Turn an event idea into a checkable proposal

An appealing idea still needs to fit its brief. In this task, evaluate three supplied ideas, repair one, and propose a different format. You will check conditions rather than judge whether an idea is universally creative or popular.

Practice goal: Produce two distinct proposals with explicit timings, evidence for each constraint and unresolved questions for the organizer.

Use only the invented information below. Do not paste real emails, personnel records, customer details or confidential event records. Changing a name does not establish permission to upload a real record.

• [B1] Fictional Cedar staff ideas session: 12 adults, in one room, with a 25-minute activity slot. This slot must include a 3-minute introduction, an activity, a 4-minute review and a 2-minute transition to the next agenda item.
• [B2] Participants must be able to stay seated. Speaking is optional; each format must also offer a written contribution or the choice to pass. There is no requirement to explain why someone passes.
• [B3] Only paper, pens and a presenter’s timer are supplied. Do not require phones, new accounts, an app, purchases, food, photographs or personal stories. These are this fictional brief’s constraints, not universal event rules.
• [B4] Idea A: a scavenger hunt requiring people to move around the room and upload phone photos. Idea B: a seated discussion in which everyone must speak for two minutes. Idea C: quiet individual writing followed by optional written or spoken sharing; contributions may be anonymous and participants may pass.
• [B5] A draft schedule for Idea C allocates 3 minutes to introduction, 18 to the activity, 4 to review and 2 to transition. All four blocks count toward the 25-minute slot.
• [B6] The organizer has not yet confirmed individual access requirements, whether the paper materials are usable for everyone, facilitator availability or participant preferences. Meeting B1–B3 alone does not establish accessibility, suitability or audience enthusiasm.
• [B7] Evaluate A, B and C against the explicit rules. Repair C’s timing and create a different seated format using the same materials and opt-out choices. Draft only; do not run a session or collect responses.

You can complete this on paper or in a local document. No external account, upload or purchase is needed.

Draft your answer before reading the correction. Optional: use only this fictional prompt in a tool your organization permits. Do not connect accounts, upload other files or send messages for this task.

Using only B1–B7 below, make a comparison table for Ideas A, B and C. Cite rule IDs and separate a clear failure from a condition still needing confirmation. Calculate the maximum activity time and repair C’s schedule. Offer one different seated paper-and-pen format with optional written/spoken contribution or passing, and show its full 25-minute timing. List remaining organizer checks; do not certify accessibility or predict engagement.

Complete fictional facts:
- [B1] Fictional Cedar staff ideas session: 12 adults, in one room, with a 25-minute activity slot. This slot must include a 3-minute introduction, an activity, a 4-minute review and a 2-minute transition to the next agenda item.
- [B2] Participants must be able to stay seated. Speaking is optional; each format must also offer a written contribution or the choice to pass. There is no requirement to explain why someone passes.
- [B3] Only paper, pens and a presenter’s timer are supplied. Do not require phones, new accounts, an app, purchases, food, photographs or personal stories. These are this fictional brief’s constraints, not universal event rules.
- [B4] Idea A: a scavenger hunt requiring people to move around the room and upload phone photos. Idea B: a seated discussion in which everyone must speak for two minutes. Idea C: quiet individual writing followed by optional written or spoken sharing; contributions may be anonymous and participants may pass.
- [B5] A draft schedule for Idea C allocates 3 minutes to introduction, 18 to the activity, 4 to review and 2 to transition. All four blocks count toward the 25-minute slot.
- [B6] The organizer has not yet confirmed individual access requirements, whether the paper materials are usable for everyone, facilitator availability or participant preferences. Meeting B1–B3 alone does not establish accessibility, suitability or audience enthusiasm.
- [B7] Evaluate A, B and C against the explicit rules. Repair C’s timing and create a different seated format using the same materials and opt-out choices. Draft only; do not run a session or collect responses.

Authored flawed sample, not an actual provider response:

Choose A: everybody enjoys moving and phone photos are always accessible. B fits easily because 12 people speaking for two minutes takes only 12 minutes. C’s 27-minute schedule also fits the 25-minute slot. All three guarantee engagement.

1. A conflicts with the stay-seated and no-phone/no-photograph requirements (B2–B4). The supplied brief does not support the sample’s claims about everyone enjoying or accessing it.

2. B requires speech, contrary to B2. Twelve two-minute turns require 12 × 2 = 24 minutes before introduction, review and transition. The full 33 minutes exceed the slot even with no extra handover time.

3. C’s format permits the specified participation choices, but B5 totals 3 + 18 + 4 + 2 = 27 minutes. The time available for activity is 25 − 3 − 4 − 2 = 16 minutes.

4. A corrected C can use 16 activity minutes. A different format should change what participants do, not merely rename C. Retain all supplied material and opt-out constraints in both proposals.

5. B6 remains unresolved even after the timing and participation rules are met. Ask the organizer about access requirements, materials and facilitation; do not turn a paper exercise into a guarantee of accessibility or engagement.

One supported correction:

Corrected C: 3-minute introduction; 8 minutes of individual writing or quiet reflection; 8 minutes of optional written/spoken sharing or passing; 4-minute review; 2-minute transition. Total: 3 + 8 + 8 + 4 + 2 = 25 minutes. No response or personal disclosure is required.

Different proposal — sort fictional idea cards: The presenter prepares paper cards describing fictional session topics, with no personal information. Participants stay seated and spend 8 minutes arranging a small set into “try,” “ask about” and “set aside,” or observing. They have 8 minutes to add an optional written or spoken reason, or pass. Use a 3-minute introduction, 4-minute review and 2-minute transition: 3 + 8 + 8 + 4 + 2 = 25 minutes. No app, purchase, photograph or personal story is required. This is a proposal; the cards have not been made.

Before real use: Confirm access requirements, usable materials, facilitation and participant preferences with the organizer (B6). The proposal’s compliance with this small brief is not a complete accessibility or event approval.

Check your answer:

• A and B are rejected for specific supplied constraints, not taste or stereotypes.
• Twelve two-minute turns take 24 minutes, and the complete mandatory-turn format takes at least 33.
• The maximum activity time is 16 minutes; each corrected proposal totals 25 with all required blocks.
• The second proposal changes the activity while retaining seated, optional participation and supplied-material constraints.
• Unknown access, material, facilitator and preference questions remain unresolved; no universal engagement or accessibility claim is made.

Different wording can satisfy these checks. Recheck the facts after any rewrite.

Use constraints as visible acceptance checks before ranking ideas. Keep unknown requirements separate from confirmed failures. W3C notes that activities can create access barriers; a seated, written or phone-free option is not a complete solution for every participant. Ask through the organizer’s approved process rather than collecting private access information in an AI prompt. A successful paper check is not evidence the event was delivered or enjoyed.

Primary guidance checked on 2026-10-12. The references support source checking, privacy boundaries and clear presentation; the event facts and sample answers are invented. W3C event guidance informs access questions; these exercises are not event safety, legal compliance or accessibility approval.

• Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile
• Making Events Accessible
• Use Clear and Understandable Content

Keep real work within your organization’s approved data and review process. These exercises do not establish tested accessibility, time savings, job competence or a professional qualification. No provider trial or human professional review is claimed.

Start free Module 1: account sign-in is required; no card is needed. Or read general AI learning guidance. Keep your practice answer in your own local document if you want to return to it; this page does not save it to your account.