[gradebook2-dev] [Building Sakai] gradebook and gradebook2 iRubric integration
Ramesh Sabetiashraf
ramesh.sabeti at reazon.com
Mon Jun 3 10:05:07 PDT 2013
John,
Sorry about the late response, I just saw this message thread. Everything
you mentioned sounds pretty exciting. I'll be the iRubric booth (on and
off) if you want to get together with Jon and others.
Cheers,
Ramesh.
-----Original Message-----
From: John Bush [mailto:john.bush at rsmart.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 1, 2013 12:20 AM
To: Jon Gorrono
Cc: Ramesh Sabetiashraf; sakai-dev; gradebook2-dev at collab.sakaiproject.org
Subject: Re: [Building Sakai] gradebook and gradebook2 iRubric integration
ok good, we should definitely talk this through, I was hoping some gb2
people would be there. The db model we have now allows for one external
grade provider to be associated with an item. So how would you have
something flow in from assignments and then be scored by iRubric using that
model, I think is the point I was trying to make.
iRubric doesn't create an item, its not an item, its not something that is
gradeable. The rubric is a grading tool, it not something that is graded
like an assignment or a test. To me that's a fundamental difference. Maybe
there is some way of thinking about this that works, I'm not sure, that
would be great if that is the case. And yes, there is a UI, there is a UI
that needs to launch after an item is present in the gradebook.
Certainly this will be a lot easier in person, I can show you what we have
and we talk this through some more.
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Jon Gorrono <jpgorrono at ucdavis.edu> wrote:
> Hi, John
>
> I'm having trouble seeing the distinction you're drawing. Assignments
> and T&Q, as the examples, both have a UI's, of course; and, grading
> for those takes place in those respective UI's. The items don't
> always have a grade at the time of the association of that item with
> the grade store.. So, each of those tools have a mechanism for
> defining an item, defining the item's association with the grade
> store, and for sending grades to the store when graded from their
respective UI's.
>
> Also, I can't picture what you're seeing as being an obstacle here:
> '... you'd also have an issue that you wouldn't be able to use irubric
> to help grade an assignment.'
>
> Again, not sure what you're thinking about there, a primary point of
> this integration being to allow precisely that sort of thing...and
> that's what the link in the GB2 UI would provide for, for all the
> tools..... so in a broad swathe, since I really missed the specific
> point there, is that externally provided tools generally 'own' the
> grading process for the items they associate with the store; I imagine
> iRubric to not be an exception to that. And, it may not be germane,
> but some tools, I believe, have a way of associating with an item and
> also allowing the GB2 UI be a locus for grading.... but, at the
> moment, I am not sure of the status of that (assignments I think) ..in
> any case, that is a less restrictive relationship and so, I think,
> can't be related to what you are referring to .... on the other hand,
> if it is, and you are saying that iRubric does not provide a UI
> component for the actual grading, then I misunderstand iRubric.
>
> Anyway, I will be at Open Apereo next week... maybe we can wave hands
> and whiteboard pens down there.
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:03 AM, John Bush <john.bush at rsmart.com> wrote:
>> Well here's where I came down on my thinking around externally
>> provided grades vs something like iRubric. Things like assignments
>> and tests and quizzes I think are fundamentally different, they push
>> grades, and then push grades from the backend, there is no UI
>> associated with that. That is different from what you do with a
>> rubric, you might already have a grade or not, and you are using
>> another tool to help generate a grade. If we tried to build this on
>> top of the external grade stuff, you'd also have an issue that you
>> wouldn't be able to use irubric to help grade an assignment.
>>
>> The gb2 work isn't a 100% complete, but you can see where I'm at in this
branch:
>>
>> https://source.sakaiproject.org/contrib/rsmart/msub/gradebook2/branch
>> es/CLE-10413/
>>
>> I'm still trying to remove all the iRubric specific stuff, but its
>> probably like 80% done.
>>
>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Jon Gorrono <jpgorrono at ucdavis.edu>
wrote:
>>> This looks pretty good, John.
>>>
>>> I have been hoping that we would be able to also increase the
>>> experience for other score providing tools with all of this. I
>>> wonder if that can still be done without going through a long
>>> process of upgrading them to provide scoring agents per this API
>>> from their codebase and that we could create an agent for
>>> Assignments and for Tests&Quizzes, even from within the GB2, or some
>>> service component, codebase....
