Expertiza_Wiki - User contributions [en]

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016

2016-11-14T03:20:17Z

Jwang59: /* Final Project Design Document */

[http://www.example.com link title]==Calibration Assignment Submissions==
*[[Calibration Assignment Submission (Firebrick JS)]]
*[[Calibration Assignment Submission (Active Job)]]
==Writing Assignments 2==
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1666. Test team functionality]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1643. Refactor Suggestion controller]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1631. Refactoring Bidding Interface]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1674.Refactor leaderboard.rb and write unit tests]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1671. Unit Tests for participants.rb Hierarchy]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1668.Test e-mailing functionality]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1658. Refractor lottery_controller.rb and write integration tests]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1660. Review requirements and thresholds]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1650. Sort instructor views alphabetically by default]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1644. Refactor and test Teams Controller]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1645. Refactoring Tree Display Controller]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1659. Refactor on_the_fly_calc.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1657. Introduce a Student View for instructors]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1653. Fix and improve rubric criteria]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1642. Refactor review_response_map.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1633. Refactor different question types from quiz feature]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1664:_Feature_Test_Assignment_Creation]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1666. Test team functionality]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1654. Improve_date-picker_and_deadlines]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1652 Fix teammate advertisements and requests to join a team ]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1662. UI issues/fixes]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1673. Refactor question_type.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1675. Timestamp for student file & hyperlink submissions]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1640. Refactor response.rb and response_helper.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1634. Refactor and write unit test of due_date.rb and deadline_helper.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/M1654._Improve_network_security_features]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1670._Unit_tests_for_answers.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1641. Refactor review_mapping_controller.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/M1652_Implement_ImageMap_Support_Servo]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1648/Add_past_due_assignment]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1656. Improve imports]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/M1653_Implement_HTML_form_validation]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1635._Refactor_join_team_requests_controller.rb_and_invitation_controller.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1665. Test staggered-deadline functionality]]

==Final Project Design Document==
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1696 Improve Self-Review]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1676 Role-based reviewing]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1680. Improve survey functionality]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1693. Drag-and-drop interface for creating rubrics]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1701. Accelerate RSpec testing]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1705. Tracking the time students look at the others' submissions]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1688. Send feedback to support + tree display improvement]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1707: Top trading cycles to exclude previous teammates]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1678: Review configuration options]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1682: Improve score calculation]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1684: Feature Test for Assignment Submission]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1689: Anonymous Chat Between Author and Reviewer]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1703: Logging for Expertiza]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1708: Improvements to staggered-deadline assignments]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1685: UI changes for review and score reports]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/ M1653 Implement HTML form validation]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/ E1700 Integrate Google doc editor/viewer]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/M1652_ImageMap_Support_Servo]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1687 Instructor account creation over the web]]

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016

2016-11-14T03:18:33Z

Jwang59: /* Final Project Design Document */

[http://www.example.com link title]==Calibration Assignment Submissions==
*[[Calibration Assignment Submission (Firebrick JS)]]
*[[Calibration Assignment Submission (Active Job)]]
==Writing Assignments 2==
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1666. Test team functionality]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1643. Refactor Suggestion controller]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1631. Refactoring Bidding Interface]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1674.Refactor leaderboard.rb and write unit tests]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1671. Unit Tests for participants.rb Hierarchy]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1668.Test e-mailing functionality]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1658. Refractor lottery_controller.rb and write integration tests]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1660. Review requirements and thresholds]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1650. Sort instructor views alphabetically by default]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1644. Refactor and test Teams Controller]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1645. Refactoring Tree Display Controller]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1659. Refactor on_the_fly_calc.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1657. Introduce a Student View for instructors]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1653. Fix and improve rubric criteria]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1642. Refactor review_response_map.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1633. Refactor different question types from quiz feature]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1664:_Feature_Test_Assignment_Creation]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1666. Test team functionality]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1654. Improve_date-picker_and_deadlines]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1652 Fix teammate advertisements and requests to join a team ]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1662. UI issues/fixes]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1673. Refactor question_type.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1675. Timestamp for student file & hyperlink submissions]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1640. Refactor response.rb and response_helper.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1634. Refactor and write unit test of due_date.rb and deadline_helper.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/M1654._Improve_network_security_features]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1670._Unit_tests_for_answers.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1641. Refactor review_mapping_controller.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/M1652_Implement_ImageMap_Support_Servo]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1648/Add_past_due_assignment]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1656. Improve imports]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/M1653_Implement_HTML_form_validation]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1635._Refactor_join_team_requests_controller.rb_and_invitation_controller.rb]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1665. Test staggered-deadline functionality]]

==Final Project Design Document==
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1696 Improve Self-Review]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1676 Role-based reviewing]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1680. Improve survey functionality]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1693. Drag-and-drop interface for creating rubrics]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1701. Accelerate RSpec testing]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1705. Tracking the time students look at the others' submissions]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1688. Send feedback to support + tree display improvement]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1707: Top trading cycles to exclude previous teammates]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1678: Review configuration options]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1682: Improve score calculation]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1684: Feature Test for Assignment Submission]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1689: Anonymous Chat Between Author and Reviewer]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1703: Logging for Expertiza]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1708: Improvements to staggered-deadline assignments]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1685: UI changes for review and score reports]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/ M1653 Implement HTML form validation]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/ E1700 Integrate Google doc editor/viewer]]
*[[CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/M1652_ImageMap_Support_Servo]]
*[[CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1687 Instructor account creation over the web]]

File:C5.jpg

2016-11-14T03:16:59Z

Jwang59: uploaded a new version of "File:C5.jpg"

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T03:16:07Z

Jwang59: /* For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors */

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

==Introduction==
Currently, the functionality of calibration is limited. It does not support varying-rubric-by-round feature. And for student side, there is no way to notify for an author to tell that a particular review that they received was submitted by an expert. Moreover,if an expert (instructor or TA) has reviewed an assignment, the students should be able to see how that expert rated the assignment, just like they can see calibration results for calibrated assignments by clicking on the “Show calibration results” link.

