HVE Teaching Plan
Frontier curriculum proposal, not a Microsoft syllabus or approved credential. Documentation reviewed 2026-11-03; labs and timings remain untested.
Proposed Learning Sequence
| Unit | Learner outcome | Exercise and evidence | Research |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Delivery mindset | Locate a task within the wider lifecycle | Identify a client’s current stage, missing evidence, and next decision | HVE Project Lifecycle |
| 2. Context and standards | Select relevant evidence and encode a team rule | Author one repository instruction and demonstrate its effect | HVE Context Engineering, HVE Roles and Collaboration |
| 3. Evidence-led RPI | Plan and implement a bounded change | Explain research readiness; produce plan, critique disposition, change, and validation evidence | HVE RPI Workflow |
| 4. Review and handoff | Reconcile the result with acceptance criteria | Find a seeded defect, route it, resolve it, and hand work to a second learner | HVE RPI Workflow, HVE Context Engineering |
| 5. Team adoption | Define a repeatable delivery practice | Propose version ownership, update checks, review responsibilities, and client handover | HVE Installation and Cohort Baseline |
Pilot Lab Proposal
Proposed scenario: a fictional insurer working with synthetic claims data. This scenario is a curriculum suggestion, not a confirmed program decision. Begin with a small local claims-validation change in a prepared repository. This lets the HVE exercise run before introducing cloud dependencies from Foundry and Fabric.
Supply requirements, acceptance criteria, a known repository convention, and one deliberate evidence gap. Include a seeded mismatch between a completion claim and the delivered behavior. Learners must investigate or justify evidence reuse, approve a bounded plan, implement, validate, review, and route remaining work. Finish with a fresh-chat handoff to a partner.
Proposed prerequisites: basic Git, ability to run the starter application’s checks, and working Copilot access. Validate these through a preflight rather than assuming certification implies readiness.
Proposed Assessment Evidence
- A defensible choice of next action and a record of unresolved assumptions.
- Traceability from requirement to plan task to implemented behavior and validation.
- One reusable team instruction whose effect the learner can explain.
- A review that distinguishes execution completion from acceptance.
- A handoff another learner can resume with the right evidence.
Use these to inform Whitelabel Training Program. Microsoft is the recorded certificate issuer; passing thresholds and final evidence requirements still need approval. These prototype exercises alone do not establish certificate eligibility. See Certification and Assessment Design.
Authoring Backlog
- Confirm personas and workshop duration: ^q-004, ^q-005.
- Review TPM, security, SRE, and data-science guidance before expanding role paths.
- Choose and test the cohort baseline with Environment.
- Build the starter repository, instructor solution, seeded failure, and submission process.
- Turn each unit into a module recording outcomes, prerequisites, agenda, lab steps, assessment, tested version, and verification date.
- Pilot with instructors; use observed completion times to set the agenda.
- Confirm adaptation rights, attribution, and branding through ^q-007 and ^q-016.
Development Drafts and Prototypes
- Learner Personas — placement dimensions and suggested routes
- HVE Sample Labs — three initial exercises with starter materials
- Environment and Setup Plan — host selection, setup, and recovery
- Competency and Evaluation Goals — common outcomes and role-specific evidence
Sample code and instructor references have local acceptance checks; HVE integration and learner timings still require a pilot.