Thirty-four requirements, each traced to a step observed in one composite emergency department and paired with a test, form the requirements list HI300 typically sets in Unit 2. Searches like "hi 300 unit 2 assignment example", "hi300 unit 2 sample" and "hi300 unit 2 example" land here.
What a finished HI300 Unit 2 requirements list looks like
A table carries almost everything. Each row holds an identifier such as ED-14, a requirement stated as a single testable sentence, the workflow step it came from, a priority of must, should or could, and the acceptance test. ED-14 reads: an acuity level entered by the triage nurse appears on the tracking board within [ten] seconds, tested by timing five entries during a demonstration. Rows are grouped under functional needs, information exchange, access, availability and reporting, so interface and continuity items are not left for later. A short workflow narrative precedes the table, numbered to match the source column. Must items are capped at about a third of the list, and a paragraph defends that cap. Nothing names a product. Weaker lists read like a brochure's contents page.
How a HI300 Unit 2 example is structured
Scope opens the document: the department, the hours observed, the roles watched and the ones missed, such as the overnight registrar. The workflow narrative follows in numbered steps from arrival through triage, rooming, orders, results, disposition and departure, because the table's source column points back to those numbers. The table is next, grouped by category and sorted by priority inside each group. After it, a short section lists assumptions, for instance that the laboratory system stays in place and must be connected rather than replaced. Open questions come next, items the observation raised but could not answer, each assigned to a person to resolve. A traceability note closes the paper, stating that every requirement maps to at least one step and every observed step produced at least one requirement or an explanation of why it did not.
Scope and the unobserved
Department, hours and roles watched, plus the roles nobody observed, so a reader knows where the list is likely to be thin.
Numbered workflow narrative
Arrival to departure in numbered steps, each short enough to be cited from the table's source column without ambiguity.
One sentence, one test
Every requirement phrased so a demonstration could pass or fail it, with the acceptance test written in the same row.
Priority with a ceiling
Must, should and could assigned per row, with must items held to roughly a third and the reason for that limit stated.
Assumptions and open questions
The systems staying in place, the questions the evening could not answer, and a named person for each unresolved item.
Where marks go in HI300 Unit 2
Lists lose the most when requirements describe a product instead of a need: must include a patient portal, must be cloud based. Neither tells an evaluator what work is being supported. Next is the untestable line, the system shall be easy to use, which nobody could ever measure. The source column gets checked in many sections, so rows pointing to no observed step, or a narrative with no numbers to point to, give up the traceability the unit is built around. Marking everything as must is another common deduction, since a list with no priorities cannot separate candidates later. Interface and availability items missing entirely is a quieter loss that often surfaces during evaluation, when a strong candidate turns out unable to accept lab results.
Get a HI300 Unit 2 example written to your instructions
Send the department or scenario your Unit 2 assignment names, plus any workflow notes, the instructions and the rubric. The requirements list comes back numbered, grouped and traced to each step, with acceptance tests filled in. First samples cost nothing, and delivery runs 24-48h. Where a template fixes the columns, the list follows that template exactly.
HI300 Unit 2 questions, answered
Should requirements use the word shall?
Many formal lists do, and the example uses shall for must items and should for the rest, which keeps priority visible in the wording itself. Some sections prefer plain statements with a separate priority column. Either works if every requirement is a single testable sentence. Mixing both conventions in one list is what confuses a reader, so the example states its convention in the scope section.
How many requirements are enough?
Enough to cover the observed workflow and the five categories, and no more. The example has thirty-four because one department across one evening produced that many distinct needs. A list of two hundred items usually means features were copied from a vendor catalog, while a list of eight usually means interfaces, access and downtime were skipped. The traceability note is what justifies the final count.
Can I base the list on my own workplace?
Yes, with care. Describe the department in general terms, drop the facility's name, and strip anything that could point to a patient, such as a bed number paired with a time. A composite emergency department stands in for a real one in the example for that reason. Your own observations still make the strongest source column, because a grader can see they came from real work.