==Current Implemetation==

Snapshots of what is currently implemented:

1.Log in as instructor6 and edit an assignment.

2.In “General” tab, check the box of “Calibration for training” and save the change, then “Calibration” tab will be shown.

[[File:1679Capture1.JPG]]

3.Go to “Calibration” tab and the a list of student works will be given and the instructor can select one of them to begin a calibration review.

[[File:1679Capture2.JPG]]

4.The review rubrics for calibration is the same as student reviewing and the instructor can make his own review.

[[File:1679Capture3.JPG]]

5.After the instructor submitted his review, the student can see the detail of this review in his “score” section. But currently, there’s no way to distinguish student reviews and expert reviews. In addition, the instructors cannot implement a multi-round review and vary the rubrics for different review rounds.

[[File:1679Capture5.JPG]]

==Files Involved==

1.app/views/student_review/_responses.html.erb

2.app/views/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb

3.app/views/student_review/list.html.erb

4.app/views/grades/_reviews.html.erb

==Task Description and Design Methodology==

===Write a migration file to change the DB schema and change the related code===

Change the “is_calibrated” field in assignment table to “has_expert_review”

Change the “calibrate_to” field in response_map table to “expert_review_to”

A new DB migration file would be added to change name of the two existing columns in the DB to a new one and all related search of these 2 column in the files involved above have to be changed to the new name.

===Change the checkbox title===

In assignment setting page (“General” tab), change the checkbox title from “Calibrated peer-review for training?” To “Add expert peer review?”. The related page is at app/view/assignment/index.html.erb.

[[File:C1.jpg]]

===Change the tab name and partial file name===

When instructor clicks that checkbox, there will be a new tab named “Calibration”. Change the tab name from “Calibration” to “Expert review” on the assignment setting page and also change the partial file name from “_calibration.html.erb” to “_expert_review.html.erb”.

[[File:C2.jpg]]

===Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality===

To make second round review with different rubric, we can refer to the “/student_review/list” page by impersonating a student, clicking a vary-rubric-by-round assignment and then clicking the “Others' work” link. A student can conduct second or third round review by clicking the update link, then new review form with different rubric will be shown. The related page is at app/view/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb. On this page, an update link would be added when an assignment has the second round review as it is in student review page.

[[File:C3.jpg]]

===Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not===

Remove “@assignment.is_calibrated == true” condition from app/views/_responses.html.erb, line 80, which means this link will show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not. After this condition is removed, the “Show calibration results” will always be presented to students in their review list rather than the assignment itself also have to be “calibrated”.

[[File:C4.jpg]]

===Change the link title from “show calibration results” to “show expert peer-review results"===

===For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors===

[[File:C5.jpg]]

As the image shown above, among all the reviews received by the students, if Review 1 is the expert review by the Instructor, two asterisks will be added ahead of its name to indicate that it’s an expert review by the instructor rather than a normal student review.

File:C5.jpg

2016-11-14T03:16:00Z

Jwang59:

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T03:15:06Z

Jwang59: /* For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors */

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

==Introduction==
Currently, the functionality of calibration is limited. It does not support varying-rubric-by-round feature. And for student side, there is no way to notify for an author to tell that a particular review that they received was submitted by an expert. Moreover,if an expert (instructor or TA) has reviewed an assignment, the students should be able to see how that expert rated the assignment, just like they can see calibration results for calibrated assignments by clicking on the “Show calibration results” link.

==Current Implemetation==

Snapshots of what is currently implemented:

1.Log in as instructor6 and edit an assignment.

2.In “General” tab, check the box of “Calibration for training” and save the change, then “Calibration” tab will be shown.

[[File:1679Capture1.JPG]]

3.Go to “Calibration” tab and the a list of student works will be given and the instructor can select one of them to begin a calibration review.

[[File:1679Capture2.JPG]]

4.The review rubrics for calibration is the same as student reviewing and the instructor can make his own review.

[[File:1679Capture3.JPG]]

5.After the instructor submitted his review, the student can see the detail of this review in his “score” section. But currently, there’s no way to distinguish student reviews and expert reviews. In addition, the instructors cannot implement a multi-round review and vary the rubrics for different review rounds.

[[File:1679Capture5.JPG]]

==Files Involved==

1.app/views/student_review/_responses.html.erb

2.app/views/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb

3.app/views/student_review/list.html.erb

4.app/views/grades/_reviews.html.erb

==Task Description and Design Methodology==

===Write a migration file to change the DB schema and change the related code===

Change the “is_calibrated” field in assignment table to “has_expert_review”

Change the “calibrate_to” field in response_map table to “expert_review_to”

A new DB migration file would be added to change name of the two existing columns in the DB to a new one and all related search of these 2 column in the files involved above have to be changed to the new name.

===Change the checkbox title===

In assignment setting page (“General” tab), change the checkbox title from “Calibrated peer-review for training?” To “Add expert peer review?”. The related page is at app/view/assignment/index.html.erb.

