Rationale
The domino analogy is gender-neutral and age-neutral. "Imagine a row of dominoes. You push the first one." Works as a physics metaphor but makes no effort to connect to female college students. Nothing here is more relatable to the target audience than to anyone else.
Fix
Reframe with a scenario the audience would recognize. A wave of applause traveling through a lecture hall. A chain of texts where each person passes the message forward but stays in their seat. The domino concept (energy travels, particles don't) can stay, but the framing should land for the demographic.
Citation
dashboard feedback "I would like them to be more geared towards female college students with more realistic graphics." inverse-related feedback "Instead of a blue boxy car maybe have a bright pink convertible or something more realistic."
Rationale
This is the exact card Jenny flagged for tone failures. The concept tab reads "Mechanical: need a medium (cannot travel through a vacuum)." Jenny's response: "What's a medium? The middle... sound waves need a middle what? Cannot travel through a vacuum? Like, to clean with?" The parenthetical does not define "medium"; it adds a second undefined term ("vacuum") as if that clarifies things. For a brand-new student, this creates two unknowns instead of one.
Fix
"Mechanical: sound needs something to travel through, like air, water, or body tissue. It can't travel through empty space." Replace jargon-first phrasing with plain language first, then introduce the term. Consider a nutshell dropdown expanding on what "mechanical" means with a visual.
Citation
acoustic-waves highlight "What's a medium? The middle... sound waves need a middle what? Cannot travel through a vacuum? Like, to clean with?" acoustic-waves general "Each of these terms needs to have more to supplement it."
Rationale
This is the card Jenny flagged hardest for beginner clarity. The concept tab dumps four abstract physics properties simultaneously: carry energy, mechanical, longitudinal, straight line. A student with zero background sees four unfamiliar ideas at once with one-line descriptions and no visuals. Jenny called this "starting off with a dictionary." She explicitly said each term needs a dropdown with an embedded visual, or each should be introduced one at a time with its own visual before being consolidated. Neither approach is used here.
Fix
Restructure the concept tab entirely. Option A: introduce each property one at a time in a step-through sequence, each with its own visual, then show the four-square summary. Option B: keep the four boxes but make each a dropdown that expands to reveal a visual and fuller explanation. Either way, do not show all four simultaneously as flat text. The concept tab should first establish "sound exists as waves" before breaking into properties.
Citation
acoustic-waves general "This is where nutshell-style dropdowns are needed. Each of these terms needs to have more to supplement it, right now we're not starting off with a concept, we're starting off with a dictionary." acoustic-waves general "Each term is introduced one at a time, with its visual, and then finally there would be a four-square showing each property with the visual. This latter approach is likely the better way to go."
Rationale
Tabs show Concept → Example → Visual → In Ultrasound → Quiz. Correct flow. No Cover or Self-Sort visible.
Fix
Confirm Cover exists with #65bf9e background, term name, and one-line summary. Confirm Self-Sort follows Quiz.
Citation
design guide §2 Required flow: Cover → Concept → Example → Visual/Graph → In Ultrasound → Quiz → Self-Sort.
Rationale
This is the central structural failure. The tab is labeled "Concept" but displays "Sound Wave Properties" as a four-item term list. Jenny's feedback on this exact card: "This tab shouldn't be called concept if it's key terms. There should be an actual concept tab introducing sound waves." The concept is that sound exists as waves. The properties (mechanical, longitudinal, etc.) are components of that concept. Listing properties is not introducing a concept.
Fix
Split the content. The Concept tab should introduce "sound exists as waves" as the big idea, with a plain-English explanation and a visual. Then rename the current content "Key Properties" and either integrate it as a sequential reveal within the concept tab or give it a sub-section. Follow Jenny's stated preference: each property introduced one at a time with its own visual, then a consolidated four-square view.
Citation
acoustic-waves general "This tab shouldn't be called concept if it's key terms. There should be an actual concept tab introducing sound waves. But if we were to keep this terminology, each one should have a drop down with an embedded visual." acoustic-waves general "Sound exists as waves. That's a concept. These waves have properties - that's breaking apart the concept into components."
Rationale
Setting aside the concept-vs-terms problem (B2), the content that exists is concise: four short descriptions, each 1-2 lines. That meets the "2-3 sentences max" standard for brevity. But the descriptions contain undefined jargon ("medium," "vacuum," "longitudinal," "perpendicular") without immediate clarification. "Longitudinal: particles move back and forth in the same direction the wave travels" assumes the student understands what particle motion in a wave means.
