What this category's data looks like
This category's data covers three types of materials involved in undergraduate program setup and dynamic adjustment: program setup application forms, talent cultivation plans, and expert review opinions. The sources are on-campus academic affairs and departmental archives, and the update cadence rolls with application windows and annual adjustments. When the three types of materials enter multilingual materials and terminology processing, their roles differ: the application form provides fields for program name, code, and application date; the cultivation plan carries the course system, credits, and degree conferral wording; the expert review opinions record the review conclusion, expert list, and signed receipt. Field characteristics concentrate in four categories: names, quantities, dates, and signatures. Multilingual versions also need to keep translated names traceable back to the source text. Terminology processing requires first aligning the same record across the three types of materials, then entering workflow orchestration, to provide a checkable field basis for the unified terminology glossary and comparison draft.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by workflow nodes (user selection and branches), outputting branch direction and interaction state records. The "unified terminology glossary and comparison draft" is continued and completed by subsequent nodes according to the branch. When the user selection node is triggered, the conversation enters an interaction state and records the workflow state; after the user completes the selection, execution continues along the branch corresponding to the selected option.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Program setup application form | The name, code, date, and signature fields must be consistent with the talent cultivation plan | Check the program name, code, and application date in the application form against the cultivation plan item by item, and check whether the signature field and receipt are complete |
| Talent cultivation plan | Course names, credit quantities, and degree wording must be consistent with the expert review opinions | Compare the course names, credit quantities, and degree conferral date in the cultivation plan against the review opinions, and mark inconsistencies |
| Expert review opinions | The expert list, review conclusion, signature, and receipt must be complete and version-synchronized | Check the expert signatures, dates, and receipts in the review opinions, and verify whether they are the same version as the latest application form and cultivation plan |
| User selection node | Each option corresponds to one branch, and the selection result variable has been passed to subsequent nodes | Check the options and branch connections one by one in the node, trigger it once to view the node state in the run record, reference variables in subsequent nodes and do a trial run; when the same session re-enters the interaction, check nodeId |
Three common errors
- Symptom: the same program name is written differently in the application form and the cultivation plan. Cause: the two materials are maintained separately, terminology is not unified, and the translated name cannot be traced back to the source text.
- Symptom: the course quantity or application date does not match between the two materials. Cause: versions are not synchronized, and the old cultivation plan was not updated along with the application form.
- Symptom: the expert review opinions lack a signature or receipt. Cause: the archiving step did not verify the signature field, and the receipt was not submitted together with the materials.
How to verify the setup
Acceptance of this feature: run a trial for each option one by one, check the branch direction and interaction state in the run record, and confirm that the selection result variable has been passed to subsequent nodes.
Business test: sample three terms and check whether their spelling is consistent throughout the document, verify whether translated names can be traced back to the source text, and check the dates and signatures of the application form, cultivation plan, and review opinions.
- In the user selection node, check the options and branch connections one by one, and trigger it once to view the node state in the run record.
- Reference the selection result variable in subsequent nodes and do a trial run, and check whether the passing of
variablesandnodeIdis consistent with the branch direction.