After the permitting class, learners used the old portal URL printed on a vendor slide and reached a retired page. What should the instructor report?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
If the slide still sends clerks to a dead portal, say so — specifically. Evaluation is how broken materials get a fix ticket, not a personnel crusade. Silence or 'just memorize it' leaves the next class with the same trap.
Full Explanation
After the permitting class, when learners used the old portal URL printed on a vendor slide and reached a retired page, the instructor should report a recommended revision that the existing slide be updated to the current city portal URL. Material evaluation includes recommending fixes when content leads learners to wrong municipal systems. Reporting nothing because vendors never update slides fails the instructor’s duty to flag broken materials. Requesting to fire the vendor’s graphic designer escalates personally and misses the concrete URL fix. Noting that learners should memorize URLs so materials never need changing blames users instead of correcting the slide. Exam caveat: recommend specific material revisions when evaluation shows content errors. Operational check: capture a screenshot of the retired page from the old URL, file a revision request with the current city portal URL, update local handouts immediately if allowed, and verify next cohort reaches the live permitting portal on first click. Keep the published objective visible on every rubric and report so raters do not drift into convenience metrics. Confirm with a second reviewer when stakes are high that the evidence matches the objective rather than a proxy such as speed, smiles, or familiarity.