C60 · Topic 5.1 · 40 minutes · IOC-1.A, IOC-1.B
Evaluating a computing innovation
By the end you can:
- Compare evidence for benefits and harms.
- Propose a targeted mitigation.
- State a trade-off and an evaluation measure.
Before this lesson: topics 1.2.
- Stakeholder
- A person or group affected by an innovation.
- Unintended effect
- A consequence beyond what the designers meant to produce.
Understand
An evaluation should connect a proposed change to an identified harm and preserve useful benefits where possible. A mitigation can have costs, create new barriers or fail to address a different mechanism. Explain what is improved and what remains rather than treating any intervention as a complete solution.
Measure outcomes that reflect the question. More total participation can coexist with exclusion of a group. Compare relevant task completion and allocation outcomes, include affected users in evaluation and protect the privacy of any real data used. Fictional classroom counts are examples, not measured evidence about a community.
Worked example
A hybrid policy offers an assisted school channel as well as the online form.
- It can offer a route for students without effective evening online access.
- Both channels need a compatible allocation rule; paper submissions must not automatically arrive after all places fill.
- Staffing, reconciliation and remaining access barriers should be evaluated alongside total sign-ups.
Explore each concept
Choose a concept, change its inputs and follow the explanation. Each example models the stated rule or scenario; completing it is practice rather than evidence of mastery.
- Physical, software and conceptual innovations
- Benefits, harms and scale
- Creative expression and cross-field effects
Change it · step through · explain
Change an input, predict what will happen, then advance one step. Read why the state changes, reset and experiment. This fixed teaching model does not save progress or award XP.
Ready · Make a prediction
- Innovationmedical-image-toolWaiting
- UseintendedWaiting
Ready to explore: Intended benefits and unintended reuse
Why: Change an input, predict the first effect, then advance one step.
Try this: Change one input or choose another listed case. Predict the effect, reset and compare the states and governing rule.
Step through and experiment
Change it · step through · explain
Change an input, predict what will happen, then advance one step. Read why the state changes, reset and experiment. This fixed teaching model does not save progress or award XP.
Ready · Make a prediction
- Input 1online-onlyWaiting
Ready to experiment
Why: Predict the first change, then advance one step.
Try this: Compare all three policies. Which barrier does each change, and which remains?
Check a misconception
Claim: Adding a second channel automatically makes allocation fair.
The channels’ timing, rules and practical accessibility still determine outcomes.
Guided practice
Propose a requirement for the two channels that addresses the first-come timing problem.
Work with a partner. Make a prediction, compare your reasoning, then identify the rule that supports your answer.
Independent transfer
Describe one cost of the revision and how you would monitor a remaining harm.
Exit check
Why should affected users help evaluate the change?
Write your reasoning before comparing with a classmate. If your teacher assigned this task, submit it through My classes to save your work and receive feedback.
Check yourself
Your practice so far
Check an answer to see its rationale.