Learning Exercise
Does the old approval still count?
An approved announcement changes from Room B to Room C, then back again. Should the original approval return? In this 12-minute activity, learners predict the result, use an interactive browser demo, inspect the decision history and write a review rule for one routine task. It supplements the Human Approval Gate guide with an individual or paired exercise, expected results and a short assessment. No coding is required.
- Material:
- The Human Approval Gate: A Practical Guide to Keeping a Person at the Decision Point in AI-Assisted Work
- Date last modified:
- October 11, 2026
- Created by:
- Keith Staggers
- License:
-
An AI draft is ready to send. What must a person check before it leaves the draft stage? This free teaching kit gives... see more
Exercise
An announcement has been approved. Someone changes Room B to Room C, then changes it back. Does the first approval count again?
Use this 12-minute activity on your own or with a partner. Before each change, predict what should happen to the approval. Then compare your prediction with the decision record.
1. Open the announcement (1 minute)
Open An approval belongs to one version. Use the preview controls. Select Start over if you have already tried the demo.
Read the announcement and its Practice brief. The workshop is on Saturday, 24 October, at 10:00 a.m. in Room B. Participants should bring one small household item.
2. Record the first decision (2 minutes)
Compare every detail in the announcement with the brief. Choose Morgan, coordinator, select I compared the current wording with the brief, then select Approve this version.
Read the decision record. Write down the approved version and the decision number. Expand See the approved wording so you can compare it with later changes.
3. Change one detail (2 minutes)
Predict: if the room changes, should the earlier approval still apply?
Select Change the room once. Compare the announcement, the brief and the decision record. Record the current version, whether it has active approval, and the version named in the earlier decision.
The brief still says Room B. The announcement now says Room C. Leave this version unapproved. A checked box cannot resolve that disagreement for you.
4. Put the words back (2 minutes)
Predict: will restoring Room B restore the approval too?
Select Change the room again. The original wording returns, but read the version and approval status before doing anything else.
This demo requires another review after every recorded wording change. Matching the earlier wording does not automatically revive the earlier decision. Compare the current announcement with the brief again, select the review checkbox and approve this version. Note which version the new decision names.
5. Apply the idea to one task (3 minutes)
Open the Human Approval Gate guide and worksheet. Choose a routine task in which an AI-assisted draft might change after review, such as a workshop notice or a project update. Write four short answers:
- What action must wait for approval?
- Who should review the current version?
- What source should that person compare it with?
- What change should require another review?
With a partner, exchange answers and look for one missing detail. Working alone, reread your answers as the person who must decide whether to release the draft.
6. Explain the decision (2 minutes)
Respond to this teammate: “The words are back to what I approved. We can use the old approval.”
Use the version numbers and decision record from the activity. Explain what the earlier decision still tells you, and what has to happen before the current draft can be treated as approved.
Finish with one sentence completing: “In our task, approval applies to ___, and a change to ___ means ___.”
Disciplines
Audience
Technical Notes
Use a current browser with JavaScript enabled. Work in the CodePen preview; no code editing is needed. The demo keeps its state in the open page, so Start over or a page reload clears the exercise. Use only the supplied workshop text and example reviewers. The reviewer menu records a selection; it does not authenticate a person. The demo records approval state but does not send or publish an announcement, and the checkbox does not check facts. In a real workflow, the control must also operate where the send, publish or other action runs. The timings are a suggested activity plan, not a measured completion time.
Requirements
A device with a current web browser and JavaScript enabled; access to the linked CodePen preview and Human Approval Gate guide; somewhere to record short answers. Work alone or with a partner. No coding or prior use of the kit is required.
Topics
Human review; approval history; AI-assisted work; version changes; source checking.
Type of Task
Learning Objectives
After completing the activity, learners should be able to:
- Identify which version a recorded approval applies to.
- Explain the difference between a historical approval and active approval after a draft changes.
- Distinguish checking a draft against its source from recording that a review occurred.
- Specify an action, reviewer, source and change trigger for one routine task.
Assessment
Use the learner's notes and final explanation. Look for these four points:
- Decision 1 approves version 1. Changing Room B to Room C creates version 2, which has no active approval. The earlier decision remains visible as history.
- Changing the room back creates version 3. The words match version 1, but the demo still requires another review. After the learner compares the wording with the brief and approves again, decision 2 applies to version 3.
- The learner distinguishes reviewing facts from recording a decision. Room C conflicts with the brief; selecting a reviewer and checking a box would not make Room C correct.
- The transfer answer names a specific action, reviewer, source and change that requires another review. “Someone checks it” is too vague to operate.
If the learner thinks the restored wording automatically revives approval, compare the notes taken before the fresh approval: decision 1 names version 1, while the restored draft is version 3. If needed, repeat steps 1 to 4 and pause after restoring Room B, before approving again. If the learner treats the checkbox as a fact check, ask which source supports the room. Use these responses to identify what needs another explanation, not as proof of workplace competence.