What this category's data looks like
Graduate training process management involves materials such as training plans, proposal reports, and mid-term assessment forms. Sources are supervisors, colleges, and graduate management positions, updated by semester and milestone. The training plan contains courses, credits, research direction, and dates; the proposal report contains the title, review comments, signatures, and receipt; the mid-term assessment form contains progress, outcomes, assessment conclusions, and signatures. After materials enter the workflow, the training plan serves as the progress baseline, the proposal report and mid-term assessment form serve as milestone evidence, and together the three support the generation of the progress table and statistical scope description. The field characteristic is that the name, quantity, and date of the same record need to be aligned across materials, signatures and receipts need to be complete, and versions need to be synchronized.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by workflow nodes (user selection and branches), outputting branch direction and interaction state records. The "progress table and statistical scope description" is completed by subsequent nodes continuing execution according to the branch.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Training plan | Whether course names, credits, dates, and signatures are consistent with the proposal report | Check options and branch connections one by one in the node, reference variables, and run a trial once |
| Proposal report | Whether the title, review comments, dates, and receipt match the mid-term assessment form | Trigger a user selection node once and view the nodeId and node status in the run record |
| Mid-term assessment form | Whether progress, outcomes, assessment conclusions, and signatures are complete and versions are synchronized | Reference the selection result variable in subsequent nodes and run a trial to check the branch direction |
| Progress table and statistical scope description | Whether the record count and statistical count match, and whether the scope is written in the header | Use one week of records to check the totals, and check whether exceptions are clearly stated |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The name, quantity, and date of the same record do not match between the training plan and the proposal report. Cause: The two materials are entered separately, without cross-material alignment and version synchronization.
- Symptom: The mid-term assessment form lacks signatures or receipts, but the progress table still includes it in the statistics. Cause: Material completeness was not verified before the node, and the statistical scope did not clearly state exceptions.
- Symptom: After selecting an option, the default branch is still taken, and the process stops after the interaction is completed. Cause: Options and branch connections were not checked one by one, and the interaction state was not recorded completely.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this feature: run trials for each option one by one, check the branch direction and interaction state in the run record, and confirm that variables and nodeId are passed correctly.
Business test: use one week of records to check the totals, and see whether the scope and exceptions are clearly stated.
- Check options and branch connections one by one in the node, and trigger once to view the node status in the run record.
- Reference the selection result variable in subsequent nodes and run a trial to check the branch direction and interaction state record.