FDE Teacher Training

Course 5 teacher guide

Course 5 - Vertical Specializations

Help instructors teach vertical translation: the same FDE method must adapt to domain risks, users, regulation, and operating constraints.

Use alongside the canonical trainee lessons; lesson titles open learner pages; do not change the learner curriculum.

Lessons 8

Aligned to trainee lesson IDs

Seat time 15 hr

Current roster estimate

Anchor question What changes when this FDE pattern enters this industry environment?

Use when facilitation drifts

Instructor outcomes

  • Teach learners to identify the domain constraint before proposing an AI pattern.
  • Coach industry-specific language without overstating expertise.
  • Compare how auditability, latency, privilege, safety, and offline constraints vary by vertical.
  • Assess whether learners can transfer FDE method across industries.

Course preparation

  • Prepare one domain brief per lesson with users, systems of record, risks, and forbidden shortcuts.
  • Invite learners to bring an industry they know and map it against the provided verticals.
  • Create a comparison grid for evidence, compliance, deployment context, and buyer concerns.
  • Choose one artifact format all teams will reuse for vertical translation.

Facilitation moves

  • Start with the domain constraint, not the model capability.
  • Ask what evidence would be unacceptable or insufficient in this vertical.
  • Make learners translate technical value into stakeholder-specific language.
  • Compare two verticals side by side before closing the lesson.

Common misconceptions

  • Assuming a working AI workflow transfers unchanged across industries.
  • Using generic compliance claims instead of naming the operational control.
  • Confusing domain vocabulary with domain judgment.
  • Ignoring edge, offline, privilege, or audit constraints until deployment.

Evidence standards

  • A vertical brief with users, workflow, risk, data, and evidence standard.
  • A translated solution pattern with explicit assumptions and constraints.
  • A stakeholder messaging map for buyer, operator, reviewer, and implementer.
  • A cross-vertical comparison showing what must change and what can transfer.

Assessment cadence

  • Run one quick vertical-risk diagnosis per lesson.
  • Use peer review across teams assigned to different industries.
  • Require each learner to revise a generic AI proposal into a vertical-specific plan.
  • End with the Vertical Translation Studio.

Lesson map

Course 5 lesson map for teacher preparation and formative checks.
Lesson Title Mode Capstone tie Formative check
5.1 Healthcare & Life Sciences Vertical: Clinical-Grade FDE Patterns Skill lab Milestone 3 What two constraints most distinguish a clinical-grade FDE pattern from a general-purpose one?
5.2 Financial Services & Banking Vertical: Audit-Trail-First Agent Design Case study Milestone 3 What does 'audit-trail-first' design change about the agent architecture?
5.3 Public Sector & GovTech Vertical: Procurement, Accessibility, and the FedRAMP Question Concept lesson Milestone 3 Why does a public-sector AI deployment timeline rarely fit a 12-week pilot?
5.4 Industrial Operations & Manufacturing Vertical: OT/IT Convergence and the Plant-Floor Boundary Skill lab Milestone 4 Where is the single most dangerous boundary in a plant-floor agentic system?
5.5 Retail, E-commerce & Hospitality Vertical: Consumer-Facing Agent Design Case study Milestone 4 What changes when the agent is talking to a customer, not an internal operator?
5.6 Legal & Professional Services Vertical: Privilege, Ethics, and the ABA 512 Bar Concept lesson Milestone 4 Why does attorney-client privilege change the STORAGE architecture of a legal-services agent — not just the prompt design?
5.7 Logistics, Supply Chain & Field Service Vertical: Edge, Offline, and the Last-Mile Constraint Skill lab Milestone 4 Why can't a logistics agent default to cloud-first inference?
5.8 Course 5 Mastery: Vertical Translation Studio Studio Milestone 5 What single FDE skill most distinguishes a senior vertical FDE from a generalist?

Instructor quick kit

  • Open the trainee lesson page and this teacher guide side by side.
  • Prepare a shared evidence folder or LMS assignment for each lesson artifact.
  • Keep the course anchor question visible during discussion and critique.
  • Assign a timekeeper, evidence reviewer, and sponsor voice during simulations or studios.

