Link enrolment, module and curriculum revision
Synthetic training centre: module M2 in curriculum C2 requires M1 under C2. Completion of M1 under C1 is carried forward only when an explicit C1-to-C2 equivalence record exists. Learner L-A has C1 completion but no equivalence; L-B has C2 completion. These are the centre’s invented progression rules, not qualification requirements.
| Constraint | Required record | Example decision rule |
|---|---|---|
| Prerequisite identity | Curriculum ID + module ID | C2/M2 requires C2/M1 |
| Completion evidence | Learner, curriculum, module, result | A C1 result alone does not satisfy C2 |
| Carry-forward | Approved equivalence reference | EQ-1 explicitly maps C1/M1 to C2/M1 |
Test current and carried-forward completion
| Case | Input | Expected decision |
|---|---|---|
| L-A | C1/M1 passed; no EQ-1 | M2 eligibility pending |
| L-B | C2/M1 passed | Prerequisite met |
- Record target curriculum
- Read version-specific completion
- Check any approved equivalence
- Decide prerequisite only
Unknown equivalence stays unresolved; do not convert an old result into a new completion event.
EQ-1 is then recorded for L-A. Must M1 be marked as newly attended under C2?
Show the worked answer
No. Carry the evidenced C1 completion through EQ-1; the C2 prerequisite is met without inventing new attendance.
Include both versions and the equivalence reference in the demo so the centre can distinguish a genuine new result from carried-forward credit.