repair-progression

Learning is a staircase, not an elevator. Every jump of more than one taxonomy level without scaffolding is a trapdoor that loses students. Build the missing steps.

Purpose

Repair progressive complexity violations detected by the vigilance audit. Eliminate taxonomy-level jumps greater than 1 step between consecutive activities. Insert scaffolding content, resequence activities, and smooth cognitive transitions within and across units. Ensure every learner can follow the progression from simple to complex without gaps.

Procedure

1. Load progression report: Read the vigilance audit or progression report from project/reports/. Extract all flagged complexity jumps (activity pairs with > 1 taxonomy level gap).
2. Map taxonomy levels: For each flagged pair, identify the Bloom/Marzano level of both activities using references/taxonomy-mapping.md.
3. Classify repair type: Determine the appropriate fix:
   • (a) Scaffolding insertion: Add an intermediate activity bridging the taxonomy gap.
   • (b) Resequencing: Swap activity order to create a smoother progression.
   • (c) Complexity reduction: Lower the cognitive demand of the higher activity.
   • (d) Cross-unit bridge: Add a transition element between units.
4. Generate scaffolding: For type (a), draft a bridging activity at the intermediate taxonomy level. Follow the Sinapsis structure. Include the appropriate Bloom verb.
5. Resequence: For type (b), reorder activities and update all internal references and numbering.
6. Reduce complexity: For type (c), split a high-complexity activity into 2 steps at lower levels.
7. Cross-unit bridge: For type (d), add a "recall/connect" opener in the receiving unit that references the prior unit.
8. Validate progression: Walk through the full activity sequence and verify monotonic or smooth oscillating complexity (no jumps > 1 level).
9. Produce repair log: Document every change with taxonomy levels, repair type, and location.

Inputs

Outputs

Acceptance Criteria

• Zero taxonomy jumps > 1 level between consecutive activities.
• Every inserted scaffolding activity includes the correct Bloom/Marzano verb for its level.
• Resequenced activities maintain correct internal numbering and cross-references.
• Cross-unit transitions include explicit recall of prior knowledge.
• No existing content is deleted -- only augmented, split, or reordered.
• Repair log documents every change with before/after taxonomy levels.

Output Format

## Progression Repair Log

| Gap | Activities | Levels | Repair Type | Action |
|-----|-----------|--------|-------------|--------|
| 1 | Act 2.3 -> Act 2.4 | Recordar -> Analizar (jump=3) | Scaffolding | Inserted Act 2.3b (Comprender) and Act 2.3c (Aplicar) |
| 2 | Act 3.1 -> Act 3.2 | Aplicar -> Evaluar (jump=2) | Resequence | Moved Act 3.4 (Analizar) before Act 3.2 |
| 3 | U2 -> U3 | Crear -> Recordar (reset) | Cross-unit bridge | Added recall opener in U3 intro |

### Progression Map (After)
U2: Recordar -> Comprender -> Aplicar -> Analizar -> Evaluar -> Crear
U3: [Recall bridge] -> Recordar -> Comprender -> Aplicar -> Analizar

Error Handling

Anti-Patterns

• Scaffolding overload: Inserting so many intermediate steps that a 6-activity unit becomes 15. Keep scaffolding minimal and targeted.
• False smoothing: Labeling an activity as "Comprender" when it actually requires "Analizar" just to make the progression look smooth. Honest taxonomy labeling.
• Ignoring cross-unit flow: Fixing within-unit progression but leaving a Crear-to-Recordar cliff between units.
• Breaking traceability: Resequencing activities without updating [REF: DZ-...] tags. Always update references.
• Complexity ceiling: Reducing all high-level activities to mid-level. The goal is smooth stairs, not a flat road.

References

• references/progression-repair-patterns.md -- Gap detection rules, scaffolding techniques, resequencing workflow
• references/taxonomy-mapping.md -- Bloom/Marzano levels, verbs, and complexity hierarchy
• references/priming-rag/rag-cognitive-load.md -- Cognitive load theory for progression design