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 3:48 PM, John Bush <john.bush at rsmart.com> wrote:
>>>> I want to circle back around on this thread. We've gone a
>>>> differently way than lti, one that more closely resembles how
>>>> turnitin works in CLE, which I think Sam suggested early on at some
point.
>>>>
>>>> We've created an abstraction called a ScoringAgent.
>>>> https://source.sakaiproject.org/svn/msub/rsmart.com/sakai/trunk/sco
>>>> ring-service/
>>>>
>>>> The idea is that gradebook2, gradebook, assignments, and whatever
>>>> else in core sakai would bind to that, in the same way
>>>> ContentReview service works.
>>>>
>>>> Then there is an irubric implementation of a ScoringAgent here:
>>>> https://source.sakaiproject.org/svn/msub/rsmart.com/sakai/trunk/iru
>>>> bric/
>>>>
>>>> We are in the process of refactoring the old iRubric patches to
>>>> live under the cover of this paradigm. Which for the most part
>>>> really won't change the user experience at all. But is a cleaner
>>>> and hopefully more acceptable approach to one day including the
>>>> ScoringAgent service into core. There would no longer be any
>>>> patches spread out across various modules. For anyone, not
>>>> deploying the irubric impl, nothing would break or seem different
>>>> in anyway, until you deploy it and turn it on. We are even keeping
>>>> the old irubric configuration, so that should make the transition
>>>> very seamless for anyone already using the patches.
>>>>
>>>> We are handling the gradebook2 pieces of this rework now,
>>>> eventually we'd want to refactor the gradebook1 patches as well.
>>>>
>>>> I have a partially working impl now, but there is still more work
>>>> to be done. When I have the gb2 work in a reasonable state I'll
>>>> ask for some more eyes. I might need a little help from gb2 devs
>>>> along the way, I'm not much of a gwt expert.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Ramesh Sabetiashraf
>>>> <ramesh.sabeti at reazon.com> wrote:
>>>>> We're playing around with the LTI tool in 2.9 and it seems that
>>>>> the LTI tool can be configured to tie to a single gradebook item.
>>>>> Is that a correct assumption?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ramesh
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: sakai-dev-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org
>>>>> [mailto:sakai-dev-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org] On Behalf Of
>>>>> Charles Severance
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 4:19 AM
>>>>> To: Jon Gorrono
>>>>> Cc: sakai-dev
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Building Sakai] gradebook and gradebook2 iRubric
>>>>> integration
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The latest LTI code basically has a bunch of API calls that allow
>>>>> tools to make, manage and launch LTI placements under tool
>>>>> control. This is in 2.9 and easily ported to 2.8 - the post-2.9
>>>>> trunk code in LTI has a cleaned up UI and better integration with Site
Info as well.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It is how we made LTI work as a core resource type in LessonBuilder.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> /Chuck
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 26, 2012, at 8:50 PM, Jon Gorrono wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think this is crazy at all, and is just what I think we had in
mind.
>>>>>
>>>>> One thing I wanted to add is that the BLTI version that was
>>>>> targetee for 2.8 includes a mechanism for pushing and updating
>>>>> grades, so perhaps a ws callback would not be necessary. And, IIRC
>>>>> a grade is a number between
>>>>> 0 and 1 in the spec.
>>>>>
>>>>> WRT GB2, there are some basic UI components that Ramesh and crew
>>>>> introduced in their coding and those are good ones in general: a
>>>>> button for updating grades (via a 'pull' or request for a 'push')
>>>>> for one. And those bits are also relevant to any other tool
>>>>> supplying grades to the sakai gradebook (edu-services), so the
>>>>> thought was for GB2 to introduce a general mechanism for handling
>>>>> those things. And that mechanism would be (and in simpler cases,
>>>>> perhaps not) the BLTI launch mechanism...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> sakai-dev mailing list
>>>>> sakai-dev at collab.sakaiproject.org
>>>>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send email to
>>>>> sakai-dev-unsubscribe at collab.sakaiproject.org
>>>>> with a subject of "unsubscribe"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> John Bush
>>>> 602-490-0470
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jon Gorrono
>>> PGP Key: 0x5434509D -
>>> http{pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x5434509D&op=index}
>>> http{middleware.ucdavis.edu}
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> John Bush
>> 602-490-0470
>
>
>
> --
> Jon Gorrono
> PGP Key: 0x5434509D -
> http{pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x5434509D&op=index}
> http{middleware.ucdavis.edu}
--
John Bush
602-490-0470
More information about the gradebook2-dev
mailing list