Teach-back prompts

  • What did you change in the artifact after critique?
  • What would a sponsor inspect first?
  • Which assumption is still weakest?
  • What should the next instructor know before the following course?

Lesson-by-lesson teaching guide

Lesson 5.1 · Skill lab · 2 hr

Healthcare & Life Sciences Vertical: Clinical-Grade FDE Patterns

Teaching intent

Use this lesson to teach vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence through the course lens of domain translation, regulated context, stakeholder language, domain-specific failure modes, and reusable FDE method, anchored in a concrete field decision in Healthcare & Life Sciences.

Before class

  • Open the trainee lesson and confirm prerequisites: 4.9, 4.12.
  • Prepare a weak and strong vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact for 5.1.
  • Identify the exact evidence field, threshold, or decision point learners must defend.

Suggested flow

  1. 14 min - frame the field problem and evidence target
  2. 22 min - model the core concept or move
  3. 48 min - learner artifact production or simulation
  4. 24 min - critique against the evidence standard
  5. 12 min - exit ticket, risk note, and next handoff

Live facilitation

  • Start with the domain constraint, not the model capability.
  • Ask learners to answer: What changes when this FDE pattern enters this industry environment?
  • Demonstrate one small move, then shift quickly into learner artifact production and review.

Evidence to collect

  • Vertical brief names users, systems of record, risk boundaries, and buyer concerns.
  • Plan states what must change from a generic AI pattern in this industry.
  • Evidence standard matches the domain risk, not generic prototype success.
  • Stakeholder message differs for buyer, operator, reviewer, and implementer.

Formative check

What two constraints most distinguish a clinical-grade FDE pattern from a general-purpose one?

Reject or remediate

  • Reject generic AI value propositions copied across industries.
  • Reject domain vocabulary without domain-specific controls.
  • Reject plans that ignore audit, latency, privilege, safety, offline, or compliance constraints.

Rubric focus

  • Artifact is specific enough for a reviewer to inspect without a verbal walkthrough.
  • Evidence is tied to a field decision, not a general opinion.
  • Risks and limits are explicit.
  • Next action is clear and owned.

Support and stretch

Support: Give learners a partially completed vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact and ask them to repair the weakest evidence field.

Stretch: Ask learners to defend the vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence tradeoff against a skeptical sponsor, reviewer, or operator.

Remediation path

  • Have the learner fill the missing domain brief field before solution design.
  • Ask what this vertical would refuse to accept as evidence.
  • Require a side-by-side comparison with another industry.

Debrief

Ask learners what changed in their artifact after review, what evidence remains weak, and what they would show a sponsor next.

Lesson 5.2 · Case study · 1 hr 30 min

Financial Services & Banking Vertical: Audit-Trail-First Agent Design

Teaching intent

Use this lesson to teach vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence through the course lens of domain translation, regulated context, stakeholder language, domain-specific failure modes, and reusable FDE method, anchored in a concrete field decision in Banking / Financial Services.

Before class

  • Open the trainee lesson and confirm prerequisites: 3.8, 3.9, 4.9.
  • Prepare a weak and strong vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact for 5.2.
  • Identify the exact evidence field, threshold, or decision point learners must defend.

Suggested flow

  1. 11 min - frame the field problem and evidence target
  2. 16 min - model the core concept or move
  3. 36 min - learner artifact production or simulation
  4. 18 min - critique against the evidence standard
  5. 9 min - exit ticket, risk note, and next handoff

Live facilitation

  • Ask what evidence would be unacceptable or insufficient in this vertical.
  • Ask learners to answer: What changes when this FDE pattern enters this industry environment?
  • Have learners find the decision point, the missing evidence, and the consequence of a poor choice.

Evidence to collect

  • Vertical brief names users, systems of record, risk boundaries, and buyer concerns.
  • Plan states what must change from a generic AI pattern in this industry.
  • Evidence standard matches the domain risk, not generic prototype success.
  • Stakeholder message differs for buyer, operator, reviewer, and implementer.

