What this category's data looks like
School moral education and homeroom teacher work materials include themed class meeting plans, student comprehensive quality records, home visit records, etc. Their sources are daily reporting by homeroom teachers, aggregation by grade groups, and archiving by the school moral education office, and their update cadence changes with semesters, months, and special activities. Themed class meeting plans contain activity objectives, procedures, time, and the homeroom teacher's signature; student comprehensive quality records contain fields such as ideological and moral character, academic level, and physical and mental health, the record date, and the review signature; home visit records contain the home visit subject, time, location, content, parent receipt, and teacher signature. After the materials enter the document parsing and chunking feature, each takes on a different role: themed class meeting plans and home visit records serve as searchable raw text rows, student comprehensive quality records serve as structured field rows, and parsed chunks are immediately persisted as visible data rows after parsing is completed and bound to a unique data identifier for subsequent retrieval and version ledger reference.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by parsing and training tasks (server-side tasks), outputting data rows and index status (parsed, indexing, indexed). The "version ledger and change records" are then completed by retrieval and subsequent processing. Parsed chunks are immediately persisted as visible data rows after parsing is completed and bound to a unique data identifier; the index transitions through the three states parsed, indexing, and completed, data pending indexing does not participate in recall, and changing the model only rebuilds data whose indexing has already been completed.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Themed class meeting plan | Whether the name, quantity, date, and signature of the same class meeting plan are consistent in the two materials: the grade group aggregation and the moral education office archive | Separately verify the class meeting theme, implementation date, and homeroom teacher signature in the two materials, confirm that the current version is unique and the old version is traceable; in the parsing task, verify whether chunkSize and chunkSplitter preserve the date and signature lines when splitting the plan procedure paragraphs |
| Student comprehensive quality record | Whether the fields such as ideological and moral character and academic level, the record date, and the review signature for the same student match between the comprehensive quality record and the class summary table | Compare field names, quantities, and dates item by item, and check for missing signatures or receipts; in the training task, verify trainingType and the index status, confirm that data pending indexing is not recalled, and that rebuilding only covers data whose indexing has already been completed |
| Home visit record | Whether the home visit subject, time, location, content, and signature of the same home visit record are consistent between the homeroom teacher ledger and the parent receipt | Verify the home visit subject, time, location, content, and parent receipt signature, and confirm that when the version is not synchronized the old version is traceable; open the data row to verify whether the status is parsed, indexing, or indexed, and confirm it is consistent with the interface display |
| File and data row | The identities of the file record and the data row are distinguishable, and the data row is in one of the three states and consistent with the interface display | Separately verify the file record and the data row, and confirm that the identities of the file record and the data row are distinguishable; inspect the data rows covered by the rebuild task and confirm that only data whose indexing has already been completed is covered |
Three common errors
- Symptom: a just-uploaded themed class meeting plan cannot be found. Cause: successful parsing does not mean retrieval will definitely hit; the data row may be in parsed or indexing, and data pending indexing is naturally isolated at the retrieval layer and is not recalled.
- Symptom: the date and quantity of the same home visit record do not match between the homeroom teacher ledger and the parent receipt. Cause: the two materials are parsed and persisted separately, the versions are not synchronized, the old version is not marked, and references are not updated with the current version.
- Symptom: after a training failure, empty data rows remain, or signatures and receipts are missing. Cause: training interruption leaves orphan data, the material itself has incomplete fields, the index status has not transitioned to indexed, and reference synchronization fails.
How to verify the setup
Feature acceptance: upload one material, observe the data row status transitions and the coverage scope of the rebuild task, and confirm that parsed chunks are immediately persisted as visible data rows after parsing is completed and bound to a unique data identifier, that the index transitions through the three states parsed, indexing, and indexed, and that rebuilding only covers data whose indexing has already been completed.
Business test: change one piece of content, observe whether the version number and references are updated synchronously, and verify whether the fields, dates, and signatures in the themed class meeting plan, student comprehensive quality record, and home visit record are consistent.
- Open the data row to verify the status, confirm it is one of parsed, indexing, or indexed and consistent with the interface display, and separately verify the file record and the data row.
- Inspect the data rows covered by the rebuild task, confirm that only data whose indexing has already been completed is covered, that the initial training covers data pending indexing and data being indexed, and that the two are not interchanged.