ER presentation

H1: Choose one route and name its evidence

The teacher selects the route. If the genuine presentation, portfolio and instructions are available, use that work instead of the original rehearsal. Otherwise use the supplied fictional paper case. Rehearsal notes do not establish a delivered presentation, an audience response or official completion.

Opening example: a fictional directory changes from “Guest Area” to “Waiting Room” to match a door label. Record O-A shows that exact word change; O-B states that nobody observed actual visitor use.

Original route: name one supported statement and its record, then one unanswered question. H1 alone supplies the opening. Actual route: use a genuine finding, evidence pointer and unanswered question from the assigned portfolio instead; ask for any missing actual input. Give one response only. Do not use personal medical information.

P1: Complete original design records

Original route only. These fictional visitor-information paper records are reproduced from February 22 for rehearsal. They are not your actual ER design, measured patient flow or completed research. Keep them beside your speaking notes; do not redraw the plan or make another revision log.

B1 brief: help a reader match a destination name and a drawn route. C1 criterion: the sign, chart destination and destination door use the exact name “Waiting Room.” C2 criterion: every chart connection follows the shown plan. C3 constraint: keep the existing rooms, doors and corridor; add no opening or space. These are exercise rules, not building codes.

P1 plan, complete text equivalent: an entrance opens into a lobby. A corridor connects the lobby to the Waiting Room door. The lobby and Waiting Room share a wall with no door through it. There is no direct lobby-to-room connection; the corridor is the only shown route. The Waiting Room door says “Waiting Room.” The lobby sign says “Guest Area.” No other spaces or connections exist in this model. The plan is not to scale.

T1 chart, complete text equivalent: START is “Enter lobby.” An arrow goes directly to END, “Arrive at Waiting Room.” It omits the corridor step and describes a direct lobby-to-room connection through the wall. These are the only two nodes and the only arrow.

P2 revised paper plan: every P1 room, door and connection is unchanged. The lobby sign now says “Waiting Room”; the destination door still says “Waiting Room.” Nothing else changed.

T2 revised paper chart, complete text equivalent: START “Enter lobby” connects to ACTION “Follow corridor to Waiting Room door”; ACTION connects to END “Arrive at Waiting Room.” Those are all three nodes and both arrows. No clinical route or new physical connection is added.

P2 and T2 are supplied completed fictional paper versions. Their changes are implemented in these paper records only. No actual prototype was changed and no user performance was measured.

Original route only. R-A simulated review comment: “The lobby sign says Guest Area, but the door and destination say Waiting Room. Compare all names with C1.” The mismatch is visible in P1/T1.

R-B simulated review comment: “T1 describes a direct route through the wall. P1 only shows a corridor route. Compare each connection with C2.” Check both P1 and T1 rather than treating the comment alone as proof.

R-C simulated suggestion: “Add a new door through the shared wall and keep the direct chart.” This is the rejected alternative. Check it against C1, C2 and C3 to name the rule it conflicts with.

Actual route: use the genuine assigned presentation, portfolio and teacher criteria instead; skip the original-case response. Do not complete both.

E1: Findings and limits for a presentation

E-A, fictional document comparison: the earlier sign read “Guest Area,” while its chart destination and door read “Waiting Room.” The revised sign, destination and door all read “Waiting Room.” The comparison supports consistent naming only.

E-B, fictional route comparison: the only plan route is entrance to lobby, then corridor to Waiting Room door. The earlier chart had a direct lobby-to-room arrow through a wall without a door. The revised chart includes the corridor step. No room, door or corridor was added.

E-C, evidence inventory: no actual user observations, accessibility review, failure analysis, emergency-condition evidence, measured outcome or authorized safety evaluation is supplied. These are missing inputs, not findings that the proposal is dangerous or safe. No probability or severity ranking has been measured.

E-D, scope record: this exercise compares written labels and drawn connections. No real building, clinical workflow, staffing plan, patient-care action, physical prototype or operating display exists in these records. Thus paper agreement cannot establish clinical effectiveness or safety.

Use E-A or E-B for a specific supported paper claim. Use E-C/E-D to explain the limit. The records come from one fictional case, not independent studies. Naming two IDs does not make them independent or prove safety. Actual route: use the genuine assigned presentation, portfolio evidence and teacher rubric instead; skip the original case-specific response. Do not do both.

For this rehearsal, the design need is B1 and the three exercise rules are C1–C3. Trace each paper revision and suggestion to its records yourself. These are connected records from one fictional case, not independent research studies.

Actual route: use the genuine assigned presentation, portfolio and teacher criteria instead; skip the original-case response. Do not complete both.

R1: Prepare and rehearse one short walkthrough

Original route: organize one speaking outline with four parts: need and criteria; the two paper changes and their evidence IDs; the rejected alternative and constraint; the strongest supported conclusion and an untested limit. A few linked notes per part are enough. Do not claim the fictional case is a complete functioning ER.

Use the 45-minute presentation slot to read P1/E1, locate evidence, arrange the outline, practice explaining it and revise one unclear statement. You may speak quietly to yourself, explain to an available teacher-approved partner, or use a written rehearsal. The slot is not a 45-minute speech or an instruction to build a new slide deck.

Name a practice as spoken, written or partner rehearsal only if it actually occurred. No fixed duration, delivery score or audience response is supplied. Actual class presentation, order, time limit, required slides and assessment follow teacher instructions; ask for missing directions.

