Letting the TEA Steep
Use an assurance case to record and examine a project's reasoning as the work develops.
Edit on GitHubYou have built a short assurance argument. It is tempting to wait until a project is nearly finished and then fill in a case for a final review. If the case begins at the end, it cannot help the team decide which risks to examine, whose perspectives to seek, or what evidence to generate during the work.
This module treats a case as a record of an ongoing process: identify what matters, make decisions as the work develops, and support those decisions with an argument and evidence. The examples include a proposed heart digital twin for clinical decision support and a prison safety algorithm used to specify fairness. They are prompts for reasoning, not proof that either system is safe or fair.
The platform does not select principles for your project. Your team brings the principles used in its domain or organisation, then decides which are relevant, how to weigh them and what practical claims and evidence would show progress.
Learning Objectives
By the end of this module, you will be able to:
Explain why an assurance case should develop across a project rather than only before deployment.
Distinguish an ethical principle from a specific action and its justification.
Identify, weigh and specify principles with stakeholder input.
Turn a specified concern into a claim, an action and evidence that can be reviewed.
Continue to the exploration.