Session 1 answer key and debrief questions
Part A answers
| Draft statement |
W1 check |
Action |
| Road B is open |
Not established |
Remove; ask authorized local source |
| All entrances are step-free |
Contradicted |
Correct; only Entrance E is step-free |
| Go directly there now |
Outside reviewer authority |
Stop; use alert approval process |
Part B guidance
| Step |
Expected themes |
| 1 |
Review draft only; manual route is established alert service |
| 2 |
People using wheelchairs harmed by wrong accessibility info; route errors |
| 3 |
Input is fictional bulletin only; no personal data in exercise |
| 4 |
If tool used for translation, must be approved; terms matter |
| 5 |
Each line checked against W1 |
| 6 |
Local communications lead approves; reviewer cannot send |
| 7 |
Stop on contradiction; incident route per org policy |
Part C model answer
- Decision: Red
- Owner: Authorized local communications lead
- Protection issue: False accessibility information excludes people who need step-free access
- Manual fallback: Established manual alert process
Debrief questions
- Why is “sounds urgent” not a reason to send?
- How is a translation error different from a policy violation?
- What would change your decision from red to amber?
- Who in your organization would you escalate to?
Rubric scoring (4 points)
| Criterion |
Look for |
| Input/use decision |
Red with valid reason |
| Source verification |
Completed table with contradiction flagged |
| Bias/omission |
Accessibility or route harm identified |
| Human control |
Named approver + manual fallback |
Download this page as an accessible PDF
