Rationale
The coffee example on the Graph tab ("Coffees" vs "Cost") is relatable to college students. Good demographic targeting for the example. The volume knob on In Ultrasound is also universally relatable. Deducting because the Example tab is not shown in screenshots, so cannot verify the full example experience, and the coffee graph has no illustrated coffee visual.
Fix
Coffee example is a strong demographic choice. Verify the Example tab (not shown) also targets the demographic. Add an illustrated coffee cup or similar to the Graph tab rather than just a data plot.
Citation
dashboard feedback "More geared towards female college students."
Rationale
"When one goes up, the other also goes up." Crystal clear. "They always move in the same direction." Simple. "These terms will come up later in detail. For now, just notice..." is excellent scaffolding: it tells the student what to pay attention to and explicitly gives them permission not to memorize yet. Best instructional framing in the trial set.
Fix
None needed.
Citation
design guide §1
Rationale
The Concept tab is great for beginners. But then the Graph tab says "The slider still controls your order. Watch how the dot moves on the graph." This implies there was a previous interactive with a slider, but the Example tab isn't shown. The word "still" assumes the student has already used a slider on the Example tab. If that's true, it flows. If the Example tab doesn't have a slider, this is confusing. The In Ultrasound tab jumps to a waveform + knob + amplitude label + Intensity/Amplitude dropdowns. The waveform is unlabeled and may be too abstract for a student encountering amplitude for the first time on a card about direct relationships, not about amplitude itself.
Fix
The In Ultrasound tab tries to do too much. It introduces amplitude, intensity, a waveform, and a knob all at once. Since this is a "directly related" card, the ultrasound application should show the direct relationship in a clinical context, not teach two new terms. Consider simplifying: just the knob + waveform, with a one-line label. Move the Intensity/Amplitude definitions to their own cards.
Citation
design guide §1 "Assume no prior knowledge at any point in the card."
Rationale
Tabs: Concept → Example → Graph → In Ultrasound → Quiz. Close to the required flow. "Graph" replaces "Visual," which is acceptable since a graph IS the visual for this concept. Bridge buttons present. No Cover or Self-Sort visible.
Fix
Confirm Cover and Self-Sort exist.
Citation
design guide §2
Rationale
"When one goes up, the other also goes up. When one goes down, the other also goes down. They always move in the same direction." This is a concept, not a dictionary. Clean, simple, complete. Tied with Reciprocals for best concept tab.
Fix
None needed.
Citation
acoustic-waves general Concept first, components after.
Rationale
Example tab not shown in screenshots. Cannot score.
Fix
Provide Example tab screenshot for evaluation.
Citation
N/A.
Rationale
This is the critical structural failure on the card. The volume knob + waveform is Jenny's approved interactive concept. It works beautifully: turn the knob, watch the wave amplitude change. But it is on the wrong tab. This is an *example* of a direct relationship, not an *ultrasound application*. A volume knob controlling waveform amplitude is a general audio/physics demonstration. The In Ultrasound tab should show what direct relationships look like in clinical ultrasound: turning up the transmit power on a machine and watching the signal strength increase, or increasing transducer frequency and seeing resolution improve. The knob belongs on the Example tab. The In Ultrasound tab needs clinical context.
Fix
Move the knob + waveform to the Example tab (or create it as a second example alongside the coffee scenario). Rebuild the In Ultrasound tab with a clinical demonstration: a simplified machine panel where the student adjusts a setting and sees the direct relationship play out in a scan context. Keep the Intensity/Amplitude dropdowns on In Ultrasound as term previews, but lead with a clinical interactive, not a volume knob.
Citation
design guide §2 "In Ultrasound: Where this concept shows up in real scanning. Should feel clinical, not abstract." direct-related feedback Jenny approved the knob idea for this card, but it was conceived as an example demonstration, not as the ultrasound application.
Rationale
"Directly related" in orange on the concept tab and graph tab summary. "Intensity" in a lighter amber/orange, "Amplitude" in a darker orange/brown. The Intensity and Amplitude boxes have distinct border colors (amber vs darker orange). Within this card, the color system is intentional and consistent. Cross-card verification needed for Intensity and Amplitude, which will appear on their own cards.
Fix
Register Intensity and Amplitude colors in the master list. Verify they match across all cards.
Citation
design guide §3
Rationale
Intensity: "Definition: How strong or powerful the sound wave is." / "Example: Think of it like volume. Louder sound has more intensity." Amplitude: "Definition: How tall the wave is, from peak to center." / "Example: Bigger amplitude means a stronger signal." Term name colored and bold, Definition and Example labeled and visually separated. Correct format. Second card (after Reciprocals) to nail the definition structure.