Fix
Each property needs plain-English grounding before or alongside the technical term. "Sound needs something to travel through" before "Mechanical." "The pieces vibrate in the same direction the wave is moving" before "Longitudinal." The technical label becomes a name for something already understood, not an introduction to something unknown.
Citation
design guide §2 "No jargon without immediate definition." acoustic-waves highlight Jenny's confusion about "medium" and "vacuum" demonstrates the gap between the current phrasing and true beginner comprehension.
Rationale
The domino analogy is conceptually strong for explaining "energy transfer, not particle transfer." The progression (push first domino → energy moves forward → each domino only rocks in place) maps well to longitudinal wave behavior. But the dominoes are code-drawn tilted rectangles, not real illustrations. They read as programmer art, though slightly more recognizable than the comp-rarefaction barcode slinky.
Fix
Replace code-drawn domino shapes with a real illustrated domino set (SVG/PNG). The animation behavior (tilting, energy propagation) can remain code-driven. The visual representation of the dominoes themselves should look like actual dominoes with dots, not abstract rounded rectangles.
Citation
design guide §6b "Example scenario imagery must be real illustrations or photos, not canvas-drawn shapes." design guide §6b "Use <img> tags loading real SVG/PNG illustrations for scenario visuals. Use canvas/JS only for the interactive behavior layer."
Rationale
Two fully expanded text boxes: "Ultrasound Pulses Are Longitudinal" (4 sentences) and "Energy Transfer, Not Particle Transfer" (4 sentences). Eight sentences of dense exposition, no dropdowns, no visuals, no interactive. This is a wall of text on the tab that should be the most clinically grounded and hands-on. Identical structural failure to the comp-rarefaction In Ultrasound tab.
Fix
Lead with a visual: an illustrated transducer sending longitudinal pulses into tissue, showing particles vibrating in place while energy moves forward. Collapse the text into dropdowns. Add a manipulation: let the student "pulse" the transducer and see the wave propagate through tissue layers. The text content is accurate but belongs behind a visual, not in front of it.
Citation
compression-rarefaction feedback "Make these two text boxes... drop downs; over-explanatory text-heavy tab." design guide §6 "Prefer manipulation over observation." design guide §8 "Placeholders for images/visuals are better than paragraphs of explanation."
Rationale
Everything is gold/amber: "acoustic waves," "Longitudinal," "Carry energy," "Mechanical," "Straight line." But these are different terms that should have different dedicated colors. The card uses a single card-level accent rather than per-term assignments. "Longitudinal" and "mechanical" are terms that will appear on other cards; they need their own tracked colors from the master list.
Fix
Assign distinct colors to each property term (longitudinal, mechanical, etc.) and register them in the master list. Use the card's gold as the card accent, not as every term's color.
Citation
design guide §3 "Every key term gets a dedicated color assigned once and used everywhere that term appears across all cards. Colors must be tracked in a master list."
Rationale
Properties shown as one-liners: "Carry energy from one place to another," "Mechanical: need a medium (cannot travel through a vacuum)." These are not the required format of Term → Definition (one sentence, anchors bolded) → Example (one sentence, visually separated). No examples provided for any property. Definition and example are not separated because examples do not exist.
Fix
Reformat each property: Mechanical (term color, bold) / Definition: Sound needs something physical to travel through, like air, water, or tissue. / Example: That's why there's no sound in space. Keep definition and example visually distinct.
Citation
design guide §5 "All term definitions follow this format: Term Name (colored, bolded), Definition: One sentence. Anchor words bolded. Example: One sentence connecting to something familiar. Definition and Example are visually separated."
Rationale
The property names ("Carry energy," "Mechanical," "Longitudinal," "Straight line") are bolded in gold. But the anchor words should be the testable recall phrases within definitions, not the term names themselves. For "Longitudinal," the anchor phrase would be something like "SAME DIRECTION" or "BACK AND FORTH." The summary text below the Visual tab does bold "back and forth," which is correct anchor behavior, but this doesn't appear on the concept tab where students first encounter the term.
Fix
Identify the testable phrase for each property and bold it within the definition sentence. Confirm with Jenny which words students will be tested on for each property.
Citation
inverse-related feedback "For Frequency I would BOLD the word(s) HOW MANY and for Period I would BOLD the word(s) HOW LONG and ONE CYCLE. This way it really reinforces what is the most important thing to remember about the terms."
Rationale
Cannot evaluate from static screenshots.
Fix
Verify in live card. Key phrases like "back and forth" and "same direction" should bounce or shake on first view.
