Problem statement
05-agentic-workflows-intro.md (Step 5) is the second-highest-dropout step: 18.0% conditional dropout among 36,222 at-risk simulated runs (95% CI 17.6%–18.4%), split between an agentic-concept-gap failure mode (~4,396 failures — learners don't fully internalize the shift from deterministic jobs to goal-oriented agentic workflows) and a smaller deployment-capability-gap (~2,137 failures — GHES learners hit an enablement gap the content treats only conditionally).
Proposed change
- Add a compact "before/after" summary table (2–3 rows) directly under the "Three key terms" table that puts a classic Actions step and its agentic equivalent side by side, reinforcing the shift in one glance for learners who skim the diagram.
- For the GHES branch, add a short explicit callout (near "Before You Start") pointing GHES learners at the existing GHES enablement check before they proceed to Activity 1, rather than leaving it implicit in deployment context alone.
Keep all three existing activities (parts, predict, agentic-or-standard, task-brief) intact — this adds a summary and a GHES signpost, it does not replace practice.
Failure mode classification
Learning barrier (concept gap, majority of failures) with a secondary access barrier (GHES enablement, minority of failures).
Quantitative guardrail
- Current
overall_score: 5.43/10
- Weakest rubric dimension:
active_learning (2.4/10) and checkpoint_quality (0.0/10, corpus-wide detection gap — not targeted by this repair)
- Current learning KPI index: active_learning 2.4, checkpoint_quality 0.0, scaffolding 5.0 → index = 2.24/10
- The added before/after table and GHES callout increase active_learning (an additional worked comparison) and scaffolding (an explicit prerequisite branch for GHES learners) without adding cognitive load beyond a compact table, so
overall_score and the learning KPI index should rise, not fall.
Acceptance criteria
Suggested owner
workshop maintainer
Related to #3139
Generated by 🔬 Workshop Student Simulator · copilot · auto · 231.3 AIC · ⌖ 7.23 AIC · ⊞ 15.2K · ◷
Problem statement
05-agentic-workflows-intro.md(Step 5) is the second-highest-dropout step: 18.0% conditional dropout among 36,222 at-risk simulated runs (95% CI 17.6%–18.4%), split between anagentic-concept-gapfailure mode (~4,396 failures — learners don't fully internalize the shift from deterministic jobs to goal-oriented agentic workflows) and a smallerdeployment-capability-gap(~2,137 failures — GHES learners hit an enablement gap the content treats only conditionally).Proposed change
Keep all three existing activities (parts, predict, agentic-or-standard, task-brief) intact — this adds a summary and a GHES signpost, it does not replace practice.
Failure mode classification
Learning barrier (concept gap, majority of failures) with a secondary access barrier (GHES enablement, minority of failures).
Quantitative guardrail
overall_score: 5.43/10active_learning(2.4/10) andcheckpoint_quality(0.0/10, corpus-wide detection gap — not targeted by this repair)overall_scoreand the learning KPI index should rise, not fall.Acceptance criteria
overall_scorefor05-agentic-workflows-intro.mdstays flat or improves after the change(2.0 × active_learning + 2.0 × checkpoint_quality + 1.5 × scaffolding) / 5.5stays flat or improvesnpx --yes markdownlint-cli2 "**/*.md"passes with no new violationsSuggested owner
workshop maintainerRelated to #3139