Formative check

What does 'audit-trail-first' design change about the agent architecture?

Reject or remediate

  • Reject generic AI value propositions copied across industries.
  • Reject domain vocabulary without domain-specific controls.
  • Reject plans that ignore audit, latency, privilege, safety, offline, or compliance constraints.

Rubric focus

  • Artifact is specific enough for a reviewer to inspect without a verbal walkthrough.
  • Evidence is tied to a field decision, not a general opinion.
  • Risks and limits are explicit.
  • Next action is clear and owned.

Support and stretch

Support: Give learners a partially completed vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact and ask them to repair the weakest evidence field.

Stretch: Ask learners to defend the vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence tradeoff against a skeptical sponsor, reviewer, or operator.

Remediation path

  • Have the learner fill the missing domain brief field before solution design.
  • Ask what this vertical would refuse to accept as evidence.
  • Require a side-by-side comparison with another industry.

Debrief

Ask learners what changed in their artifact after review, what evidence remains weak, and what they would show a sponsor next.

Lesson 5.3 · Concept lesson · 1 hr 15 min

Public Sector & GovTech Vertical: Procurement, Accessibility, and the FedRAMP Question

Teaching intent

Use this lesson to teach vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence through the course lens of domain translation, regulated context, stakeholder language, domain-specific failure modes, and reusable FDE method, anchored in a concrete field decision in Public Sector.

Before class

  • Open the trainee lesson and confirm prerequisites: 4.9.
  • Prepare a weak and strong vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact for 5.3.
  • Identify the exact evidence field, threshold, or decision point learners must defend.

Suggested flow

  1. 9 min - frame the field problem and evidence target
  2. 14 min - model the core concept or move
  3. 30 min - learner artifact production or simulation
  4. 15 min - critique against the evidence standard
  5. 7 min - exit ticket, risk note, and next handoff

Live facilitation

  • Make learners translate technical value into stakeholder-specific language.
  • Ask learners to answer: What changes when this FDE pattern enters this industry environment?
  • Model the concept with a concrete operational example, then ask learners to apply it to a new scenario.

Evidence to collect

  • Vertical brief names users, systems of record, risk boundaries, and buyer concerns.
  • Plan states what must change from a generic AI pattern in this industry.
  • Evidence standard matches the domain risk, not generic prototype success.
  • Stakeholder message differs for buyer, operator, reviewer, and implementer.

Formative check

Why does a public-sector AI deployment timeline rarely fit a 12-week pilot?

Reject or remediate

  • Reject generic AI value propositions copied across industries.
  • Reject domain vocabulary without domain-specific controls.
  • Reject plans that ignore audit, latency, privilege, safety, offline, or compliance constraints.

Rubric focus

  • Artifact is specific enough for a reviewer to inspect without a verbal walkthrough.
  • Evidence is tied to a field decision, not a general opinion.
  • Risks and limits are explicit.
  • Next action is clear and owned.

Support and stretch

Support: Give learners a partially completed vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact and ask them to repair the weakest evidence field.

Stretch: Ask learners to defend the vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence tradeoff against a skeptical sponsor, reviewer, or operator.

Remediation path

  • Have the learner fill the missing domain brief field before solution design.
  • Ask what this vertical would refuse to accept as evidence.
  • Require a side-by-side comparison with another industry.

Debrief

Ask learners what changed in their artifact after review, what evidence remains weak, and what they would show a sponsor next.

Lesson 5.4 · Skill lab · 2 hr

Industrial Operations & Manufacturing Vertical: OT/IT Convergence and the Plant-Floor Boundary

Teaching intent

Use this lesson to teach vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence through the course lens of domain translation, regulated context, stakeholder language, domain-specific failure modes, and reusable FDE method, anchored in a concrete field decision in Manufacturing / Industrial Ops.

Before class

  • Open the trainee lesson and confirm prerequisites: 3.9, 3.11, 4.4.
  • Prepare a weak and strong vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact for 5.4.
  • Identify the exact evidence field, threshold, or decision point learners must defend.

