What this category's data looks like
This page addresses the category of undergraduate program setup and dynamic adjustment. The materials include three types: program setup application forms, talent cultivation plans, and expert review opinions. The program setup application form records the proposed program name, code, degree-granting category, length of study, and application date, and is filled in and sealed by the school/college; the talent cultivation plan records the curriculum system, credits and credit hours, practical components, and graduation requirements, and is compiled by the teaching and research office and reviewed by the school/college teaching committee; the expert review opinions record the review conclusion, list of experts, professional titles and affiliations, and signature date, and are signed by off-campus experts. In terms of update cadence, the application form is updated with each application batch, the cultivation plan is synchronized with each revision round, and the review opinions are formed with each review meeting. When the three enter this feature, they serve respectively as the application basis, cultivation basis, and review basis, each assuming a different role and not substitutable for one another. Field characteristics center on four categories: names, quantities, dates, and signatures. The same record must be compared item by item across different materials.
Configuration and implementation checks
This step is executed by the conversation record interface (by application and session dimension), outputting the session message list and total record count, including role and reference information. The handover-ready deployment status and operation records are then completed by humans or external systems. The message list is not a version ledger of business materials; it is used only as session evidence.
| Object | Check | Verification action |
|---|---|---|
| Program setup application form | Name, quantity, date, and signature must be aligned item by item with the talent cultivation plan and expert review opinions | In the request parameters, verify the source of the application and session identifiers, page through to retrieve all records, locate the session by chatId, and sample one record to check the role and reference |
| Talent cultivation plan | Course names, credit and credit-hour quantities, and revision date must be consistent with the application form and review opinions | Page through to retrieve all records by total record count, compare the names and quantities of the same record in the two materials, and check whether signatures or receipts are complete |
| Expert review opinions | Expert list, professional titles and affiliations, review conclusion, and signature date must be synchronized with the application form and cultivation plan | Open one record to check the reference and elapsed-time fields, use dataId and value to locate a single message, and confirm version synchronization |
| Conversation record interface output | Total record count and response code of 200 must be consistent with the paginated results | Pull two pages consecutively to compare the total count and offset, confirm that the role field matches the original conversation, and record the reference count separately by array length |
Three common errors
- Symptom: The same program name is written differently in the application form and the cultivation plan. Cause: The two materials are filled in separately without field-level comparison, so dates and quantities consequently fail to match.
- Symptom: Expert review opinions lack signatures or receipts. Cause: Materials were not fully collected after the review meeting, signature pages and receipts were not archived in sync, and verification is impossible at handover.
- Symptom: The interface returns empty but sessions exist in the UI. Cause: The sources of the application and session identifiers are inconsistent, or only the first page was retrieved, so the total record count and offset are not aligned.
How to verify the setup
Feature acceptance: page through to retrieve all records by total record count, sample one record to check the role, reference information, and time, and confirm that response code of 200 and _id, dataId and value can locate it.
Business testing: check item by item once against the handover sheet, see which record is missing, and confirm that version, connection, and task records are consistent.
- Page through to retrieve all records by total record count, compare the offset and total count, confirm that the role field matches the original conversation, and record the reference count separately by array length.
- Open one record to check the reference and elapsed-time fields, use
_id,dataIdandvalueto locate a single message, and confirm version synchronization.