Skip to content

Dependency Review Console

Run the Dependency Review Console MicroSim Fullscreen

About This MicroSim

A dependency CSV with 490 edges is not 490 equally trustworthy claims. Some are load-bearing, some are merely helpful, and a few turn out on review to be wrong. Dependency Review is the process of examining those assertions rather than accepting them at face value, and it is a judgment a validator cannot make for you: an overconstrained graph is still a perfectly valid DAG, and passes every structural check in Chapter 5.

This console deals you eight edges one at a time. Each shows the asserted relationship, the rationale the asserter gave, their confidence, and the edge's provenance. Your job is to classify it:

Classification What it means
Sound A genuine, correctly scoped prerequisite
Overconstrained Requires more than the concept genuinely needs — usually a recommended prerequisite encoded as necessary, which blocks learners for no reason
Underconstrained Requires less than the concept genuinely needs, letting a learner attempt something they are not ready for
False Prerequisite Not a real prerequisite at all — a plausible-sounding edge based on topical proximity rather than domain expertise

Edges follow this book's convention: A → B reads "A depends on B", so B is the prerequisite.

Read the rationale, not the badge

The confidence values deliberately cross-cut correctness, because that is the trap this sim exists to spring:

  • Edge 5 (Topological Sort → Directed Acyclic Graph) is asserted at only medium confidence, and it is sound. The asserter simply did not cite a source.
  • Edge 6 (Concept Label → Learning Graph) is asserted at high confidence by a human domain expert, and it is overconstrained.

Confidence records how sure the asserter was — not whether they were right. A reviewer who classifies by reading the badge will land near chance. The rationale is the evidence; the confidence is just how loudly it was claimed.

How to Use

  1. Read the edge, the rationale, and the confidence badge.
  2. Ask the diagnostic question for each failure mode:
  3. Could a learner genuinely not start B without A? If they could, but it would be harder, the edge is overconstrained.
  4. Is something else obviously required that is not listed? Then underconstrained.
  5. Is the rationale actually about topic, ordering, or convenience rather than required prior knowledge? Then false prerequisite.
  6. Click a classification. The card turns green or red, the model answer's button turns green, and the justification appears below.
  7. Advance through all eight, then click Review Summary for a table of your classifications against the model answers with your final accuracy.

Iframe Embed Code

You can add this MicroSim to any web page by adding this to your HTML:

1
2
3
4
<iframe src="https://dmccreary.github.io/learning-graphs/sims/dependency-review-console/main.html"
        height="482px"
        width="100%"
        scrolling="no"></iframe>

Lesson Plan

Audience

Instructional designers, curriculum developers, and educational technologists working with concept dependency graphs.

Duration

15–20 minutes

Prerequisites

Learners need Dependency Rationale, Dependency Confidence, Necessary Prerequisite, and Recommended Prerequisite from Chapter 23.

Activities

  1. Solo review (8 min): Each learner classifies all eight edges alone and records their accuracy from the summary table.
  2. Argue the misses (7 min): Collect the class's answers for edges 2 and 6 — both overconstrained, but one is asserted at medium confidence by an AI pass and the other at high confidence by a human expert. Ask which one was harder to reject, and why. This is where the "confidence is not correctness" lesson lands.
  3. Necessary vs recommended (5 min): Edge 2's rationale says graph theory "makes node styling much easier to reason about." Have learners rewrite that rationale so it would justify a sound edge, and then decide whether the edge should exist at all or be re-encoded as a recommended prerequisite.

Assessment

Learners can:

  • Classify a dependency edge against the four categories and justify the call from the rationale.
  • Identify "makes it easier" language as the signature of a recommended prerequisite.
  • Identify topical proximity and teaching order as false-prerequisite signals.
  • Explain why confidence and provenance inform a review without settling it.
  • Dependency Review — the process this console simulates
  • Dependency Rationale — the stated reason, and the actual evidence a reviewer weighs
  • Dependency Confidence — how sure the asserter was, which is not the same as correctness
  • Edge Provenance — who or what asserted the edge
  • Overconstraint / Underconstraint / False Prerequisite — the three failure modes
  • Necessary vs Recommended Prerequisite — the distinction most overconstraint comes from

References

  1. Chapter 23: Advanced Dependency Modeling - The chapter this MicroSim supports.
  2. Chapter 3: Concept Dependencies and Prerequisites - The simpler single-flavor prerequisite edge this chapter extends.
  3. Directed Acyclic Graph - Why an overconstrained graph still passes every structural check.
  4. Curriculum Mapping - The broader practice that dependency review supports.
  5. Bloom's Taxonomy - The framework behind the Evaluate-level judgment this MicroSim asks for.