[[File:C1.jpg]]

===Change the tab name and partial file name===

When instructor clicks that checkbox, there will be a new tab named “Calibration”. Change the tab name from “Calibration” to “Expert review” on the assignment setting page and also change the partial file name from “_calibration.html.erb” to “_expert_review.html.erb”.

[[File:C2.jpg]]

===Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality===

To make second round review with different rubric, we can refer to the “/student_review/list” page by impersonating a student, clicking a vary-rubric-by-round assignment and then clicking the “Others' work” link. A student can conduct second or third round review by clicking the update link, then new review form with different rubric will be shown. The related page is at app/view/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb. On this page, an update link would be added when an assignment has the second round review as it is in student review page.

[[File:C3.jpg]]

===Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not===

Remove “@assignment.is_calibrated == true” condition from app/views/_responses.html.erb, line 80, which means this link will show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not. After this condition is removed, the “Show calibration results” will always be presented to students in their review list rather than the assignment itself also have to be “calibrated”.

[[File:C4.jpg]]

===Change the link title from “show calibration results” to “show expert peer-review results"===

===For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors===

[[File:C6.jpg]]

As the image shown above, among all the reviews received by the students, if Review 1 is the expert review by the Instructor, two asterisks will be added ahead of its name to indicate that it’s an expert review by the instructor rather than a normal student review.

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T03:14:49Z

Jwang59: /* Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not */

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

==Introduction==
Currently, the functionality of calibration is limited. It does not support varying-rubric-by-round feature. And for student side, there is no way to notify for an author to tell that a particular review that they received was submitted by an expert. Moreover,if an expert (instructor or TA) has reviewed an assignment, the students should be able to see how that expert rated the assignment, just like they can see calibration results for calibrated assignments by clicking on the “Show calibration results” link.

==Current Implemetation==

Snapshots of what is currently implemented:

1.Log in as instructor6 and edit an assignment.

2.In “General” tab, check the box of “Calibration for training” and save the change, then “Calibration” tab will be shown.

[[File:1679Capture1.JPG]]

3.Go to “Calibration” tab and the a list of student works will be given and the instructor can select one of them to begin a calibration review.

[[File:1679Capture2.JPG]]

4.The review rubrics for calibration is the same as student reviewing and the instructor can make his own review.

[[File:1679Capture3.JPG]]

5.After the instructor submitted his review, the student can see the detail of this review in his “score” section. But currently, there’s no way to distinguish student reviews and expert reviews. In addition, the instructors cannot implement a multi-round review and vary the rubrics for different review rounds.

[[File:1679Capture5.JPG]]

==Files Involved==

1.app/views/student_review/_responses.html.erb

2.app/views/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb

3.app/views/student_review/list.html.erb

4.app/views/grades/_reviews.html.erb

==Task Description and Design Methodology==

===Write a migration file to change the DB schema and change the related code===

Change the “is_calibrated” field in assignment table to “has_expert_review”

Change the “calibrate_to” field in response_map table to “expert_review_to”

A new DB migration file would be added to change name of the two existing columns in the DB to a new one and all related search of these 2 column in the files involved above have to be changed to the new name.

===Change the checkbox title===

In assignment setting page (“General” tab), change the checkbox title from “Calibrated peer-review for training?” To “Add expert peer review?”. The related page is at app/view/assignment/index.html.erb.

[[File:C1.jpg]]

===Change the tab name and partial file name===

When instructor clicks that checkbox, there will be a new tab named “Calibration”. Change the tab name from “Calibration” to “Expert review” on the assignment setting page and also change the partial file name from “_calibration.html.erb” to “_expert_review.html.erb”.

[[File:C2.jpg]]

===Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality===

To make second round review with different rubric, we can refer to the “/student_review/list” page by impersonating a student, clicking a vary-rubric-by-round assignment and then clicking the “Others' work” link. A student can conduct second or third round review by clicking the update link, then new review form with different rubric will be shown. The related page is at app/view/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb. On this page, an update link would be added when an assignment has the second round review as it is in student review page.

[[File:C3.jpg]]

===Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not===

Remove “@assignment.is_calibrated == true” condition from app/views/_responses.html.erb, line 80, which means this link will show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not. After this condition is removed, the “Show calibration results” will always be presented to students in their review list rather than the assignment itself also have to be “calibrated”.

[[File:C4.jpg]]

===Change the link title from “show calibration results” to “show expert peer-review results"===

===For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors===

As the image shown above, among all the reviews received by the students, if Review 1 is the expert review by the Instructor, two asterisks will be added ahead of its name to indicate that it’s an expert review by the instructor rather than a normal student review.

File:C4.jpg

2016-11-14T03:14:35Z

Jwang59:

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T03:12:43Z

Jwang59: /* Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality */

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

==Introduction==
Currently, the functionality of calibration is limited. It does not support varying-rubric-by-round feature. And for student side, there is no way to notify for an author to tell that a particular review that they received was submitted by an expert. Moreover,if an expert (instructor or TA) has reviewed an assignment, the students should be able to see how that expert rated the assignment, just like they can see calibration results for calibrated assignments by clicking on the “Show calibration results” link.

==Current Implemetation==

Snapshots of what is currently implemented:

1.Log in as instructor6 and edit an assignment.

2.In “General” tab, check the box of “Calibration for training” and save the change, then “Calibration” tab will be shown.

