xowf.en_US.ISO-8859-1.xml

  • last updated 20 hours ago
Constraints
Constraints: committers
 
Constraints: files
Constraints: dates
made message keys more consistent, updated dependencies

  1. … 2 more files in changeset.
Provide localization for hardcoded text

  1. … 3 more files in changeset.
Normalize message key sorting in the catalog files

  1. … 2 more files in changeset.
Support for extra extra hints texts (feedback, correction hints)

The updated version of the inclass-exam supports now extra hint texts for lecturers and students. These extra information is displayed after the question, and is used either for feedback to the student (e.g. Einsicht) or as information for the grader (evaluation guidelines, esp. useful when multiple graders are involved). It can be controlled via setup what kind of information the question author can provide. The providable feedback is controlled via the feedback level:

Feedback level

- The feedback level can be

* "full": two input fields for feedback for correct and incorrect answers

* "single": single input fields for feedback

* "none": no input field for feedback.

- The feedback level is specified in the forms used in the

pull down menus for creating "New" test items.

- The feedback level is applicable to all test item types

(SC, MC, Text, ShortText, Ordering, Upload, Composite, Pool)

- The predefined setup is as follows:

"single" is used for all item type, except for "Pool" questions (since the feedback

is taken from the replacement question from the Pool)

- Nothing has change here

Correction notes:

- optionally, correction notes can be specified.

Since in the past, the general feedback was not shown to the students,

it was sometimes abused for correction hints for the lecturer.

Therefore, we have now a separate field

- Correction notes can be added to all item types

(SC, MC, Text, ShortText, Ordering, Upload, Composite, Pool) and are

turned on by default (except for Pool).

Visibility of general feedback and correction notes

- general feedback is shown (when provided)

* full exam-protocol is shown

* filtering single question

* filtering single submission (view with revision selection)

* exam-review for students (Einsicht)

- corrections notes are shown (when provided)

* full exam-protocol is shown

* filtering single question

* filtering single submission (view with revision selection)

- when general feedback is not provided, the exam protocol etc. looks as before

- when correction notes are not provided, the exam protocol etc. looks as before

- Negative feedback is provided,

* when percentage is known, and

* percentage is < 50%

- when negative feedback is displayed, the positive feedback is not displayed and vice versa

For composite questions, the system supports hint texts for the full composite question and additional ones for every single part.

Version number bumped to 5.10.1d32

  1. … 5 more files in changeset.
Added support for restricting access to exams based on IP addresses.

In order to avoid the problem that students might participate on exams

intended to be held e.g. on campus from at home, one can now restrict

the access based on IP ranges. It is possible to restrict the access

via multiple range blocks that can be predefined by the sysadmins. One

could predefine e.g. IP range blocks for "Campus LAN", "On Site",

"VPN", etc., which can be selected by lecturers for individual exams.

Every IP range block can be defined via multiple entries of disallowed

and allowed IP ranges, where the addresses can be specified via IPv4

or IPv6 CIDR blocks (e.g. 127.208.0.0/16), or with wild cards or

individual IP addresses. The usage of CIDR blocks requires an update

to the updated version of NaviServer.

The IP restriction is used in the current implementation for

restricting the regular start of the exam (proctored or

non-proctored). Lecturers can still perform test runs for exams with

restricted access.

Bump version number to 5.10.1d31

  1. … 8 more files in changeset.
Fix tag

update message catalog

  1. … 2 more files in changeset.
Port downstream change: adding label for question selection box

Many thanks to Felix Mödritscher

  1. … 3 more files in changeset.
Normalize ordering in the catalog files to facilitate downstream merges

    • -251
    • +215
    ./xowf.en_US.ISO-8859-1.xml
  1. … 2 more files in changeset.
improve spelling

  1. … 5 more files in changeset.
- added anchor title for configuration button

- reduced verbosity

  1. … 3 more files in changeset.
Improved configurability of inclass exam

- added modal window for showing all configuration options

- depending on the state of an exam (whether students have stated

working on the exam or not) different options can be

altered. E.g. the grading scheme can be adjusted at any time, since

it is not visible to students prior to exam review.

- improved configurability of form-fields:

. new feature: fc_repository for shared definitions

(can be reused in the same configuration on multiple occasions)

. when form-constraints are defined with an empty short-spec,

the system tries to look this up from the fc_repository.

- extended answer manager:

. new method: student_submissions_exist

. renamed methods

. "student_submissions" -> "submissions"

(since result my include as well test run results)

. "get_answers" -> "get_answer_attributes"

to better distinguish from "submissions"

- base "merge_constraints" on dicts

- prefer forwarder over instance variable for referring

the question manager(QM)

- extended Message keys with "Configuration"

- added missing German translations in message keys

- bump version to 5.10.1d17

  1. … 11 more files in changeset.
Added support for user-supplied grading schemes

Grading schemes provide a means to map achieved percentages to a numeric grade.

In the current versions, a fixed number of 5 grades is supported.

A grading scheme consists of a grounding scheme and grading boundaries.

- A grading scheme can be selected at exam definition time

- Lecturers can define their own grading schemes and reuse these between exams

- Available grounding schemes:

* no rounding (recommended for small exams, e.g. 5 minutes or 2 points)

* by percent (the calculated percentages are rounded to the provided number of digits)

* by points (the calculated points are rounded to the provided number of digits)

- The grounding precision can be defined by the user (e.g. to 2 digits)

- The grading boundaries represent percentages boundaries necessary for a certain grade

- When selecting no grading scheme, no grading information is provided in the exam protocol

(just percentages)

More changes:

- allow grading also, when student has not submitted the exam

- added percentage information in the grading-box (esp. useful for composite questions)

- renamed predefined grading schemes to more neutral terms

- provide easy-to-type names for question-manager, answer-manager and form-loader

- new utility for more robust list-comparions

- defined validating form-field type for grading boundaries

  1. … 13 more files in changeset.
added input validation for points in modal dialog

  1. … 2 more files in changeset.
Added option to download results on an exam

The download is in form of an CSV file and consists of one line per

question/sub-question and including comments. This feature can be

selected after the exam was evaluated once via running the

exam-protocol.

