# Interactive case and feedback map

Pretectal workflow template · October 2, 2026
Guide: https://pretectal.com/workflows/interactive-case-presentations

Start with the learner's decision and its preferred explanation. Complete the answer map before building an interface; keep clinical feedback fixed for review.

## 1. Choose the reasoning task

- Audience and prior knowledge:
- Reasoning task:
- Original fictional scenario / authorized case:
- Fictional or synthetic label shown to learners:
- Information initially available:
- Source-supported teaching point:

## 2. Write the answer map

For EACH option or branch:

- Response / action:
- Why a learner might choose it:
- Preferred / acceptable / unsupported in this scenario:
- Feedback shown:
- Exact source location supporting the explanation:
- Missing information or ambiguity:
- Next scene or ending:

Before continuing: can a reviewer distinguish the preferred answer from the alternatives using only the information given? If not, revise the question, add the missing information, or explicitly accept more than one answer.

## 3. Prototype and test the interaction

- What remains hidden until commitment:
- How feedback is revealed:
- How a learner can revisit an answer:
- Keyboard and screen-reader behavior:

Check every route, including an incorrect answer and returning to an earlier scene. Record the actual result rather than checking only that a control responds.

| Starting scene | Response / control | Expected next scene and feedback | Actual result | Device / input | Issue and owner | Version retested |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | | | | | |

## 4. Prepare the room

- Delivery setting and constraints:
- Static slide / handout equivalent:
- When the facilitator reveals the answer:
- Facilitator question after the reveal:
- Final-device rehearsal and result:
- Difference between live and fallback versions to resolve:

## 5. Check transfer

- A new question testing the same concept:
- Preferred explanation and source location:
- Reviewer and unresolved ambiguity:
- Learner explanation observed, if tested:
- Revision prompted by that explanation:

### Production and handoff

- AI task, tool, and date:
- Human revisions to questions / distractors / feedback:
- Reviewer and review scope:
- All branches exercised:
- Final-device rehearsal:
- Remaining issues and owners:
- Version and correction route:

Completion check: every answer has reviewed feedback, every route has a defined ending or next step, and the static version preserves the decision. A correct selection alone does not establish understanding; record the explanation when testing the lesson.

Keep clinical feedback fixed and reviewed for this workflow. A dynamically generated clinical-answer system needs a separate design and review process.