Citation
design guide §4 "Core takeaway phrase... colored and animated with a subtle bounce or shake on first view."
Rationale
This card does not deal with directional relationships (up/down, increase/decrease). Not applicable.
Fix
None needed.
Citation
design guide §4 Directional coding applies "anywhere directional language appears." This card has none.
Rationale
Bold used on property names and "back and forth" in the Visual tab summary. Generally intentional. The "THIS IS SOUND" badge on the Visual tab is a heavier emphasis choice, but it serves a clear pedagogical purpose: distinguishing the wave type that matters from the one that doesn't. Minor over-emphasis on the badge but acceptable.
Fix
Consider softening the "THIS IS SOUND" badge to a more integrated label rather than a callout box. Otherwise, bold usage is disciplined.
Citation
inverse-related highlight "Probably not necessary to bold any items here." The principle: bold should be intentional, not decorative.
Rationale
No emdashes visible in any tab.
Fix
None needed.
Citation
design guide §3 "No emdashes anywhere."
Rationale
No manipulation anywhere on the card. The Example tab dominoes appear to be a watch-only animation. The Visual tab particle dots are observation-only. The In Ultrasound tab is pure text. The student never drags, pushes, pulls, or controls anything. On a card teaching four physical properties of waves, there is zero hands-on interaction.
Fix
At minimum: make the domino example interactive (let the student tap/push the first domino to trigger the chain). Better: let the student manipulate wave properties directly. For "longitudinal," let them push particles back and forth and see energy propagate. For "mechanical," show a toggle between medium present / medium absent (with vs. without). Every property on this card is demonstrable through manipulation.
Citation
design guide §6 "Prefer manipulation over observation. Students should drag, turn, push, pull. Not just watch a dot on a graph."
Rationale
No controls of any kind visible. No sliders, no knobs, no draggable elements. The card has no interactive controls to evaluate against the hierarchy.
Fix
Add direct manipulation controls. For the domino chain: tap-to-push. For the particle visualization: drag a particle to see energy transfer. Avoid slider bars as the primary control per Jenny's hierarchy.
Citation
design guide §6 "Seesaw/knob/draggable model > slider bar > static graph."
Rationale
No sound, no sensory feedback. The card is literally titled "Acoustic Waves" and teaches that sound is a mechanical, longitudinal wave. The student never hears a sound wave on a card about sound waves.
Fix
When the domino chain fires, play a propagating click/thud sound that travels left to right. On the particle visualization, play a tone as the wave moves. When teaching "mechanical" (needs a medium), toggle between sound playing in air vs. silence in vacuum. The concept is sound; let the student hear it.
Citation
design guide §6 "Sound and sensory feedback where possible... Makes abstract concepts tangible."
Rationale
No interactives exist. This criterion evaluates whether interactives earn their place, but the absence itself is the problem on a card with four demonstrable physical properties. Every property on this card (energy transfer, mechanical nature, longitudinal motion, straight-line propagation) is naturally interactive. The card has the highest interactive potential in the trial set and zero interactive execution.
Fix
Design at least one interactive per property, or one consolidated interactive that lets the student toggle/explore all four properties through a single wave simulation. Prioritize manipulation over sliders.
Citation
rubric v2 §E4 "Interactive clearly improves understanding of the concept." The corollary: when interaction would clearly improve understanding and none exists, the criterion is failed.
Rationale
Dominoes are code-drawn tilted rectangles in gold. Particle dots on the Visual tab are code-drawn circles. No real illustrations or photos anywhere on the card. Everything is canvas programmer art.
Fix
Replace domino shapes with illustrated domino assets (SVG/PNG). Replace abstract particle dots with a more recognizable visual: illustrated molecules or spheres with a physical feel. Animation behavior stays as code; visual representation of objects becomes real assets.
Citation
design guide §6b "Example scenario imagery must be real illustrations or photos, not canvas-drawn shapes." design guide §6b, flagged 3x "More realistic graphics."
Rationale
In Ultrasound tab is pure text. No transducer, no tissue, no medical imagery. Not even a placeholder frame indicating where a medical visual should go. The tab titled "In Ultrasound" contains zero ultrasound-related visuals.
Fix
Add an illustrated transducer sending longitudinal pulses into tissue layers. Show the "energy travels, particles vibrate in place" concept in a clinical context. Even a dashed placeholder with a description is better than nothing.
Citation
rubric v2 §F2 "Ultrasound-related visuals should resemble real practice... Placeholder must indicate planned real scan integration."