  1. … 4 more files in changeset.
Added support for manual grading and individual feedback

- Lecturers can provide points and feedback comments

directly via exam protocol

- Grading is allowed, when student has submitted the exam or

the exam is not open

- Composite questions are graded at the sub-question level

- Manual grading have a higher priority than automatic grades

- Manual grading/comments can be undone by clearingfield

(showing then missing points, automated computed points, ...)

- Grades and comments are included in the exam review for

students ("Einsicht").

- Grading interactions are implemented as AJAX calls

(no need for redrawing the exam protocol, immediate feedback)

  1. … 6 more files in changeset.
improve wording of message key

added support for optionally turning off proctoring recodings

This options is useful e.g. for e.g. mock exams to avoid privacy issues.

  1. … 10 more files in changeset.
added title for "inclass-exam-submit"

  1. … 2 more files in changeset.
add titles to first/next/previous quesion buttons

  1. … 3 more files in changeset.
improve spelling

add titles for flag states

  1. … 2 more files in changeset.
added tailored title for "logout button, fixed typos in message catalog

  1. … 2 more files in changeset.
Support for pool questions in the test-item family

Features:

- select random questions from some folder

(Currently siblings, i.e., folders of the same package instance)

- one exam can have multiple pool questions, potentially from other pools

- pools can be links to other folders (which are no siblings)

- The current folder can be used as well as a pool folder. In this

case, other not-used items can be selected as replacement items

given these match the specified filter characteristics

- Question filtering

* filter by item type:

allow one to select from all/some/some item types

(mc, sc, short text, reordering, composite, ...):

use as replacement items only examples of these types

* filter by minutes and/or points:

use as replacement items only items with matching points/minutes

* filter by language:

use as replacement items only items in a certain language

* Filter per item name pattern:

use as replacement items only items matching a name.

When (short-) names are used systematically, one can e.g.

use the date in the name and specify only items from e.g.

one year ago, via "*2020*", or from some chapter "*ch01", ...

Certainly, it is also possible to use different item

folders for this

Potential further steps:

- Currently, exams containing pool questions are treated as

auto-correctable (which implies automated exam-review (Einsicht), when

from the question pools only question from strictly closed questions

are selected (MC, SC, Ordering). Depending on the detailed settings,

also other item types could be possible (via correct-when), but this

requires a deeper analysis of every question, which is so far not

performed.

- Categorized items: technically, the infrastructure is mostly here to

allow also filtering by categories. This would allow one to select

e.g. from technical questions, case examples, knowledge transfer

questions, research-oriented questions... which are orthogonal to

the filtering currently available. Every lecturer can define

own categories depending on their needs, we could provide

university-wide category-trees, etc. Of course, one could also

define separate pools for these purposes, but categorizing is

probably more convenient and more flexible.

- Performance: when question pools become large (500+ questions) and

the cohorts as well (500+), the current version might require more

tuning. The only critical time is the exam-start, where the random

question placeholders have to be resolved for every student. The

approach from this weekend uses basic caching, but maybe this has to

be extended.

- Protecting selected questions: Question pools are more detached from

an exam than single exercises, a lecturer might have in mind. One

should not allow one to delete questions/question pools when these are

in use. Probably deletion should be a move to a trash-can, which is

actually, an issue for all exams, but getting more important with

pool questions.

- Handling of potential duplicates: When items are pulled from a

question pool, a replacement item is selected by making sure that

this item does not occur already in the query selection. Therefore,

one can safely draw two questions from the same question pool

without fearing that a student gets the same question twice.

This duplicate checking might require some fine-tuning:

* the system checks for duplicates in an exam via POOL/NAME.

* if a lecturer uses two pool-questions in an exam pointing to the same pool,

the systems makes sure, the same question is not used twice.

* however, if a teacher adds a question q1 to pool1 and the same question to pool2,

these two instances have different item ids and are regarded as two different

questions. One could make a test for only checking NAME (without POOL),

but then it might be the case that certain questions are not accepted

although these are different, because they have the same name.

- Statistics: so far, i have not provided any special answer

statistics for treating pool questions.

  1. … 10 more files in changeset.
Added support for tailored messages when autosave is rejected

Optionally, the AJAX call from autosave can be answered with

a JSON structure containing a "feedback". If this is provided, this

is presented to the user. The mechanism can be extended in the

future to include some reason code, etc. for further automatic

processing in JavaScript.

With this change, the inclass-exam-answer workflow will use this

to comminicate the reasone for rejected autosave operations in

situations, where the examtime is up.

  1. … 4 more files in changeset.
provide means for omit the audio alarm control in the countdown timer

  1. … 4 more files in changeset.
better control of browser built-in spellcheck

- xowiki: added property "spellcheck" to formfield classes "textarea" and "text_fields"

- xowf: allow per-exam to activate/deactivate spellcheck in these widget classes

  1. … 6 more files in changeset.
Made titles of subquestions configurable

bumped version number to 5.10.1d1

  1. … 2 more files in changeset.
added message key for sub-question, fixed cut&paste error.

  1. … 3 more files in changeset.
added composite question per default to the "New" pull-down menu, added message keys for German

  1. … 4 more files in changeset.