[Building Sakai] Scoring Agent API for review

[John Bush]

It certainly a totally valid approach.  Especially if you don't care
about your LTI tool being portable from one LMS to another.  Because
then you can call sakai webservices all over the place and do really
rich integrations.  I know this isn't what LTI was intended for, but
it totally viable approach for simply building Sakai tools when you
want to be free from sakai technology choices or deployment schedule
etc.

On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Neal Caidin <neal.caidin at apereo.org> wrote:
> It will be interesting to see if the new Karuta Portfolio system, which is
> emerging out of the Sakai Portfolio community and which is based on LTI, can
> evolve into something that would work. Seems like that depends on many
> factors, way too early to tell.
>
> Thanks for the info.
>
> — Neal
>
>
>
> Neal Caidin
> Sakai Community Coordinator
> neal.caidin at apereo.org
> Skype: nealkdin
> Twitter: ncaidin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 6, 2013, at 10:38 AM, Matthew Jones <matthew at longsight.com> wrote:
>
> Yea, that's essentially right, LTI generally puts more work on the provider
> which they may or may not be willing to do.
>
> Also at the moment I'd LTI, even at 2.0, doesn't have a an extension for
> handling this type of use case very well. The current LTI simple outcomes
> alone can't handle everything this is going to need to do and integrate as
> well as we'd like. Some type of integration with these tools is what's
> really expected.
>
> So you would need to be able (in a site in the Sakai sense) have gradebook,
> assignment and forums be able to be available to send their items to the
> provider and make them gradable.  There likely could be extension(s) created
> that could eventually implement this interface as part of LTI 2.0 in the
> future, but I agree this is the best solution for the moment.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 1:13 AM, John Bush <jbush at anisakai.com> wrote:
>>
>> More like practical constraints.  The reality is there was already
>> iRubric integration existing, albeit it was a set of patches.  LTI
>> would require iRubric to make changes on their side.  That is not
>> something they are interested in doing.  From what I understand the
>> user experience is less than ideal as well, because folks would prefer
>> a more integrated solution into the sakai tools, then treating it as a
>> whole separate tool which is typically the LTI experience.
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Neal Caidin <neal.caidin at apereo.org>
>> wrote:
>> > That’s very interesting.
>> >
>> > I’m guessing you considered LTI , but feel this is a better approach? Or
>> > there are technical constraints?
>> >
>> > Just curious.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Neal
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Neal Caidin
>> > Sakai Community Coordinator
>> > neal.caidin at apereo.org
>> > Skype: nealkdin
>> > Twitter: ncaidin
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Nov 26, 2013, at 3:37 PM, John Bush <jbush at anisakai.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Please check out:
>> > https://crucible.sakaiproject.org/cru/SAKTRUNK-22#details
>> >
>> > https://jira.sakaiproject.org/browse/SAK-23717
>> >
>> > I believe this is low impact work to include in Sakai 10 as its a
>> > brand new service that doesn't really touch anything else.
>> >
>> > In order to support integrations like iRubric or other use cases like
>> > it. We want a core API that tools can bind to in order to integrate
>> > into their user interfaces without relying on patches or direct third
>> > party code. This api can then be implemented by third party providers
>> > like iRubric or others and optionally included into sakai builds, much
>> > like we do with the content review api and turnitin.
>> >
>> > The iRubric implementation of this API, can be found here:
>> > https://source.sakaiproject.org/svn/msub/rsmart.com/sakai/trunk/irubric
>> >
>> > mods to gradebook2 which rely on this service can be found here:
>> > https://source.sakaiproject.org/contrib/rsmart/msub/gradebook2/trunk
>> >
>> > It would be nice for Sakai 10 to have this API included so that gb2
>> > can merge in these changes, and we could start work in other places
>> > (like Assignments) that wish to have iRubric integration included,
>> > post Sakai 10 release. The end game here is that Sakai might have
>> > "hooks" for iRubric integration without needing to include iRubric
>> > code ootb and without relying on patches that have to be constantly
>> > maintained and applied to multiple places in the codebase.
>> >
>> > --
>> > John Bush
>> > 602-490-0470
>> >
>> > ** This message is neither private nor confidential in fact the US
>> > government is storing it in a warehouse located in Utah for future
>> > data mining use cases should they arise. **
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>>
>> ** This message is neither private nor confidential in fact the US
>> government is storing it in a warehouse located in Utah for future
>> data mining use cases should they arise. **
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

** This message is neither private nor confidential in fact the US
government is storing it in a warehouse located in Utah for future
data mining use cases should they arise. **