Suggested flow

  1. 14 min - frame the field problem and evidence target
  2. 22 min - model the core concept or move
  3. 48 min - learner artifact production or simulation
  4. 24 min - critique against the evidence standard
  5. 12 min - exit ticket, risk note, and next handoff

Live facilitation

  • Compare two verticals side by side before closing the lesson.
  • Ask learners to answer: What changes when this FDE pattern enters this industry environment?
  • Demonstrate one small move, then shift quickly into learner artifact production and review.

Evidence to collect

  • Vertical brief names users, systems of record, risk boundaries, and buyer concerns.
  • Plan states what must change from a generic AI pattern in this industry.
  • Evidence standard matches the domain risk, not generic prototype success.
  • Stakeholder message differs for buyer, operator, reviewer, and implementer.

Formative check

Where is the single most dangerous boundary in a plant-floor agentic system?

Reject or remediate

  • Reject generic AI value propositions copied across industries.
  • Reject domain vocabulary without domain-specific controls.
  • Reject plans that ignore audit, latency, privilege, safety, offline, or compliance constraints.

Rubric focus

  • Artifact is specific enough for a reviewer to inspect without a verbal walkthrough.
  • Evidence is tied to a field decision, not a general opinion.
  • Risks and limits are explicit.
  • Next action is clear and owned.

Support and stretch

Support: Give learners a partially completed vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact and ask them to repair the weakest evidence field.

Stretch: Ask learners to defend the vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence tradeoff against a skeptical sponsor, reviewer, or operator.

Remediation path

  • Have the learner fill the missing domain brief field before solution design.
  • Ask what this vertical would refuse to accept as evidence.
  • Require a side-by-side comparison with another industry.

Debrief

Ask learners what changed in their artifact after review, what evidence remains weak, and what they would show a sponsor next.

Lesson 5.5 · Case study · 1 hr 30 min

Retail, E-commerce & Hospitality Vertical: Consumer-Facing Agent Design

Teaching intent

Use this lesson to teach vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence through the course lens of domain translation, regulated context, stakeholder language, domain-specific failure modes, and reusable FDE method, anchored in a concrete field decision in Retail / E-commerce / Hospitality.

Before class

  • Open the trainee lesson and confirm prerequisites: 4.6, 4.7.
  • Prepare a weak and strong vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact for 5.5.
  • Identify the exact evidence field, threshold, or decision point learners must defend.

Suggested flow

  1. 11 min - frame the field problem and evidence target
  2. 16 min - model the core concept or move
  3. 36 min - learner artifact production or simulation
  4. 18 min - critique against the evidence standard
  5. 9 min - exit ticket, risk note, and next handoff

Live facilitation

  • Start with the domain constraint, not the model capability.
  • Ask learners to answer: What changes when this FDE pattern enters this industry environment?
  • Have learners find the decision point, the missing evidence, and the consequence of a poor choice.

Evidence to collect

  • Vertical brief names users, systems of record, risk boundaries, and buyer concerns.
  • Plan states what must change from a generic AI pattern in this industry.
  • Evidence standard matches the domain risk, not generic prototype success.
  • Stakeholder message differs for buyer, operator, reviewer, and implementer.

Formative check

What changes when the agent is talking to a customer, not an internal operator?

Reject or remediate

  • Reject generic AI value propositions copied across industries.
  • Reject domain vocabulary without domain-specific controls.
  • Reject plans that ignore audit, latency, privilege, safety, offline, or compliance constraints.

Rubric focus

  • Artifact is specific enough for a reviewer to inspect without a verbal walkthrough.
  • Evidence is tied to a field decision, not a general opinion.
  • Risks and limits are explicit.
  • Next action is clear and owned.

Support and stretch

Support: Give learners a partially completed vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact and ask them to repair the weakest evidence field.

Stretch: Ask learners to defend the vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence tradeoff against a skeptical sponsor, reviewer, or operator.

Remediation path

  • Have the learner fill the missing domain brief field before solution design.
  • Ask what this vertical would refuse to accept as evidence.
  • Require a side-by-side comparison with another industry.

