Uploaded image for project: 'Contrib: Evaluation System'
  1. Contrib: Evaluation System
  2. EVALSYS-618

Flexible selection of instructors & TAs


    • Type: Feature Request
    • Status: CLOSED
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 1.2
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: None
    • Labels:


      (This issue is dependent on EVALSYS-345, i.e. assumes a TA category which behaves like an Instructor category.)

      Courses at UCT may have between 1 and 10 lecturers, and up to 80 TAs (for very large courses). Evaluations are typically set up by a course convenor or admin staff. However, the instructors (and TAs) cannot be automatically determined by users who have the appropriate roles/permissions in the site, for various reasons, e.g.

      For instructors:

      • The evaluation (which may be delivered mid-term) may not include all of the users in the site with the instructor role (e.g. because some instructors may not have taught students yet)
      • Some courses are structured so that different cohorts of students are taught by different instructors (a grouping which may not be reflected in the site in any way)

      We therefore need a manual way for the evaluation owner to select the instructor(s) and TA(s) to be included in the evaluation, with various delivery options.

      The UI should be something like this for each assigned group (course):

      Instructors to include in this evaluation: (multi-select list box or equivalent UI pre-populated with users in the site who have be_evaluated.instructor permission)
      Include (radio box, i.e. select one option only):

      • A section for each selected instructor
      • One instructor section only, where the student chooses the instructor who applies to him/her

      TAs to include in this evaluation: (multi-select list box or equivalent UI pre-populated with users in the site who have be_evaluated.ta permission)
      Include (radio box, i.e. select one option only):

      • A section for each selected TA
      • One TA section only, where the student chooses the TA who applies to him/her

      Some use case descriptions at:

      Implementation Notes:
      This will require us to store a listing of all participants (takers, evaluatees, TAs, etc.) for each evaluation. This listing will be used when determining who is allowed to take the eval, who should be evaluated, what group they are associated with, etc. This means a new table needs to be added and the login around checking memberships and doing counts and stats needs to be changed (i.e. this is a far reaching change)

      • All participants will be stored when the eval is first created
        • There will be an option to sync the list when the eval starts (i.e. add/remove users based on current group enrollments before sending the "start" email)
      • When setting up the eval the user will be able to choose groups from Sakai like normal, adhoc groups, or simply add users by email/username (requires selecting the associated group if there is one?), the final listing will be shown as normal but with "adhoc added users" as a separate listing
      • Optionally, owner will be allowed to remove/add users to the overall listing at any time until the eval is closed
        • removals will be tracked until the eval start so that the sync does not re-add them
      • Participants will be linked to a group always (should there be an option to add unassociated users?)
      • The listing of participants will be broken up into evaluatees, TAs, and then takers in that order when viewed
      • Owners can manipulate this listing directly or add existing groups into the listing by selecting them (this interface needs to be designed)
      • The existing permission PERM_ASSIGN_EVALUATION will be used properly after this change - indicates that a user can select the group from the list when creating evaluations but should not be included in the list of evaluatees (automatically anyway)
      • Data Model: groupId, userId, role (take/be/TA), removed (T/F), id, created. lastModified, owner

      The selections will be stored with each eval for defaults and then with each assign group for override and checking. Checks should be made using the utility which is referred to in EvalAssignGroup. The selections made by the user should be stored in the response using the setSelection method in EvalResponse. These will be checked and used for filtering required items when the response is validated and stored. The selections will be available later on for retrieval is desired.

        Gliffy Diagrams



              Issue Links

              Add UserAssignment to data model Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Add methods for retrieving user assignments Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Add methods for editing and syncing user assignments Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Change everything that uses perms to use the user assignments Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Add selections to the eval settings/assignments views Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Update the take eval view to show selections based on settings Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Change UI calls that use permissions to use services Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Update the TIDL to take selections into account Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Change the required items check to take selections into account Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Support custom ordering for instructors/TAs Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Failure submitting eval with TA items Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Error clicking on assigned groups list Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Error clicking on report when only assigned to 1 group Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Address all FIXME in take eval producer Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Switch all usage of ta to assistant Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Change selection fields to a more flexible coded field Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Selection defaults not set for new eval Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Instructors cannot view report for evaluations in which they are evaluated Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Changing group assignment multiple times creates duplicates Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Selection changes in eval settings do not propagate to assigned group settings Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Selection-related error on submission Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Selections checked when not required Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Startup failure from data conversion Sub-task CLOSED Aaron Zeckoski (Inactive)
              Selection problems when a user is both Lecturer and Tutor Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Reopening a submitted evaluation does not render selections Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Selection changes need to resize tool iframe Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Lecturer/Tutor selections not consistently preserved across validation failures Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Cannot switch selections after reopening submitted response Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Make the preview views show actual instructors/TAs and selections Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Handle special case of select one/many with only 1 instructor or TA available Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube
              Filter the groups shown in the assign view to a more practical list Sub-task CLOSED Unassigned
              Selections ordering needs to be preserved in the take eval view. Sub-task CLOSED Lovemore Nalube



                  lovenalube Lovemore Nalube
                  smarquard Stephen Marquard
                  0 Vote for this issue
                  0 Start watching this issue



                      Git Integration