Changing the first information

Text A: an original contemporary practice extract.

An adult learning centre tested sending materials to learners a week before a course began. Previously, the pack had been handed out during the first session. The centre agreed to judge the change by comparing first-session attendance and completion of the opening task with the previous term. Learners were also invited to comment on what they had received.

More people arrived ready to discuss the opening topic, and fewer needed extra time to complete the task. However, several learners said that the long pack had made the course seem more demanding than it was. Staff decided to continue sending information in advance, but replaced the full pack with a one-page introduction and a link to the remaining material. Comparing the two terms showed that early preparation was useful; the comments showed how it could be made less intimidating.

Text B: an original contemporary practice extract.

An amateur athletics league tried publishing the schedule for each meeting two weeks earlier than usual. Organisers counted enquiries and late withdrawals, then compared the totals with those from the previous season. Team captains completed a short survey after the third meeting.

The earlier schedule reduced the number of questions about starting times, and captains said that arranging transport had become easier. Yet changes to lanes and officials meant that some downloaded copies were soon out of date. The league kept the earlier publication date but added a clearly dated updates page. The organisers did not choose between the old and new systems simply by asking whether people liked the trial. They used the comparison and the survey to preserve its advantage while correcting a problem revealed during use.

In both accounts, people assess the effect of making information available earlier. What similarities do the approaches used to assess these changes share in these extracts? Use evidence from both texts to support your answer.