Debrief

Ask learners what changed in their artifact after review, what evidence remains weak, and what they would show a sponsor next.

Lesson 5.6 · Concept lesson · 1 hr 15 min

Legal & Professional Services Vertical: Privilege, Ethics, and the ABA 512 Bar

Teaching intent

Use this lesson to teach vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence through the course lens of domain translation, regulated context, stakeholder language, domain-specific failure modes, and reusable FDE method, anchored in a concrete field decision in Legal / Professional Services.

Before class

  • Open the trainee lesson and confirm prerequisites: 4.7, 4.9.
  • Prepare a weak and strong vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact for 5.6.
  • Identify the exact evidence field, threshold, or decision point learners must defend.

Suggested flow

  1. 9 min - frame the field problem and evidence target
  2. 14 min - model the core concept or move
  3. 30 min - learner artifact production or simulation
  4. 15 min - critique against the evidence standard
  5. 7 min - exit ticket, risk note, and next handoff

Live facilitation

  • Ask what evidence would be unacceptable or insufficient in this vertical.
  • Ask learners to answer: What changes when this FDE pattern enters this industry environment?
  • Model the concept with a concrete operational example, then ask learners to apply it to a new scenario.

Evidence to collect

  • Vertical brief names users, systems of record, risk boundaries, and buyer concerns.
  • Plan states what must change from a generic AI pattern in this industry.
  • Evidence standard matches the domain risk, not generic prototype success.
  • Stakeholder message differs for buyer, operator, reviewer, and implementer.

Formative check

Why does attorney-client privilege change the STORAGE architecture of a legal-services agent — not just the prompt design?

Reject or remediate

  • Reject generic AI value propositions copied across industries.
  • Reject domain vocabulary without domain-specific controls.
  • Reject plans that ignore audit, latency, privilege, safety, offline, or compliance constraints.

Rubric focus

  • Artifact is specific enough for a reviewer to inspect without a verbal walkthrough.
  • Evidence is tied to a field decision, not a general opinion.
  • Risks and limits are explicit.
  • Next action is clear and owned.

Support and stretch

Support: Give learners a partially completed vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact and ask them to repair the weakest evidence field.

Stretch: Ask learners to defend the vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence tradeoff against a skeptical sponsor, reviewer, or operator.

Remediation path

  • Have the learner fill the missing domain brief field before solution design.
  • Ask what this vertical would refuse to accept as evidence.
  • Require a side-by-side comparison with another industry.

Debrief

Ask learners what changed in their artifact after review, what evidence remains weak, and what they would show a sponsor next.

Lesson 5.7 · Skill lab · 1 hr 30 min

Logistics, Supply Chain & Field Service Vertical: Edge, Offline, and the Last-Mile Constraint

Teaching intent

Use this lesson to teach vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence through the course lens of domain translation, regulated context, stakeholder language, domain-specific failure modes, and reusable FDE method, anchored in a concrete field decision in Logistics / Supply Chain / Field Service.

Before class

  • Open the trainee lesson and confirm prerequisites: 3.1, 3.11, 4.4.
  • Prepare a weak and strong vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact for 5.7.
  • Identify the exact evidence field, threshold, or decision point learners must defend.

Suggested flow

  1. 11 min - frame the field problem and evidence target
  2. 16 min - model the core concept or move
  3. 36 min - learner artifact production or simulation
  4. 18 min - critique against the evidence standard
  5. 9 min - exit ticket, risk note, and next handoff

Live facilitation

  • Make learners translate technical value into stakeholder-specific language.
  • Ask learners to answer: What changes when this FDE pattern enters this industry environment?
  • Demonstrate one small move, then shift quickly into learner artifact production and review.

Evidence to collect

  • Vertical brief names users, systems of record, risk boundaries, and buyer concerns.
  • Plan states what must change from a generic AI pattern in this industry.
  • Evidence standard matches the domain risk, not generic prototype success.
  • Stakeholder message differs for buyer, operator, reviewer, and implementer.

