minutes, compared with 24.5 minutes for cars, but their distances and routes differ; these figures do not show that a shuttle will be faster. Cycling support also deserves consideration, but we lack evidence about seasonal uptake and access. My choice prioritizes a defined group rather than a proven improvement. Before implementation, I would ask intended users about schedules and routes; during the pilot I would record uptake and collect feedback about whether the service fits their needs.

## Instructor calibration note
Sample A contains unjustified universal and causal claims. Sample B uses the scenario and arithmetic accurately, recognizes limits, and proposes evaluation; it still needs review against the precise assignment, length, and rubric. Use this as an opportunity to explain ratings rather than simply ask an agent for a score. A different well-supported recommendation could favor cycling support.