# PWR-136 — Iterative invention: learner worksheet Release: Revision 7T · Full Tutorial Edition Estimated time: Estimated 26 min reading and worksheet pass Difficulty: Intermediate Equipment: Common household or practice equipment — Cable-reach brief, paper, card, removable tape, string used only on the tabletop and scissors used in the ordinary safe way.; Three prototype cards, shared test rubric and version log.; Criteria for one-movement reach, snagging, cable thickness, removability and new problems. Space: Room-scale practice space Automated structural checklist: 10 of 10 structural checks present Evidence quality/context: G1; Detailed research depth Automated method-quality band: Comprehensive Method-rating basis: Structure coverage, instruction/check specificity, alternative distinctness, source troubleshooting, comparison depth and whether purpose/check fields are authored rather than derived. Editorial review: Pending manual editorial sign off ## Before you begin - [ ] I read the tutorial authority and stop conditions. - [ ] I have the required equipment/space or a declared accessible alternative. ## Canonical source context Iterative invention turns an idea into information through small reversible tests. This lesson uses three rough paper or card concepts for the cable-reach problem. The learner names the next uncertainty, applies the same test to parallel concepts, records unexpected effects, chooses keep, adapt or reject, changes one meaningful feature and preserves version history. Nothing powered, load-bearing, medical, transport, fire, chemical or safety-critical is built. Target outcome: The learner completes two traceable prototype cycles and shows a measurable improvement on one declared benign criterion without new hard-constraint failure. ### Authority and setup conditions - Confirm prototypes are non-functional representations and no electrical device is modified. - Write hard stops for damage, trip hazard, pinch, sharp edge and inaccessible use. - Choose one uncertainty that the first cycle will answer. ### Required or supplied materials - Cable-reach brief, paper, card, removable tape, string used only on the tabletop and scissors used in the ordinary safe way. - Three prototype cards, shared test rubric and version log. - Criteria for one-movement reach, snagging, cable thickness, removability and new problems. ## 1. Name the next uncertainty Write one question, such as whether the cable end can be reached in one movement without extra snagging. Why: A prototype should answer a question rather than look finished. Success check: The question has an observable answer and stop rule. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Write one question, such as whether the cable end can be reached in one movement without extra snagging.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “The question has an observable answer and stop rule.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 2. Build three rough alternatives Make a desk-edge guide, counterweight representation and storage pocket at equal low detail before refining any one. Why: Parallel prototypes reduce commitment to the first idea. Success check: Three mechanisms are testable with comparable effort. Accessible alternative: Complete “Make a desk-edge guide, counterweight representation and storage pocket at equal low detail before refining any one.” in shorter passes, or use keyboard input, dictation or a support person, while preserving this success check: “Three mechanisms are testable with comparable effort.” Use low-force tools and pre-cut materials without changing the design question. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 3. Predeclare a common test Define success, failure, hard stops and how each concept will face the same paper-cable walkthrough. Why: A common test supports comparison and limits hindsight. Success check: The rubric is fixed before trials. Accessible alternative: A supported, seated, reduced-range or slower version of “Define success, failure, hard stops and how each concept will face the same paper-cable walkthrough.” is equivalent only when it keeps the same trained or measured target, declared configuration and success check: “The rubric is fixed before trials.” If any of those change, record it as a related alternative rather than an equivalent repetition. Alternative relationship: Conditional equivalence requires target and configuration check Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 4. Run and preserve raw evidence Test each once, record result, unexpected effect and hard-stop status without repairing during the run. Why: Unedited evidence shows what the version actually did. Success check: Each prototype has a complete result row and photo or sketch. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Test each once, record result, unexpected effect and hard-stop status without repairing during the run.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “Each prototype has a complete result row and photo or sketch.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 5. Choose keep, adapt or reject Apply the rubric and write the decision for every concept. Do not rescue a hard-stop failure with a high average. Why: Explicit decisions keep iteration evidence-led. Success check: Every decision cites a result and gate. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Apply the rubric and write the decision for every concept. Do not rescue a hard-stop failure with a high average.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “Every decision cites a result and gate.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 6. Change one feature For one adapt decision, alter one meaningful feature only and label version two. Why: A single change makes the next result interpretable. Success check: Version two differs in one recorded feature. Accessible alternative: Complete “For one adapt decision, alter one meaningful feature only and label version two.” in shorter passes, or use keyboard input, dictation or a support person, while preserving this success check: “Version two differs in one recorded feature.” Use storyboards, cardboard, tactile mock-ups or accessible interface wireframes. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 7. Retest and stop intelligently Repeat the same test, compare criterion and new problems, then stop when the uncertainty is answered or further work is not justified. Why: Iteration is not endless polishing. Success check: The final log states improvement, no improvement or termination and why. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “Repeat the same test, compare criterion and new problems, then stop when the uncertainty is answered or further work is not justified.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “The final log states improvement, no improvement or termination and why.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## 8. Check delayed repeatability After 48 hours, rebuild the chosen paper version from the lineage and test record without using the original object. Run the same rubric once more and explain any changed result. Why: A reconstructable invention record should preserve the critical feature beyond one lucky build or immediate memory. Success check: The delayed version matches the declared feature, and any score change is traced to build variation, measurement noise or a real failure. Accessible alternative: Complete the same research action — “After 48 hours, rebuild the chosen paper version from the lineage and test record without using the original object. Run the same rubric once more and explain any changed result.” — using speech-to-text, text-to-speech, enlarged text, keyboard-only navigation, shorter work blocks or a support person. Preserve this declared check: “The delayed version matches the declared feature, and any score change is traced to build variation, measurement noise or a real failure.” Do not convert the research task into capability practice. Alternative relationship: Target preserving when declared check is preserved Learner notes: ________________________________________________________________________________ Completed: [ ] ## Reflection What changed? ________________________________________________________________________________ What remains difficult? ________________________________________________________________________________ What will I repeat, adapt, ask for help with, or stop? ________________________________________________________________________________ --- Completion of this worksheet demonstrates tutorial participation only. It does not establish capability, qualification, safety clearance, diagnosis, treatment or independent validation.