If stuck, start with the P1-to-P2 sign change and the criterion it answers. Explain the exact change, evidence and limit, then restore the chart change, rejected alternative and other outline parts. No separate recovery product is required. Actual route: use the genuine assigned presentation, portfolio and teacher criteria instead; skip the original-case response. Do not complete both.

Q1: Supplied questions and an honest evidence gap

Original practice question Q-A: “Why did you change the route chart rather than add a door?” Available records are P1, T1, T2, R-B, R-C, C2 and C3. Answer from those records and state the ones you used. This is a supplied question, not a real panel question.

Original practice question Q-B: “How much faster or safer would a real visitor reach the room?” E-C/E-D supply no user outcome, measured time or safety result. State what cannot be answered and name the missing evidence; do not invent a number, a successful trial or a clinical conclusion.

During the ten-minute Q&A slot, answer Q-A and address Q-B’s limit in the same notes. If a genuine audience question occurs, label it genuine and use the actual evidence. Otherwise call the two questions supplied practice. Two questions here are a complete original practice scope, not the official recording requirement.

At the later unanswered-question slot, use Q-B again: record the unanswered part, missing evidence and a next action such as requesting teacher-approved relevant evidence or clarification. Do not run a study, collect patient data or treat this note as permission to test. Actual route: use one genuine unresolved audience question and appropriate next action instead; if no such question occurred, tell the teacher rather than inventing one.

F1: Simulated feedback or genuine feedback

Original simulated reviewer comment F-A: “The new sign name is clear in the outline, but I cannot tell which source shows the corridor step. Point to T2 and connect it to P1/P2.” This is author-supplied feedback for practice; no classmate said it.

Original self-review criteria: clarity means a reader can identify the stated design change and its record; persuasiveness means the reason fits the named criterion and stays inside the evidence limit. Neither criterion certifies actual audience understanding or agreement.

Use F-A or your own labeled self-review to revise or justify one statement on the same outline. Record the feedback source, exact point and your response. If your outline already names T2 clearly, explain that with the actual sentence rather than invent a defect.

Actual route: record genuine peer feedback on clarity and persuasiveness using teacher requirements instead of F-A. If no peer comment was received, tell the teacher; self-review or simulated feedback does not fulfill a received-peer-feedback requirement. No duplicate fictional feedback response is required.

S1: Check actual requirements and Schoology submission separately

Keep twelve checks distinct: assigned presentation instructions/rubric; genuine portfolio and prototype; research/source evidence; audience/order/time limit; delivered presentation; genuine audience Q&A; received peer feedback; unresolved-question note; recording/async requirements; official completion; assignment access; whether Schoology shows Submitted. Give a brief non-private basis for what you did or name a missing input and next action. Begin during work and update only changes; an existing record can serve.

Original paper rehearsal does not fulfill authentic delivery, peer-feedback, recording or Schoology submission requirements. Retain the rehearsal as preparation only. Actual product is the delivered ER presentation, genuine peer feedback notes and the unresolved-question note with next action.

Confirm the actual recording format, question count and destination with the teacher. Q-A/Q-B are original rehearsal questions only. No camera recording, personal image, posting or second set of questions is required by this preparation.

Confirm the enrolled task and all completion requirements with the teacher. Do not invent a checkpoint or assume research, design and revision work are complete.

Open the linked BI assignment and check its posted deadline and submission format. Use the linked February 25 BI assignment and check its posted directions. If blocked, save locally and ask for help with the missing input or access problem. A saved file and a delivered presentation are different.

February 26 begins Physiology variables. Carry the habit of naming evidence and its limits; do not start an experiment or physiology worksheet in this presentation block.

Chosen route: locate a finding and a limit

Original route: use H1 to name a supported statement, its record and an unanswered question. Actual route: use genuine assigned evidence instead or ask for the missing input.

Use one chosen-route response only; original uses H1, actual uses its genuine portfolio.

Chosen route: one rehearsal or actual presentation

Original route: prepare R1’s four-part outline and rehearse in a feasible spoken, written or partner mode.

Actual route: use the genuine assigned presentation, portfolio and teacher criteria instead; skip the original-case response. Do not complete both. Record only the mode or delivery that actually occurred.

Chosen route: answer with records

Original route: answer supplied Q-A and state Q-B’s evidence gap in the same notes.

Actual route: use the genuine assigned presentation, portfolio and teacher criteria instead; skip the original-case response. Do not complete both. Supplied questions are not genuine audience questions.

Chosen route: respond to a real or declared practice source

Original route: identify F-A or an honest self-review, record its point and revise or justify one statement.

Actual route: use the genuine assigned presentation, portfolio and teacher criteria instead; skip the original-case response. Do not complete both. Ask the teacher what to do if actual peer feedback is missing.

Chosen route: unanswered question and next action

Original route: reuse Q-B and name the unanswered part, missing evidence and a teacher-approved next action.

Actual route: use the genuine assigned presentation, portfolio and teacher criteria instead; skip the original-case response. Do not complete both. Do not invent an audience question or begin a new study.

Both routes: retain honest completion records

Use S1 to record what you actually did or need next and use the linked assignment; ask for help if access or an input is missing.

Original practice is preparation only. Check actual delivery, feedback, recording, official completion and Schoology submission separately using genuine evidence. Use an existing record instead of duplicating it.