[curriculum-eval] 04-github-actions-intro.md: cognitive_load — 28 new concepts introduced before retrieval practice covers them

The file to edit is workshop/04-github-actions-intro.md. Start by reading the file to understand the current structure and the 28 concepts listed. Follow the improvement prompt's steps: move the 'What is a runner?' details block after the 'Label a sample workflow' activity, simplify the comparison table by collapsing some rows into a details block, and extend the labeling activity to include a term from the table. After editing, run the markdownlint command to check for errors.

File: workshop/04-github-actions-intro.md
Overall Score: 5.39 / 10.0 (corpus mean: 6.09)

Flagged Dimensions:

Corpus-derived (real): word_count=756 (within budget), new_concepts=28 (nearly double the 15-concept ideal), code_blocks=4, checklist_items=5, activity_density=1.19.

Root Cause (≤ 2 sentences):
This is the workshop's introduction to GitHub Actions terminology, and it deliberately front-loads a large vocabulary set (trigger, job, step, runner, action, workflow file, self-hosted runner, plus the agentic-workflow comparison table's five additional paired terms) in a single 756-word page — the word count stays disciplined, but concept density per word is very high, which is the classic "vocabulary-dump" pattern flagged by cognitive load theory even when total length looks fine.

Evidence (quoted from the file):

"A GitHub Actions workflow is a YAML file in .github/workflows/ that tells GitHub: when to run (on) what to run (jobs) how each job executes (steps)" — followed within a few paragraphs by a <details> aside introducing "runner" and "self-hosted runner," then a comparison table introducing five more paired terms (Trigger, Runner, Steps, Output, plus the classic-vs-agentic distinction).

Learning Science Rationale:
Sweller's Cognitive Load Theory holds that the number of new schema elements introduced per unit of instructional time — not just word count — determines whether working memory is overwhelmed; 28 new concepts in 756 words is a concept density roughly double the rubric's ideal, which risks learners retaining term labels without durable understanding. The existing "Label a sample workflow" activity is a good retrieval-practice technique, but it currently tests only five of the ~28 introduced terms, leaving the comparison-table concepts (self-hosted runner, output, permissions model) unpracticed.

Improvement Prompt (for an agent):

Edit workshop/04-github-actions-intro.md to reduce concept density without cutting word count
significantly:

1. Move the "What is a runner?" <details> aside (which introduces "runner" and "self-hosted
   runner" as two additional concepts) so it appears directly after the "Label a sample
   workflow" activity instead of before it, letting learners practice with fewer, familiar
   terms (trigger, job, runner, action, step) before encountering the self-hosted-runner
   variant.
2. In the "Why This Matters for Agentic Workflows" comparison table, consider trimming to the
   two most essential row comparisons (Trigger and Steps/Output) for a first-pass read, and
   move the remaining rows (Runner) into a collapsed <details> "See the full comparison"
   block, so the core five workflow-file concepts (trigger, job, runner, step, action) stay
   the primary cognitive focus of this page.
3. Extend the existing "Label a sample workflow" activity to also ask learners to identify one
   term from the comparison table (e.g., "which row shows what happens differently in an
   agentic workflow?"), so the practiced-concept set better matches the introduced-concept set.
4. Do not increase total word count meaningfully — the current 756 words is well within
   budget; focus only on reordering and adding retrieval practice for already-introduced terms.
5. After editing, run `npx --yes markdownlint-cli2 "workshop/04-github-actions-intro.md"` and
   confirm no new lint errors.

Expected Score After Fix: 6.5 / 10.0 (concept-density and activity-density improvements only; independent of the separately-reported checkpoint_quality/scaffolding regex fix — this page has a valid :white_check_mark: Checkpoint and :clipboard: Before You Start heading, so once that tooling bug is fixed this page's true combined score is closer to 8.5/10.0).

Generated by 🔬 Curriculum Quality Evaluator · copilot · auto · 102.7 AIC · ⌖ 19.2 AIC · ⊞ 10.4K · ◷

• expires on Sep 25, 2026, 7:00 AM UTC