[[File:1679Capture1.JPG]]

3.Go to “Calibration” tab and the a list of student works will be given and the instructor can select one of them to begin a calibration review.

[[File:1679Capture2.JPG]]

4.The review rubrics for calibration is the same as student reviewing and the instructor can make his own review.

[[File:1679Capture3.JPG]]

5.After the instructor submitted his review, the student can see the detail of this review in his “score” section. But currently, there’s no way to distinguish student reviews and expert reviews. In addition, the instructors cannot implement a multi-round review and vary the rubrics for different review rounds.

[[File:1679Capture5.JPG]]

==Files Involved==

1.app/views/student_review/_responses.html.erb

2.app/views/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb

3.app/views/student_review/list.html.erb

4.app/views/grades/_reviews.html.erb

==Task Description and Design Methodology==

===Write a migration file to change the DB schema and change the related code===

Change the “is_calibrated” field in assignment table to “has_expert_review”

Change the “calibrate_to” field in response_map table to “expert_review_to”

A new DB migration file would be added to change name of the two existing columns in the DB to a new one and all related search of these 2 column in the files involved above have to be changed to the new name.

===Change the checkbox title===

In assignment setting page (“General” tab), change the checkbox title from “Calibrated peer-review for training?” To “Add expert peer review?”. The related page is at app/view/assignment/index.html.erb.

[[File:C1.jpg]]

===Change the tab name and partial file name===

When instructor clicks that checkbox, there will be a new tab named “Calibration”. Change the tab name from “Calibration” to “Expert review” on the assignment setting page and also change the partial file name from “_calibration.html.erb” to “_expert_review.html.erb”.

[[File:C2.jpg]]

===Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality===

To make second round review with different rubric, we can refer to the “/student_review/list” page by impersonating a student, clicking a vary-rubric-by-round assignment and then clicking the “Others' work” link. A student can conduct second or third round review by clicking the update link, then new review form with different rubric will be shown. The related page is at app/view/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb. On this page, an update link would be added when an assignment has the second round review as it is in student review page.

[[File:C3.jpg]]

===Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not===

Remove “@assignment.is_calibrated == true” condition from app/views/_responses.html.erb, line 80, which means this link will show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not. After this condition is removed, the “Show calibration results” will always be presented to students in their review list rather than the assignment itself also have to be “calibrated”.

===Change the link title from “show calibration results” to “show expert peer-review results"===

===For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors===

As the image shown above, among all the reviews received by the students, if Review 1 is the expert review by the Instructor, two asterisks will be added ahead of its name to indicate that it’s an expert review by the instructor rather than a normal student review.

File:C3.jpg

2016-11-14T03:12:28Z

Jwang59:

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T03:10:12Z

Jwang59: /* Change the tab name and partial file name */

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

==Introduction==
Currently, the functionality of calibration is limited. It does not support varying-rubric-by-round feature. And for student side, there is no way to notify for an author to tell that a particular review that they received was submitted by an expert. Moreover,if an expert (instructor or TA) has reviewed an assignment, the students should be able to see how that expert rated the assignment, just like they can see calibration results for calibrated assignments by clicking on the “Show calibration results” link.

==Current Implemetation==

Snapshots of what is currently implemented:

1.Log in as instructor6 and edit an assignment.

2.In “General” tab, check the box of “Calibration for training” and save the change, then “Calibration” tab will be shown.

[[File:1679Capture1.JPG]]

3.Go to “Calibration” tab and the a list of student works will be given and the instructor can select one of them to begin a calibration review.

[[File:1679Capture2.JPG]]

4.The review rubrics for calibration is the same as student reviewing and the instructor can make his own review.

[[File:1679Capture3.JPG]]

5.After the instructor submitted his review, the student can see the detail of this review in his “score” section. But currently, there’s no way to distinguish student reviews and expert reviews. In addition, the instructors cannot implement a multi-round review and vary the rubrics for different review rounds.

[[File:1679Capture5.JPG]]

==Files Involved==

1.app/views/student_review/_responses.html.erb

2.app/views/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb

3.app/views/student_review/list.html.erb

4.app/views/grades/_reviews.html.erb

==Task Description and Design Methodology==

===Write a migration file to change the DB schema and change the related code===

Change the “is_calibrated” field in assignment table to “has_expert_review”

Change the “calibrate_to” field in response_map table to “expert_review_to”

A new DB migration file would be added to change name of the two existing columns in the DB to a new one and all related search of these 2 column in the files involved above have to be changed to the new name.

===Change the checkbox title===

In assignment setting page (“General” tab), change the checkbox title from “Calibrated peer-review for training?” To “Add expert peer review?”. The related page is at app/view/assignment/index.html.erb.

[[File:C1.jpg]]

===Change the tab name and partial file name===

When instructor clicks that checkbox, there will be a new tab named “Calibration”. Change the tab name from “Calibration” to “Expert review” on the assignment setting page and also change the partial file name from “_calibration.html.erb” to “_expert_review.html.erb”.

[[File:C2.jpg]]

===Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality===

To make second round review with different rubric, we can refer to the “/student_review/list” page by impersonating a student, clicking a vary-rubric-by-round assignment and then clicking the “Others' work” link. A student can conduct second or third round review by clicking the update link, then new review form with different rubric will be shown. The related page is at app/view/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb. On this page, an update link would be added when an assignment has the second round review as it is in student review page.

===Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not===

Remove “@assignment.is_calibrated == true” condition from app/views/_responses.html.erb, line 80, which means this link will show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not. After this condition is removed, the “Show calibration results” will always be presented to students in their review list rather than the assignment itself also have to be “calibrated”.

===Change the link title from “show calibration results” to “show expert peer-review results"===

===For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors===

As the image shown above, among all the reviews received by the students, if Review 1 is the expert review by the Instructor, two asterisks will be added ahead of its name to indicate that it’s an expert review by the instructor rather than a normal student review.

File:C2.jpg

2016-11-14T03:10:00Z

Jwang59:

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T03:08:40Z

Jwang59: /* Change the checkbox title */

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

==Introduction==
Currently, the functionality of calibration is limited. It does not support varying-rubric-by-round feature. And for student side, there is no way to notify for an author to tell that a particular review that they received was submitted by an expert. Moreover,if an expert (instructor or TA) has reviewed an assignment, the students should be able to see how that expert rated the assignment, just like they can see calibration results for calibrated assignments by clicking on the “Show calibration results” link.

==Current Implemetation==

Snapshots of what is currently implemented:

1.Log in as instructor6 and edit an assignment.

2.In “General” tab, check the box of “Calibration for training” and save the change, then “Calibration” tab will be shown.

[[File:1679Capture1.JPG]]

3.Go to “Calibration” tab and the a list of student works will be given and the instructor can select one of them to begin a calibration review.

[[File:1679Capture2.JPG]]

4.The review rubrics for calibration is the same as student reviewing and the instructor can make his own review.

[[File:1679Capture3.JPG]]

5.After the instructor submitted his review, the student can see the detail of this review in his “score” section. But currently, there’s no way to distinguish student reviews and expert reviews. In addition, the instructors cannot implement a multi-round review and vary the rubrics for different review rounds.

[[File:1679Capture5.JPG]]

==Files Involved==

1.app/views/student_review/_responses.html.erb

2.app/views/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb

3.app/views/student_review/list.html.erb

4.app/views/grades/_reviews.html.erb

==Task Description and Design Methodology==

===Write a migration file to change the DB schema and change the related code===

Change the “is_calibrated” field in assignment table to “has_expert_review”

Change the “calibrate_to” field in response_map table to “expert_review_to”

A new DB migration file would be added to change name of the two existing columns in the DB to a new one and all related search of these 2 column in the files involved above have to be changed to the new name.

===Change the checkbox title===

In assignment setting page (“General” tab), change the checkbox title from “Calibrated peer-review for training?” To “Add expert peer review?”. The related page is at app/view/assignment/index.html.erb.

[[File:C1.jpg]]

===Change the tab name and partial file name===

When instructor clicks that checkbox, there will be a new tab named “Calibration”. Change the tab name from “Calibration” to “Expert review” on the assignment setting page and also change the partial file name from “_calibration.html.erb” to “_expert_review.html.erb”.

===Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality===

To make second round review with different rubric, we can refer to the “/student_review/list” page by impersonating a student, clicking a vary-rubric-by-round assignment and then clicking the “Others' work” link. A student can conduct second or third round review by clicking the update link, then new review form with different rubric will be shown. The related page is at app/view/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb. On this page, an update link would be added when an assignment has the second round review as it is in student review page.

===Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not===

Remove “@assignment.is_calibrated == true” condition from app/views/_responses.html.erb, line 80, which means this link will show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not. After this condition is removed, the “Show calibration results” will always be presented to students in their review list rather than the assignment itself also have to be “calibrated”.

===Change the link title from “show calibration results” to “show expert peer-review results"===

===For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors===

As the image shown above, among all the reviews received by the students, if Review 1 is the expert review by the Instructor, two asterisks will be added ahead of its name to indicate that it’s an expert review by the instructor rather than a normal student review.

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T03:08:24Z

Jwang59: /* Change the checkbox title */

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

==Introduction==
Currently, the functionality of calibration is limited. It does not support varying-rubric-by-round feature. And for student side, there is no way to notify for an author to tell that a particular review that they received was submitted by an expert. Moreover,if an expert (instructor or TA) has reviewed an assignment, the students should be able to see how that expert rated the assignment, just like they can see calibration results for calibrated assignments by clicking on the “Show calibration results” link.

==Current Implemetation==

Snapshots of what is currently implemented:

1.Log in as instructor6 and edit an assignment.

2.In “General” tab, check the box of “Calibration for training” and save the change, then “Calibration” tab will be shown.

[[File:1679Capture1.JPG]]

3.Go to “Calibration” tab and the a list of student works will be given and the instructor can select one of them to begin a calibration review.

[[File:1679Capture2.JPG]]

4.The review rubrics for calibration is the same as student reviewing and the instructor can make his own review.

[[File:1679Capture3.JPG]]

5.After the instructor submitted his review, the student can see the detail of this review in his “score” section. But currently, there’s no way to distinguish student reviews and expert reviews. In addition, the instructors cannot implement a multi-round review and vary the rubrics for different review rounds.

[[File:1679Capture5.JPG]]

==Files Involved==

1.app/views/student_review/_responses.html.erb

2.app/views/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb

3.app/views/student_review/list.html.erb

4.app/views/grades/_reviews.html.erb

==Task Description and Design Methodology==

===Write a migration file to change the DB schema and change the related code===

Change the “is_calibrated” field in assignment table to “has_expert_review”

Change the “calibrate_to” field in response_map table to “expert_review_to”

A new DB migration file would be added to change name of the two existing columns in the DB to a new one and all related search of these 2 column in the files involved above have to be changed to the new name.

