What this category's data looks like
This category's data covers three types of materials involved in undergraduate program planning: the program plan, course syllabi, and the credit structure table. The materials come from revision drafts submitted by academic affairs and departments, with an update cadence that rolls by semester or program cycle. Field characteristics include course name, credit count, term offered, responsible person, signature field, and version date. The program plan serves as the master record, while course syllabi and the credit structure table serve as supporting records. Once they enter the workflow, they take on the roles of master data, supporting data, and summary data respectively, and the names, quantities, dates, and signatures across the materials need to be aligned item by item.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by workflow nodes (user selection and branching), outputting branch directions and interaction state records. "Signable material drafts and handover records" are then completed by subsequent nodes continuing execution along the branches.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Program plan | Whether the course name, credit count, term offered, version date, and signature field are complete and consistent with the course syllabi | Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, trigger a run to view the node status in the run records, and reference variables in subsequent nodes for a trial run |
| Course syllabus | Whether the name, quantity, and date of the same course match across the two materials, and whether the versions are in sync | Compare fields one by one against the program plan, check whether signatures and receipts are missing, and verify the branch direction corresponding to nodeId |
| Credit structure table | Whether the total credits and the quantities of each module are consistent with the program plan and course syllabi, and whether the dates are unified | Check quantities and dates item by item, confirm that unsynchronized versions or missing signatures are blocked, and record the values of variables in subsequent nodes |
| Handover record | Whether the responsible person is clearly identified, whether signatures and receipts are complete, and whether the version and date are consistent | Draft one according to the template and complete one handover, check whether missing items are blocked, and verify the transfer results of nodeId and variables |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same course do not match across the two materials. Cause: The program plan and course syllabi are maintained separately, and no field-level comparison was done during revision.
- Symptom: Versions are not in sync, and old drafts are mixed with new drafts. Cause: The material update cadences are inconsistent, and versions and dates were not checked during handover.
- Symptom: Signatures or receipts are missing, and the materials cannot be issued. Cause: The responsibility handover step did not confirm the responsible person item by item, and the signature field and receipt were not closed-loop.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this feature: run trials option by option, check the branch directions and interaction states in the run records, and confirm that nodeId and variables are correctly referenced in subsequent nodes.
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, and trigger a run to view the node status in the run records.
- Reference
variablesin subsequent nodes and run a trial once, and verify the branch direction and interaction state records corresponding tonodeId.