# Canvas Implementation Blueprint ## Stop, Isolate, Escalate: Responding to a Potential Allergen Cross-Contact Incident **Client concept:** Koru Foods Ltd (fictional) **Format:** Mobile-first, scenario-based microlearning **Estimated duration:** 12-15 minutes **Status:** Proposed Canvas-aligned architecture ## Truthful implementation disclosure This is an independent portfolio concept. It is not an official AsureQuality product. The prototype was not built or administered in Canvas. This blueprint documents how the learning experience could be structured using Canvas Modules, Pages, Assignments, Quizzes, Module Requirements, Gradebook and Analytics. It does not demonstrate Canvas access, administration or learner delivery. ## Business problem New production employees may notice a potential allergen cross-contact or labelling problem but hesitate, continue production, attempt an unauthorised response or provide incomplete information when escalating the incident. ## Audience - Primary: new food-production employees with varied language, literacy, digital confidence and prior food-safety experience. - Secondary: shift supervisors who reinforce expectations, support transfer to work and review incident information. ## Learning objectives Learners will be able to: 1. Recognise warning signs of a potential allergen cross-contact incident. 2. Select the correct immediate response: stop, isolate and escalate. 3. Identify the essential information that must be recorded and communicated. 4. Avoid unsafe or unauthorised actions. 5. Complete a final knowledge check with a target score of at least 80%. ## Proposed module architecture ### Module 00 - Start here - **Items:** Welcome Page; navigation; objectives; support and accessibility information. - **Canvas structure:** Pages plus Module requirement. - **Requirement:** View each item before Module 01 unlocks. - **Evidence status:** Page copy and learner-view screenshot not yet provided. ### Module 01 - Recognise the risk - **Items:** Context Page; warning-sign examples; low-stakes recognition check. - **Canvas structure:** Pages plus ungraded Quiz. - **Requirement:** View the content and submit the practice check. - **Evidence status:** Storyboard and prototype capture pending. ### Module 02 - Make the call - **Items:** H5P branching scenario with decision points and consequence-based feedback. - **Canvas structure:** External Tool or embedded Page, subject to technical validation. - **Requirement:** Launch and complete the scenario. Any LMS completion rule must be configured and validated separately before relying on it. - **Evidence status:** Public standalone HTML is available. The main scenario was exported and launched successfully as SCORM 1.2; completion tracking for the scenario was not verified and is not claimed. ### Module 03 - Apply the sequence - **Items:** Stop-Isolate-Escalate explainer; guided practice; essential-information checklist. - **Canvas structure:** Pages plus practice activity. - **Requirement:** View and mark as done. - **Evidence status:** Learning content and job-aid capture pending. ### Module 04 - Record and communicate - **Items:** Incident-record activity based on a fictional case; structured submission template. - **Canvas structure:** Assignment. - **Requirement:** Submit the activity. Completion may be submission-based or teacher-reviewed, subject to the agreed delivery model. - **Evidence status:** Assignment brief and rubric planned. ### Module 05 - Final knowledge check - **Items:** Five questions covering recognition, immediate response, essential escalation information and unsafe actions. - **Canvas structure:** Graded Quiz. - **Requirement:** Score at least 80%. Allow a defined retry after feedback. - **Evidence status:** Public standalone HTML is available. SCORM Cloud score, completion, success and mastery-threshold tracking are verified for the Final Knowledge Check; Canvas configuration and results are not provided. ### Module 06 - Take it to work - **Items:** Downloadable job aid; supervisor reflection prompt; completion Page. - **Canvas structure:** File, Discussion and Page. - **Requirement:** View the job aid and post or review the reflection prompt, as locally appropriate. - **Evidence status:** Job aid and discussion prompt pending. ## Module settings and progression - Use one clear sequential pathway. - Require items to be completed in order where the dependency supports learning. - Keep learner support and accessibility information available without restrictive locks. - Treat prerequisites and requirements as proposed until tested in a real Canvas course. - If embedded H5P completion cannot communicate reliably with Canvas, pair the launch with a Canvas-native confirmation or scored item. - Define the behaviour for retrying, resuming and revisiting completed content before release. ## Assessment and Gradebook model - **Branching scenario:** formative practice; feedback is instructional rather than punitive. - **Incident-record activity:** applied evidence, either ungraded or low-weight depending on local requirements. - **Final knowledge check:** primary scored item; proposed threshold of 80%. - Every scored item maps to one learning objective. - Distractors represent plausible unsafe actions, not trick wording. - Exact weighting, retry limits, feedback release and late policies require stakeholder agreement. ## Proposed roles - **Learner:** completes the learning sequence and assessments. - **Shift supervisor:** reinforces expectations and facilitates workplace reflection. - **Course owner:** monitors completion, score and question patterns; coordinates revisions. - **Authorised subject-matter expert:** approves food-safety content and