===Change the checkbox title===

In assignment setting page (“General” tab), change the checkbox title from “Calibrated peer-review for training?” To “Add expert peer review?”. The related page is at app/view/assignment/index.html.erb.

[[File:C1.JPG]]

===Change the tab name and partial file name===

When instructor clicks that checkbox, there will be a new tab named “Calibration”. Change the tab name from “Calibration” to “Expert review” on the assignment setting page and also change the partial file name from “_calibration.html.erb” to “_expert_review.html.erb”.

===Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality===

To make second round review with different rubric, we can refer to the “/student_review/list” page by impersonating a student, clicking a vary-rubric-by-round assignment and then clicking the “Others' work” link. A student can conduct second or third round review by clicking the update link, then new review form with different rubric will be shown. The related page is at app/view/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb. On this page, an update link would be added when an assignment has the second round review as it is in student review page.

===Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not===

Remove “@assignment.is_calibrated == true” condition from app/views/_responses.html.erb, line 80, which means this link will show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not. After this condition is removed, the “Show calibration results” will always be presented to students in their review list rather than the assignment itself also have to be “calibrated”.

===Change the link title from “show calibration results” to “show expert peer-review results"===

===For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors===

As the image shown above, among all the reviews received by the students, if Review 1 is the expert review by the Instructor, two asterisks will be added ahead of its name to indicate that it’s an expert review by the instructor rather than a normal student review.

File:C1.jpg

2016-11-14T03:08:07Z

Jwang59:

File:1679Capture5.JPG

2016-11-14T03:05:03Z

Jwang59: uploaded a new version of "File:1679Capture5.JPG"

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T03:04:43Z

Jwang59: /* Current Implemetation */

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

==Introduction==
Currently, the functionality of calibration is limited. It does not support varying-rubric-by-round feature. And for student side, there is no way to notify for an author to tell that a particular review that they received was submitted by an expert. Moreover,if an expert (instructor or TA) has reviewed an assignment, the students should be able to see how that expert rated the assignment, just like they can see calibration results for calibrated assignments by clicking on the “Show calibration results” link.

==Current Implemetation==

Snapshots of what is currently implemented:

1.Log in as instructor6 and edit an assignment.

2.In “General” tab, check the box of “Calibration for training” and save the change, then “Calibration” tab will be shown.

[[File:1679Capture1.JPG]]

3.Go to “Calibration” tab and the a list of student works will be given and the instructor can select one of them to begin a calibration review.

[[File:1679Capture2.JPG]]

4.The review rubrics for calibration is the same as student reviewing and the instructor can make his own review.

[[File:1679Capture3.JPG]]

5.After the instructor submitted his review, the student can see the detail of this review in his “score” section. But currently, there’s no way to distinguish student reviews and expert reviews. In addition, the instructors cannot implement a multi-round review and vary the rubrics for different review rounds.

[[File:1679Capture5.JPG]]

==Files Involved==

1.app/views/student_review/_responses.html.erb

2.app/views/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb

3.app/views/student_review/list.html.erb

4.app/views/grades/_reviews.html.erb

==Task Description and Design Methodology==

===Write a migration file to change the DB schema and change the related code===

Change the “is_calibrated” field in assignment table to “has_expert_review”

Change the “calibrate_to” field in response_map table to “expert_review_to”

A new DB migration file would be added to change name of the two existing columns in the DB to a new one and all related search of these 2 column in the files involved above have to be changed to the new name.

===Change the checkbox title===

In assignment setting page (“General” tab), change the checkbox title from “Calibrated peer-review for training?” To “Add expert peer review?”. The related page is at app/view/assignment/index.html.erb.

===Change the tab name and partial file name===

When instructor clicks that checkbox, there will be a new tab named “Calibration”. Change the tab name from “Calibration” to “Expert review” on the assignment setting page and also change the partial file name from “_calibration.html.erb” to “_expert_review.html.erb”.

===Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality===

To make second round review with different rubric, we can refer to the “/student_review/list” page by impersonating a student, clicking a vary-rubric-by-round assignment and then clicking the “Others' work” link. A student can conduct second or third round review by clicking the update link, then new review form with different rubric will be shown. The related page is at app/view/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb. On this page, an update link would be added when an assignment has the second round review as it is in student review page.

===Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not===

Remove “@assignment.is_calibrated == true” condition from app/views/_responses.html.erb, line 80, which means this link will show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not. After this condition is removed, the “Show calibration results” will always be presented to students in their review list rather than the assignment itself also have to be “calibrated”.

===Change the link title from “show calibration results” to “show expert peer-review results"===

===For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors===

As the image shown above, among all the reviews received by the students, if Review 1 is the expert review by the Instructor, two asterisks will be added ahead of its name to indicate that it’s an expert review by the instructor rather than a normal student review.

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T03:04:18Z

Jwang59: /* Current Implemetation */

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

==Introduction==
Currently, the functionality of calibration is limited. It does not support varying-rubric-by-round feature. And for student side, there is no way to notify for an author to tell that a particular review that they received was submitted by an expert. Moreover,if an expert (instructor or TA) has reviewed an assignment, the students should be able to see how that expert rated the assignment, just like they can see calibration results for calibrated assignments by clicking on the “Show calibration results” link.

==Current Implemetation==

Snapshots of what is currently implemented:

1.Log in as instructor6 and edit an assignment.

2.In “General” tab, check the box of “Calibration for training” and save the change, then “Calibration” tab will be shown.

