Week 08 · lesson
Capstone Defense: Show the System
The final assessment is a Digital Workspace Portfolio and Defense. You are not being graded for remembering menu locations. You are defending why the workflow works, what evidence supports that claim, and where the evidence stops.
Portfolio checklist
Your portfolio includes:
- organized Drive project structure;
- Docs project plan;
- Sheets budget/data artifact with formula evidence;
- Forms instrument using synthetic or non-sensitive data;
- Slides briefing with speaker notes;
- Gmail communication draft;
- Calendar event;
- Tool Choice Decision Map;
- Digital Citizenship Operations Checklist;
- Claim Verification Record.
Prepare the 4–6 minute defense
Your defense should answer five questions.
1. Why these tools?
Choose two components and explain why the selected tool fits the information, action, and audience better than a plausible alternative.
2. Who can access what?
Show one permission decision. Name the identity/audience, resource, required action, and role.
3. What did you deliberately not collect or publish?
Show one privacy/data-minimization decision. A good answer names the tempting field/information and explains why the workflow did not need it.
4. What did you verify?
Show one claim, source, or link that you checked instead of trusting the first search result or AI output.
5. What remains limited?
Name one limitation. Examples:
- test responses are synthetic and do not represent a real event audience;
- one permission was tested only with the available classroom role;
- a budget is fictional and does not represent actual vendor pricing;
- interface behavior may vary under a different organization's Google settings.
Evidence defense matrix
Before presenting, complete:
| Claim | Evidence | What the evidence proves | What it cannot prove |
|---|---|---|---|
| workspace is organized | retrieval test | named capstone resources can be found through intended structure | every future file will be organized correctly |
| agenda access works | recipient-role test | tested role opened/commented as intended | every external account can access it |
| survey is minimized | field-purpose audit | each current field has stated purpose | no platform metadata exists outside the visible response fields |
Add at least two rows of your own.
Final failure check
Before submission, look specifically for:
- broad sharing that is not required;
- broken Drive links;
- inconsistent date/time across tools;
- unverified factual claims;
- uncited/restricted visuals;
- color-only meaning or unreadable slides;
- a Form field with no defensible purpose;
- private information exposed in screenshots.
Fix the issue and record the retest.
What mastery looks like
A strong defense sounds like this:
I used Forms to collect repeated structured responses, then Sheets to summarize them because the jobs are different. The response sheet is limited to the project team because the broader audience only needs the Form. I removed personal phone number from the first draft because the event workflow does not require it. I tested the linked agenda from the intended reviewer role. That proves the reviewer could access it during the test, but it does not prove access will remain correct if permissions change later.
That is digital literacy: tool choice + evidence + access + verification + limitation.