Fix
None needed.
Citation
design guide §5
Rationale
"Strong or powerful" bolded for Intensity. "Tall" bolded for Amplitude. "Goes up," "also goes up," "goes down," "also goes down," "same direction" bolded/colored on the concept tab. These are testable recall phrases. Clear and intentional.
Fix
Verify with Jenny that "strong or powerful" and "tall" are the intended anchor words for these terms.
Citation
inverse-related feedback Jenny's anchor word methodology.
Rationale
Cannot evaluate from static screenshots.
Fix
Verify "same direction" animates on first view.
Citation
design guide §4
Rationale
"Goes up" and "also goes up" in warm red/orange. "Goes down" and "also goes down" in cool blue. "Same direction" in warm orange. "Up from left to right" on the graph tab in warm orange. This is the best directional color coding in the trial set. Warm for increase, cool for decrease, applied consistently across tabs.
Fix
None needed. Use this as the reference implementation for directional color coding.
Citation
design guide §4 "Warm color (red) for up/increase, cool color (blue) for down/decrease."
Rationale
Bold on directional anchors, definition labels, and term names only. No decorative bold. "Strong or powerful," "tall" are bold anchor words within definitions. Clean throughout.
Fix
None needed.
Citation
design guide §4
Rationale
No emdashes visible.
Fix
None needed.
Citation
design guide §3
Rationale
The volume knob is true manipulation: the student turns it and watches the waveform respond. This is the best interactive in the entire trial set. It's Jenny's approved concept and it works. The coffee graph uses a slider (observation through a control, not direct manipulation of the graph itself). Two interactive moments: one strong (knob), one weak (slider). But the knob is on the wrong tab (see B4).
Fix
Move the knob to Example tab. Replace the coffee slider with direct manipulation (drag the dot on the graph, or click to add coffees). Add a clinical interactive to the In Ultrasound tab.
Citation
design guide §6 "Prefer manipulation over observation."
Rationale
The knob is a rotary control, which sits at the top of Jenny's hierarchy (seesaw/knob/draggable model). Excellent choice. But the coffee graph uses a slider bar, the least preferred control. One knob (top of hierarchy) + one slider (bottom of hierarchy). The knob proves the developer can build non-slider controls; the slider on the Graph tab is therefore a choice, not a limitation.
Fix
Replace the coffee slider with a non-slider control. Since the graph is linear (more coffees = more cost), let the student click/tap to add coffees one at a time and watch the dot climb the line. Or drag the dot along the curve. The knob pattern is already proven on this card; apply the same thinking to the graph.
Citation
design guide §6 "Seesaw/knob/draggable model > slider bar > static graph." inverse-related feedback "I do not like having to drag the bar across the screen."
Rationale
The volume knob controls waveform amplitude. The concept is literally about sound intensity. The knob is labeled "INTENSITY" with "Low" and "High." But there appears to be no actual sound. The student turns a volume knob and sees a wave get bigger, but doesn't hear anything get louder. This is the most natural audio feedback opportunity in the entire trial set, and the one Jenny specifically requested.
Fix
When the student turns the knob up, play a tone that gets louder. When they turn it down, the tone gets quieter. This is exactly what Jenny asked for: "a sound get louder and quieter depending on which way they turn the knob." The visual waveform change + audio volume change together make the concept of intensity/amplitude viscerally clear.
Citation
direct-related feedback Jenny specifically requested "a sound get louder and quieter depending on which way they turn the knob." This was the approved concept. The sound is missing.
Rationale
The knob is perfectly justified: it demonstrates a direct relationship (turn up intensity, amplitude increases) through a physical metaphor the student already understands. The coffee graph is justified conceptually (more coffees = more cost = direct relationship). Both earn their place. The knob loses credit because it's on the wrong tab and missing sound.
Fix
Move knob to correct tab, add sound. Both interactives then become fully justified.
Citation
rubric v2 §E4
Rationale
The knob is a code-drawn circular element. It looks reasonably like a physical knob (dark circle, indicator line, Low/High labels), which is better than a barcode-slinky or purple pie chart. It reads as a knob. The coffee graph is all code-drawn (dots, axes, gridlines). No real illustrations anywhere. No scene-setting imagery. The older version of this card apparently had a visual example that was removed.
Fix
The knob can stay as code (it's functional UI, like the metric staircase). But add scene-setting illustrations: a coffee cup on the Graph tab, a clinical setting on the In Ultrasound tab. Investigate what visual example existed on the older card and consider restoring it.