[[File:1679Capture1.JPG]]

3.Go to “Calibration” tab and the a list of student works will be given and the instructor can select one of them to begin a calibration review.

[[File:1679Capture2.JPG]]

4.The review rubrics for calibration is the same as student reviewing and the instructor can make his own review.

[[File:1679Capture3.JPG]]

5.After the instructor submitted his review, the student can see the detail of this review in his “score” section. But currently, there’s no way to distinguish student reviews and expert reviews. In addition, the instructors cannot implement a multi-round review and vary the rubrics for different review rounds.

[[File:1679Capture4.JPG]]

==Files Involved==

1.app/views/student_review/_responses.html.erb

2.app/views/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb

3.app/views/student_review/list.html.erb

4.app/views/grades/_reviews.html.erb

==Task Description and Design Methodology==

===Write a migration file to change the DB schema and change the related code===

Change the “is_calibrated” field in assignment table to “has_expert_review”

Change the “calibrate_to” field in response_map table to “expert_review_to”

A new DB migration file would be added to change name of the two existing columns in the DB to a new one and all related search of these 2 column in the files involved above have to be changed to the new name.

===Change the checkbox title===

In assignment setting page (“General” tab), change the checkbox title from “Calibrated peer-review for training?” To “Add expert peer review?”. The related page is at app/view/assignment/index.html.erb.

===Change the tab name and partial file name===

When instructor clicks that checkbox, there will be a new tab named “Calibration”. Change the tab name from “Calibration” to “Expert review” on the assignment setting page and also change the partial file name from “_calibration.html.erb” to “_expert_review.html.erb”.

===Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality===

To make second round review with different rubric, we can refer to the “/student_review/list” page by impersonating a student, clicking a vary-rubric-by-round assignment and then clicking the “Others' work” link. A student can conduct second or third round review by clicking the update link, then new review form with different rubric will be shown. The related page is at app/view/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb. On this page, an update link would be added when an assignment has the second round review as it is in student review page.

===Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not===

Remove “@assignment.is_calibrated == true” condition from app/views/_responses.html.erb, line 80, which means this link will show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not. After this condition is removed, the “Show calibration results” will always be presented to students in their review list rather than the assignment itself also have to be “calibrated”.

===Change the link title from “show calibration results” to “show expert peer-review results"===

===For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors===

As the image shown above, among all the reviews received by the students, if Review 1 is the expert review by the Instructor, two asterisks will be added ahead of its name to indicate that it’s an expert review by the instructor rather than a normal student review.

File:1679Capture5.JPG

2016-11-14T03:04:07Z

Jwang59:

File:1679Capture3.JPG

2016-11-14T03:03:11Z

Jwang59:

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T03:02:25Z

Jwang59: /* Current Implemetation */

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

==Introduction==
Currently, the functionality of calibration is limited. It does not support varying-rubric-by-round feature. And for student side, there is no way to notify for an author to tell that a particular review that they received was submitted by an expert. Moreover,if an expert (instructor or TA) has reviewed an assignment, the students should be able to see how that expert rated the assignment, just like they can see calibration results for calibrated assignments by clicking on the “Show calibration results” link.

==Current Implemetation==

Snapshots of what is currently implemented:

1.Log in as instructor6 and edit an assignment.

2.In “General” tab, check the box of “Calibration for training” and save the change, then “Calibration” tab will be shown.

[[File:1679Capture1.JPG]]

3.Go to “Calibration” tab and the a list of student works will be given and the instructor can select one of them to begin a calibration review.

[[File:1679Capture2.JPG]]

4.The review rubrics for calibration is the same as student reviewing and the instructor can make his own review.

5.After the instructor submitted his review, the student can see the detail of this review in his “score” section. But currently, there’s no way to distinguish student reviews and expert reviews. In addition, the instructors cannot implement a multi-round review and vary the rubrics for different review rounds.

==Files Involved==

1.app/views/student_review/_responses.html.erb

2.app/views/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb

3.app/views/student_review/list.html.erb

4.app/views/grades/_reviews.html.erb

==Task Description and Design Methodology==

===Write a migration file to change the DB schema and change the related code===

Change the “is_calibrated” field in assignment table to “has_expert_review”

Change the “calibrate_to” field in response_map table to “expert_review_to”

A new DB migration file would be added to change name of the two existing columns in the DB to a new one and all related search of these 2 column in the files involved above have to be changed to the new name.

===Change the checkbox title===

In assignment setting page (“General” tab), change the checkbox title from “Calibrated peer-review for training?” To “Add expert peer review?”. The related page is at app/view/assignment/index.html.erb.

===Change the tab name and partial file name===

When instructor clicks that checkbox, there will be a new tab named “Calibration”. Change the tab name from “Calibration” to “Expert review” on the assignment setting page and also change the partial file name from “_calibration.html.erb” to “_expert_review.html.erb”.

===Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality===

To make second round review with different rubric, we can refer to the “/student_review/list” page by impersonating a student, clicking a vary-rubric-by-round assignment and then clicking the “Others' work” link. A student can conduct second or third round review by clicking the update link, then new review form with different rubric will be shown. The related page is at app/view/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb. On this page, an update link would be added when an assignment has the second round review as it is in student review page.

===Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not===

Remove “@assignment.is_calibrated == true” condition from app/views/_responses.html.erb, line 80, which means this link will show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not. After this condition is removed, the “Show calibration results” will always be presented to students in their review list rather than the assignment itself also have to be “calibrated”.