changes. - **LMS administrator:** configures enrolment, access, course settings, reporting and support. ## Accessibility implementation - Use plain language, short screens and consistent control labels. - Preserve strong contrast, readable type and reflow at 200% zoom. - Provide logical heading structure and descriptive links. - Ensure keyboard access, visible focus and touch-friendly targets. - Provide alternative text for meaningful images and captions or transcripts for media. - Do not use colour as the only signal. - Validate the exported H5P, standalone HTML and LMS presentation with keyboard, screen-reader, contrast, zoom and mobile checks. ## SCORM and portable content - Maintain the editable Lumi/H5P source. - Public standalone HTML versions are provided for both the branching scenario and Final Knowledge Check. - Both learning experiences were exported successfully as SCORM 1.2 packages for portable LMS delivery. - The main branching scenario launched successfully as SCORM 1.2. Its embedded practice activity reported an interaction score, so completion tracking for the main scenario was not verified and is not claimed. - Formal mastery tracking was intentionally validated through the separate Final Knowledge Check. - For the Final Knowledge Check, a 60% attempt reported as **incomplete and failed**. - For the Final Knowledge Check, an 80% attempt reported as **complete and passed**. - These results confirm that score, completion, success and the configured 80% mastery threshold were communicated correctly to the SCORM environment. - Two redacted SCORM Cloud screenshots are included in the public case study as verified evidence. The original screenshots remain in the project archive. - Resume, retry-edge-case and broader browser or LMS compatibility behaviour are not claimed as verified. - The SCORM ZIP files are retained as portable-delivery evidence and are not exposed as public downloads. ## Canvas-aligned analytics plan Proposed sources include Module progress, Quiz item analysis, Gradebook results, submission status and course analytics, subject to available Canvas features and permissions. Monitor: - completion rate by relevant cohort; - proportion meeting the 80% target; - incorrect-response patterns by objective; - attempts and time in context; - incident-record omissions; - learner and supervisor feedback. Use an observe-diagnose-revise-retest cycle. Treat long completion time cautiously because it may indicate reflection, interruption, language load or usability friction. Any demonstration dataset must be clearly labelled simulated. ## Product ownership and role-aligned evidence This case study is deliberately centred on the capabilities required to own a digital learning product from concept through continuous improvement: - **Concept and design:** business problem, audience, measurable objectives, learning sequence and assessment strategy. - **Adult learning:** realistic decisions, consequence-based feedback, low cognitive load, repeated retrieval and workplace transfer. - **Authoring and digital content:** Lumi/H5P branching practice, a separate assessed knowledge check and public standalone delivery. - **Contemporary learning technology:** SCORM 1.2 packaging, SCORM Cloud QA and an explicit future xAPI event plan. - **Canvas-aligned planning:** build-ready mapping across Modules, Pages, Assignments, Quizzes, Module Requirements, Gradebook and Analytics. - **Product quality:** evidence boundaries, accessibility checks, version control, usability testing and an observe-diagnose-revise-retest cycle. - **Regulated context:** a food-production decision workflow designed for review by an authorised subject-matter expert. ## Responsible AI controls - AI-assisted tools may support drafting, critique, code, visual exploration, accessibility prompts and maintenance planning. - Learning objectives, assessment logic, food-safety claims and release decisions remain subject to human review. - Regulatory authority and subject-matter approval are never delegated to AI. - No private learner data is used or exposed; account-identifying details are removed from public evidence. - AI-generated claims, analytics and evidence must not be invented or presented as verified. - Any future automation should keep a traceable human review step before publication or learner impact. ## Evidence register ### Defined - Business problem, audience and objectives. - Learning journey and assessment strategy. - Canvas-aligned architecture. - Accessibility and analytics plan. ### Reported complete - H5P branching scenario. - Separate five-question knowledge check. ### Verified - Public standalone HTML versions of the branching scenario and Final Knowledge Check. - Successful SCORM 1.2 export for both learning experiences. - Successful SCORM 1.2 launch for the main branching scenario; no scenario-completion claim is made. - Final Knowledge Check tracking in SCORM Cloud: 60% reported as incomplete / failed; 80% reported as complete / passed. - Final Knowledge Check score, completion, success and 80% mastery-threshold communication. - Two redacted SCORM Cloud evidence screenshots included in the case study. ### Evidence pending - Storyboard and learner-view captures. - Job aid, incident-record activity and rubric. - SCORM resume, retry-edge-case and broader compatibility QA. - Canvas implementation screenshots or learner data (none claimed). ### Future implementation - Authenticated LMS pilot using the Canvas-aligned course architecture. - xAPI event planning for richer interaction-level evidence, subject to platform and governance decisions. - Real learner testing and authorised content validation. - Analytics review using real or explicitly simulated records.