Rationale
No placeholder frames anywhere. The card ships code art as finished visuals (dominoes, particles) and has no dashed frames indicating where real illustrations should go. Unlike the comp-rarefaction card, which at least had a labeled transducer placeholder on the concept tab, this card has none.
Fix
Mark every code-art visual with a dashed placeholder frame describing the real asset needed, or replace with actual assets. Add placeholders on the In Ultrasound tab for medical visuals.
Citation
design guide §6b "When an illustration is not yet available, use a clearly marked dashed placeholder frame with a description of what goes there. Never ship canvas programmer art as the visual."
Rationale
Tab sequencing is correct: Example (dominoes, slower/simpler concept) before Visual (particles, faster/more abstract comparison). The domino animation appears to be a simple chain reaction before the more complex longitudinal-vs-transverse particle visualization. Good conceptual pacing between tabs.
Fix
Verify in the live card that the domino animation starts on user action, not auto-playing. If the particle visualizations auto-loop, add play/pause controls and start paused.
Citation
design guide §7 "Always show the slow, simple version of a visualization first."
Rationale
The Visual tab shows single-row particle animations for both longitudinal and transverse, which is significantly more restrained than the comp-rarefaction 8-row grid. The domino animation appears contained. Less visually overwhelming. Deducting because there appear to be no speed controls or pause buttons visible.
Fix
Add pause/play and speed controls to both particle visualizations on the Visual tab. Consider starting them paused with a static frame showing the wave pattern before motion begins.
Citation
compression-rarefaction feedback "Would there be a way the user can slow this down and speed it up." The principle applies across all animated cards.
Rationale
In Ultrasound tab shows two fully expanded text boxes with ~4 sentences each, totaling 8+ sentences on screen simultaneously. No dropdowns. Concept tab shows four property boxes all visible at once, which Jenny explicitly said should be sequential or behind dropdowns. The Example and Visual tabs are better; concise text with visuals.
Fix
In Ultrasound: collapse into dropdowns, default both closed. Concept tab: make properties sequential or collapsible per Jenny's stated preference. Both changes reduce simultaneous cognitive load.
Citation
acoustic-waves general "Each of these terms needs to have more to supplement it... each one should have a drop down with an embedded visual." design guide §8 "If a section has more than 3-4 sentences visible at once, it is too text-heavy."
Rationale
Example tab shows well (domino visual + text). Visual tab shows well (particle animations comparing wave types). Concept tab is mostly tell (four text boxes with icons). In Ultrasound is entirely tell. Two of four tabs fail the show-over-tell standard.
Fix
Concept tab: add a visual per property (Jenny's request), or at minimum one visual showing "sound exists as waves" before listing properties. In Ultrasound: replace text walls with a visual (see B5).
Citation
design guide §8 "Placeholders for images/visuals are better than paragraphs of explanation. Show, do not tell." acoustic-waves general "Either that, or each term is introduced one at a time, with its visual."
Rationale
The Visual tab particle visualization container has generous empty space above and below the single rows of dots. The domino example container has significant padding. In Ultrasound with expanded text uses vertical space poorly: long paragraphs but no visual density.
Fix
Tighten containers around their content. Particle visualizations don't need tall boxes for a single row of dots. Reduce padding to match content height.
Citation
inverse-related feedback "Too much whitespace above seesaw, doesn't need to be perfectly square." design guide §9 "Tighten whitespace."
Rationale
The Concept tab presents four equal-weight property boxes. There is no hierarchy between them; a student doesn't know which to focus on first, or that they should be encountered sequentially. The Example and Visual tabs have clearer progression (text → visual → summary → bridge button). In Ultrasound breaks hierarchy entirely by being text-only.
Fix
On the Concept tab, create a progression: either number the properties, present them sequentially, or visually weight the most important one (longitudinal, since this is an ultrasound course). Maintain the hierarchy pattern on all tabs.
Citation
design guide §9 "Clear visual hierarchy: concept > explanation > example > interactive."
Rationale
Same issue as comp-rarefaction: the In Ultrasound sub-section headers ("Ultrasound Pulses Are Longitudinal," "Energy Transfer, Not Particle Transfer") use the title brush font. This should be reserved for the card title. Sub-section headers should use Tomarik Poster in all caps.
Fix
Tomarik Brush for card title only. Tomarik Poster (all caps) for all sub-section headers. DM Sans for body text.
Citation
design guide §11 "Titles: Tomarik Brush. Subtitles: Tomarik Poster (all caps). Body: DM Sans (placeholder)."