What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the scenario of kindergarten operation behavior and quality self-assessment, covering three types of materials: self-assessment reports, issue lists, and rectification plans. The materials come from daily inspection records of the kindergarten, class observation forms, parent feedback summaries, and internal self-check ledgers. The update cadence advances in three rounds: beginning of semester, mid-semester, and end of semester, and each round requires re-verifying fields and dates. Self-assessment reports focus on overall conclusions and signature fields, issue lists focus on item names, quantities, and discovery dates, and rectification plans focus on responsible persons, completion deadlines, and receipts. After the three types of materials enter the workflow, each assumes a different role: the self-assessment report serves as the summary output, the issue list serves as the source of items, and the rectification plan serves as the basis for subsequent execution. The three must keep the same record's name, quantity, and date consistent, with synchronized versions and complete signatures and receipts.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by workflow nodes (user selection and branching), outputting branch directions and interaction status records. "Draft materials and handover records that can be issued" are then completed by subsequent nodes continuing execution according to the branch. When the user selection node is triggered, the conversation enters an interaction state and records the workflow status. After the user completes the selection, execution continues along the branch corresponding to the selected option.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Self-assessment report | Fields complete, responsible person clear, version and date consistent | Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, confirm that the report conclusion corresponds to the branch for the signature field; reference variables in subsequent nodes and run a trial once, and check whether the report version and date in the handover record are synchronized |
| Issue list | The same record's name, quantity, and date do not match across the two materials | Trigger a user selection node once, check the node status and nodeId in the run record; verify whether the list items' names, quantities, and dates are consistent in the self-assessment report and rectification plan |
| Rectification plan | Missing signature or receipt, version not synchronized | Reference the selection result variables in subsequent nodes and run a trial once, confirm that the rectification responsible person and completion deadline are written into the handover record; verify whether the receipt and signature field are complete |
| Handover record | Fields complete, responsible person clear, version and date consistent | Draft one according to the template and complete one handover, check whether missing items are blocked; verify whether the version number and date in the handover record are consistent with the upstream materials |
Three common errors
- Phenomenon: The same record's name, quantity, and date do not match between the self-assessment report and the issue list. Cause: The two materials were drafted separately, and the field definitions and version numbers were not unified before handover, resulting in an inability to correspond during subsequent verification.
- Phenomenon: The rectification plan has been updated, but the self-assessment report still references the old version, and the date and signature field are not synchronized. Cause: The version was not synchronized, the handover record did not record the change node, and subsequent nodes continued execution along the old branch.
- Phenomenon: The handover record lacks a signature or receipt, and the next stage cannot sign for acceptance. Cause: After the user selection node was triggered, the interaction was not completed, the process stopped, the responsible person did not confirm, and the receipt was not generated.
How to verify the setup
This feature's acceptance: run trials option by option, check the branch direction and interaction status in the run record, confirm that each option corresponds to one branch, variables have been passed to subsequent nodes, and nodeId is consistent with the run record.
Business test: draft one according to the template and complete one handover, and see whether missing items are blocked.
- Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, trigger a user selection node once, and check the node status and branch direction in the run record.
- Reference the selection result variable in subsequent nodes and run a trial once, and verify whether the version, date, signature, and receipt in the handover record are complete.