D6 · 7/30/90 Action Plan — Interactive Assessment Session 7 · Institutional Guidelines Part 2 · Online

D6 · 7/30/90 Action Plan

Convert your Guideline v0.1 into a falsifiable deployment plan. Three horizons, one kill criterion, one named ally per step.

Honesty guard

"Plans without falsifiability are wishes. Every horizon needs a named ally, a date, and a concrete commitment — not 'talk to my head of department' but 'submit a 2-pager for the 28 Sep faculty meeting agenda.' The kill criterion is what makes this an accountability artifact rather than a diary entry. If you cannot imagine a world in which this plan fails, you have not planned — you have hoped."

Entries are temporary until saved.

3 horizons

7 days Empty

Deploy one S4 workflow in a live course — already built, deployment is the only step left.

30 days Empty

Run the redesigned assessment (S5) with one real cohort; collect the process evidence it was designed to produce.

90 days Empty

Move Guideline v0.1 one institutional step — department meeting, faculty committee, or senate paper — with a named ally and a date.

Kill criterion

Mandatory. Plans without falsifiability are wishes.

Falsifiability statement

Non-negotiable

"I will know this failed if ___ by ___." — fill both blanks below.

"I will know this failed if …"
"…by date"

How the 7/30/90 Action Plan works

The D6 Action Plan is your post-course deployment mechanism. It converts the portfolio you built across seven sessions — guideline, redesign, workflows — into a dated, owned, falsifiable sequence. Session 8 presentations are judged against this plan.

  1. Start with what exists. The 7-day horizon should name a workflow you already built in S4 — deployment, not invention. The hardest part of post-course follow-through is picking the first thing to do; the course has already picked it.
  2. Name the ally. Every horizon needs a person who knows you committed to this. "Self" is not an ally for the 90-day horizon — the whole point is that institutional steps require a co-sponsor.
  3. Date everything. A horizon without a date is a genre shift from plan to diary. Use calendar dates (not "next semester").
  4. Write the kill criterion last. It is the most important line. If you cannot imagine a specific, dated failure condition, you are writing aspirations — the facilitator will flag this in Session 8.
  5. Save your snapshot — name it "S7 Action Plan". Export as JSON for backup or submission.

Quality bar

  • 7-day commitment names a specific S4 workflow (rubric builder or feedback assistant) and a specific course
  • 30-day commitment names the redesigned assessment from S5 and the process evidence it collects
  • 90-day commitment names a named institutional person (not "my department") and a specific meeting or deadline
  • Kill criterion is specific and dated — "if the guideline hasn't been emailed to the committee secretary by 1 Nov" not "if it doesn't get approved"

Session 8 presentation note

Summative rubric

The action plan is judged against the S8 rubric: Evidence discipline, Design over policing, Deployability, Ethical reasoning, Falsifiability. The kill criterion is the falsifiability dimension — the single most common reason plans score below "Proficient."

7 days
  • Commitment: Deploy the rubric-builder workflow (S4 Lab 1) in my SOC101 Theory Application Essay module. Add the verification log as a required submission appendix. Announce AI-use disclosure norm to students.
  • Owner/Ally: Dr. Aisyah Rahman (course co-ordinator)
  • Date: 10 Sep 2026
30 days
  • Commitment: Run the redesigned SOC101 essay with in-class viva (🔴, 25%) + annotated source table with process log (🟡, 30%) + AI-assisted final analysis (🟢, 45%). Collect all process evidence and write a 1-page reflection on what the viva revealed about actual student understanding vs. AI-assisted output.
  • Owner/Ally: Self (lead) + H.E. Tan (teaching assistant)
  • Date: 3 Oct 2026
90 days
  • Commitment: Submit Guideline v0.1 as a discussion paper for the Faculty Teaching & Learning Committee agenda (28 Nov meeting). Recruit Dr. Chong (committee member) as co-presenter. Request a 20-min agenda slot. Attach the one-page reflection from the 30-day horizon as evidence of implementation.
  • Owner/Ally: Dr. Chong Wei Ming (FLC member)
  • Date: 28 Nov 2026
Kill criterion

I will know this failed if the FLC agenda for 28 Nov has closed and the guideline has not been submitted, by 14 Nov 2026 (the agenda deadline).

The kill criterion is specific, dated, and verifiable — anyone on the committee can check the agenda. Notice it does not say "if the guideline is rejected" — rejection is a data point, not a failure. Failure is the plan not arriving at a decision point.

Sample adapted from the course-pack exemplar (Appendix D6). Every participant's plan will differ by discipline, institution, and personal context.