Formative check

Why can't a logistics agent default to cloud-first inference?

Reject or remediate

  • Reject generic AI value propositions copied across industries.
  • Reject domain vocabulary without domain-specific controls.
  • Reject plans that ignore audit, latency, privilege, safety, offline, or compliance constraints.

Rubric focus

  • Artifact is specific enough for a reviewer to inspect without a verbal walkthrough.
  • Evidence is tied to a field decision, not a general opinion.
  • Risks and limits are explicit.
  • Next action is clear and owned.

Support and stretch

Support: Give learners a partially completed vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact and ask them to repair the weakest evidence field.

Stretch: Ask learners to defend the vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence tradeoff against a skeptical sponsor, reviewer, or operator.

Remediation path

  • Have the learner fill the missing domain brief field before solution design.
  • Ask what this vertical would refuse to accept as evidence.
  • Require a side-by-side comparison with another industry.

Debrief

Ask learners what changed in their artifact after review, what evidence remains weak, and what they would show a sponsor next.

Lesson 5.8 · Studio · 4 hr

Course 5 Mastery: Vertical Translation Studio

Teaching intent

Use this lesson to teach vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence through the course lens of domain translation, regulated context, stakeholder language, domain-specific failure modes, and reusable FDE method, anchored in a concrete field decision in Mixed (random draw across two contrasting verticals).

Before class

  • Open the trainee lesson and confirm prerequisites: 5.1-5.7.
  • Prepare a weak and strong vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact for 5.8.
  • Identify the exact evidence field, threshold, or decision point learners must defend.

Suggested flow

  1. 29 min - frame the field problem and evidence target
  2. 43 min - model the core concept or move
  3. 96 min - learner artifact production or simulation
  4. 48 min - critique against the evidence standard
  5. 24 min - exit ticket, risk note, and next handoff

Live facilitation

  • Compare two verticals side by side before closing the lesson.
  • Ask learners to answer: What changes when this FDE pattern enters this industry environment?
  • Reserve most time for build, critique, revision, and final defense.

Evidence to collect

  • Vertical brief names users, systems of record, risk boundaries, and buyer concerns.
  • Plan states what must change from a generic AI pattern in this industry.
  • Evidence standard matches the domain risk, not generic prototype success.
  • Stakeholder message differs for buyer, operator, reviewer, and implementer.

Formative check

What single FDE skill most distinguishes a senior vertical FDE from a generalist?

Reject or remediate

  • Reject generic AI value propositions copied across industries.
  • Reject domain vocabulary without domain-specific controls.
  • Reject plans that ignore audit, latency, privilege, safety, offline, or compliance constraints.

Rubric focus

  • Artifact is specific enough for a reviewer to inspect without a verbal walkthrough.
  • Evidence is tied to a field decision, not a general opinion.
  • Risks and limits are explicit.
  • Next action is clear and owned.

Support and stretch

Support: Give learners a partially completed vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence artifact and ask them to repair the weakest evidence field.

Stretch: Ask learners to defend the vertical constraints, stakeholder language, forbidden shortcuts, and domain evidence tradeoff against a skeptical sponsor, reviewer, or operator.

Remediation path

  • Have the learner fill the missing domain brief field before solution design.
  • Ask what this vertical would refuse to accept as evidence.
  • Require a side-by-side comparison with another industry.

Debrief

Ask learners what changed in their artifact after review, what evidence remains weak, and what they would show a sponsor next.

Rubric for instructor review

  • Artifact quality: the output is inspectable, specific, and tied to the lesson objective.
  • Evidence discipline: the learner separates claims, assumptions, observations, and proof.
  • Field judgment: the learner explains tradeoffs, constraints, and next decisions.
  • Communication: the learner can explain the artifact to a sponsor, teammate, and reviewer.

Course handoff

Course 5 prepares learners to adapt their capstone plan to a real partner's vertical constraints.

  • Learners should leave with a reusable vertical translation template.
  • Flag learners who use one generic AI value proposition for every industry.
  • Carry forward the domain-risk grid into partner qualification and sales planning.