Citation
design guide §6b "The distinction is between things the student manipulates (code) and things that set the scene (real assets)."
Rationale
The In Ultrasound tab shows a waveform and a knob. The waveform is an abstract sine wave, not a clinical representation. The knob looks like a stereo knob, not a machine control. There's no transducer, no machine panel, no scan image. This tab should show what "turning up intensity" looks like on an actual ultrasound machine. Instead it shows a physics demo.
Fix
Since the knob belongs on the Example tab anyway (see B4), the In Ultrasound tab rebuild should center on clinical imagery: a simplified machine panel with a power/gain knob, showing how adjusting it affects the brightness/quality of a scan image.
Citation
rubric v2 §F2 "Ultrasound-related visuals should resemble real practice."
Rationale
No placeholder frames. No indication that real visual assets are planned. Same pattern as the other cards.
Fix
Add dashed placeholders where illustrations are needed.
Citation
design guide §6b
Rationale
Concept (simple text) → Example (not shown, presumably concrete) → Graph (abstract data plot) → In Ultrasound (knob + waveform). The progression from concrete to abstract is present. The graph is appropriately abstract for its position. The knob on In Ultrasound is actually simpler/slower than the graph, which inverts the typical progression, but since it's on the wrong tab anyway, this is moot.
Fix
Once the knob moves to Example, the progression becomes: concept → knob (slow, tactile) → graph (abstract, data) → clinical application. Much better pacing.
Citation
design guide §7
Rationale
Concept tab: three sentences. Graph tab: one sentence above, two below. Both excellent. In Ultrasound: the knob area is clean, but below it there's an italicized paragraph + two expanded dropdowns with Definition/Example each. That bottom section is text-heavy. The dropdowns appear to default collapsed (arrows pointing right in the collapsed-state screenshot) but the expanded screenshot shows both open. Good that they default collapsed.
Fix
The collapsed default is correct. Keep it. Consider whether both dropdowns need to be on this card at all, since Intensity and Amplitude are preview terms that will have their own cards.
Citation
design guide §8
Rationale
The In Ultrasound tab has a lot of vertical real estate: waveform box (with significant empty space above the wave) + large gap + knob + gap + text + two dropdowns. The page scrolls significantly. The waveform container has about 40% empty space above the sine wave where nothing happens. The knob area is generously padded. Tighten both.
Fix
Reduce the waveform container height to hug the wave. Tighten spacing between waveform and knob. The whole In Ultrasound tab should fit on one screen without scrolling past the dropdowns.
Citation
design guide §9 "Tighten whitespace."
Rationale
Concept tab is clean: title → definition → bridge. Graph tab: intro → graph → summary → bridge. Good hierarchy. In Ultrasound: waveform → knob → text → dropdowns. The knob creates a strong visual anchor. The hierarchy works, though the waveform's purpose (showing amplitude change) and the knob's purpose (controlling it) should be more visually connected. They feel like two separate elements rather than a unified interactive.
Fix
Visually connect the waveform and knob: put the knob directly below or beside the waveform in the same container, with a clear "turn this → watch that" relationship. Currently they're separated by a gap.
Citation
design guide §9
Rationale
The "Intensity" and "Amplitude" dropdown headers appear to use the brush title font, same issue as other cards. However, the main card title "Directly Related" correctly uses brush, and "INTENSITY" label under the knob uses all-caps sans serif, which is closer to correct subtitle treatment. Mixed compliance.
Fix
Dropdown headers should use Tomarik Poster (all caps), not brush font.
Citation
design guide §11
Rationale
Coffee graph: X-axis "Coffees" (with numeric scale 0-6), Y-axis "Cost" (with dollar amounts $0-$35). Both axes have meaningful labels and units. In Ultrasound waveform: "Amplitude" label on the right side with a measurement bracket. Best axis labeling in the trial set.
Fix
None needed.
Citation
design guide §10 "Every axis is labeled with a unit."
Rationale
Coffee graph: the movable dot is annotated with its position, which is useful. But the scatter plot pattern (dots trailing behind the current position) creates visual noise. The dashed trend line is helpful but could be more prominent. The graph would benefit from one clean annotation: "Both go up together. This is a direct relationship." rather than relying on the summary text below to make the point. The waveform's amplitude bracket annotation is clean and useful.
Fix
Simplify the coffee graph: single clean line instead of scatter dots, or show the trail more subtly. Add one annotation on the graph itself connecting the visual to the concept.
Citation
design guide §10 "Annotations should teach, not decorate."