Parent or Peer Reviewer Sign-Off Template

Module 10, Lesson 10.5 · sign-off conversation structure · produces /capstone/named-human-signoff.md

Save this as: /capstone/named-human-signoff.md. A capstone does not freeze without the sign-off.

Use it again: the reviewer writes during the conversation; the student listens. Bring the printout to the meeting.

The sign-off is a conversation, not a form.

The reviewer reads the final doc, watches the demo, walks the rubric, and answers three questions. A passing sign-off requires yes to questions 1 and 2. Question 3 may be non-trivial; a non-trivial answer is a compliment, not a veto.

Header

Student:

Reviewer (parent or peer):

Relationship: ☐ parent ☐ tutor ☐ mentor ☐ other:

Date of conversation: Duration (min):

Format: ☐ In-person ☐ Video call ☐ Phone

How this sign-off works. The reviewer reads the final doc, watches the demo video, walks through the fifteen-criterion rubric, and then answers three questions in this file. The student’s job is to listen, not to defend.

Part A — the three questions. The reviewer answers these in their own words. These answers are the operative content of the sign-off.

Part B — the rubric result and signature. Records the pass/fail outcome.

Part A — The three sign-off questions

Question 1 — Does the system do what the charter says?

Reviewer compares charter §1 to the demo and final doc

A drift of tone is fine. A drift of function is not. Drift of tone: “Monday morning reading plan” vs. “weekly reading summary” — same thing. Drift of function: “summarizes my tabs” vs. “also auto-posts to my public blog” — different thing.

Reviewer’s answer (one paragraph):

☐Yes — the system does what the charter says. ☐No — there is a drift; the student will narrow the system or amend the charter before sign-off.

Question 2 — Would you be comfortable operating it under the posture?

Reviewer imagines being handed the kill switch and the runbook

Would they know what to do if a component broke? If a budget spiked? If a posture element slipped? If the answer is “no, because the operator would have to understand X that the final doc doesn’t explain,” the student owes the final doc a revision before sign-off.

Reviewer’s answer (one paragraph):

☐Yes — I could operate this system under the posture with what’s in the final doc. ☐No — one or more operating details are missing; student will add them before sign-off.

Question 3 — What would you change before v2?

One concrete suggestion for a v2 — not a gate on sign-off

A v1 does not need to implement v2 feedback, but this question is a required answer. The student will record it and decide whether to pull it into the “what I’d build next” prompt in the reflection, or to leave v2 for another day.

Reviewer’s answer (one paragraph):

Student’s response:

☐I’ve added this to my reflection’s “what I’d build next.” ☐I’ve noted it for v2 but didn’t change the reflection. ☐Neither; I disagree with the suggestion and have told the reviewer why.

Part B — Rubric result and signatures

Rubric summary

Reviewer has walked the fifteen-criterion rubric at /capstone/capstone-rubric.md

All fifteen passed:

☐ Yes ☐ No

If no, criteria that failed (→ Action: revise, then return to sign-off):

Signatures

Student

Name:

Date: Signature:

Reviewer (parent or peer)

Name:

Date: Signature:

Credit confirmation (optional, for homeschool transcripts)

For households issuing high-school credit on a transcript

This sign-off confirms the capstone component of the AI Architect Academy course. Transcript language templates live at /ops/credit-documentation.md.

Credit component issued:

☐AI Architect Academy — Capstone (capstone component only) ☐AI Architect Academy — Full Course (course complete, capstone included)

Hours documented:

Pulled from the tracking sheet at /ops/credit-documentation.md.

Appendix — What the reviewer read and watched

Checkbox list confirming the reviewer actually saw the artifacts

A sign-off without this checklist is a signature on something the reviewer hasn’t read.

/capstone/capstone-charter.md (read)
/capstone/capstone-architecture.md (read)
/capstone/capstone-final.md (read)
/capstone/observation-log.md (skimmed)
/capstone/incident-drill-afteraction.md (read)
/capstone/demo.mp4 (watched, end to end)
/capstone/capstone-reflection.md (read)
/capstone/capstone-rubric.md (walked through)

This template accompanies Lesson 10.5 of AI Architect Academy. The three-question structure, the conversation-not-form rule, and the fifteen-criterion rubric gate are concept. Specific reviewer wording and the credit block are recipe.