===Change the link title from “show calibration results” to “show expert peer-review results"===

===For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors===

As the image shown above, among all the reviews received by the students, if Review 1 is the expert review by the Instructor, two asterisks will be added ahead of its name to indicate that it’s an expert review by the instructor rather than a normal student review.

File:1679Capture2.JPG

2016-11-14T03:02:10Z

Jwang59:

File:1679Capture1.JPG

2016-11-14T03:00:22Z

Jwang59: uploaded a new version of "File:1679Capture1.JPG"

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T02:59:49Z

Jwang59: /* Current Implemetation */

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

==Introduction==
Currently, the functionality of calibration is limited. It does not support varying-rubric-by-round feature. And for student side, there is no way to notify for an author to tell that a particular review that they received was submitted by an expert. Moreover,if an expert (instructor or TA) has reviewed an assignment, the students should be able to see how that expert rated the assignment, just like they can see calibration results for calibrated assignments by clicking on the “Show calibration results” link.

==Current Implemetation==

Snapshots of what is currently implemented:

1.Log in as instructor6 and edit an assignment.

2.In “General” tab, check the box of “Calibration for training” and save the change, then “Calibration” tab will be shown.

[[File:1679Capture1.JPG]]

3.Go to “Calibration” tab and the a list of student works will be given and the instructor can select one of them to begin a calibration review.

4.The review rubrics for calibration is the same as student reviewing and the instructor can make his own review.

5.After the instructor submitted his review, the student can see the detail of this review in his “score” section. But currently, there’s no way to distinguish student reviews and expert reviews. In addition, the instructors cannot implement a multi-round review and vary the rubrics for different review rounds.

==Files Involved==

1.app/views/student_review/_responses.html.erb

2.app/views/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb

3.app/views/student_review/list.html.erb

4.app/views/grades/_reviews.html.erb

==Task Description and Design Methodology==

===Write a migration file to change the DB schema and change the related code===

Change the “is_calibrated” field in assignment table to “has_expert_review”

Change the “calibrate_to” field in response_map table to “expert_review_to”

A new DB migration file would be added to change name of the two existing columns in the DB to a new one and all related search of these 2 column in the files involved above have to be changed to the new name.

===Change the checkbox title===

In assignment setting page (“General” tab), change the checkbox title from “Calibrated peer-review for training?” To “Add expert peer review?”. The related page is at app/view/assignment/index.html.erb.

===Change the tab name and partial file name===

When instructor clicks that checkbox, there will be a new tab named “Calibration”. Change the tab name from “Calibration” to “Expert review” on the assignment setting page and also change the partial file name from “_calibration.html.erb” to “_expert_review.html.erb”.

===Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality===

To make second round review with different rubric, we can refer to the “/student_review/list” page by impersonating a student, clicking a vary-rubric-by-round assignment and then clicking the “Others' work” link. A student can conduct second or third round review by clicking the update link, then new review form with different rubric will be shown. The related page is at app/view/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb. On this page, an update link would be added when an assignment has the second round review as it is in student review page.

===Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not===

Remove “@assignment.is_calibrated == true” condition from app/views/_responses.html.erb, line 80, which means this link will show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not. After this condition is removed, the “Show calibration results” will always be presented to students in their review list rather than the assignment itself also have to be “calibrated”.

===Change the link title from “show calibration results” to “show expert peer-review results"===

===For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors===

As the image shown above, among all the reviews received by the students, if Review 1 is the expert review by the Instructor, two asterisks will be added ahead of its name to indicate that it’s an expert review by the instructor rather than a normal student review.

File:1679Capture1.JPG

2016-11-14T02:59:39Z

Jwang59:

File:Capture1.JPG

2016-11-14T02:59:10Z

Jwang59: uploaded a new version of "File:Capture1.JPG": Reverted to version as of 13:25, 19 September 2011

File:Capture1.JPG

2016-11-14T02:57:25Z

Jwang59: uploaded a new version of "File:Capture1.JPG"

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T02:56:31Z

Jwang59: /* Task Description and Design Process */

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

==Introduction==
Currently, the functionality of calibration is limited. It does not support varying-rubric-by-round feature. And for student side, there is no way to notify for an author to tell that a particular review that they received was submitted by an expert. Moreover,if an expert (instructor or TA) has reviewed an assignment, the students should be able to see how that expert rated the assignment, just like they can see calibration results for calibrated assignments by clicking on the “Show calibration results” link.

==Current Implemetation==

Snapshots of what is currently implemented:

1.Log in as instructor6 and edit an assignment.

2.In “General” tab, check the box of “Calibration for training” and save the change, then “Calibration” tab will be shown.

3.Go to “Calibration” tab and the a list of student works will be given and the instructor can select one of them to begin a calibration review.

4.The review rubrics for calibration is the same as student reviewing and the instructor can make his own review.

5.After the instructor submitted his review, the student can see the detail of this review in his “score” section. But currently, there’s no way to distinguish student reviews and expert reviews. In addition, the instructors cannot implement a multi-round review and vary the rubrics for different review rounds.

==Files Involved==

1.app/views/student_review/_responses.html.erb

2.app/views/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb

3.app/views/student_review/list.html.erb

4.app/views/grades/_reviews.html.erb

==Task Description and Design Methodology==

===Write a migration file to change the DB schema and change the related code===

Change the “is_calibrated” field in assignment table to “has_expert_review”

Change the “calibrate_to” field in response_map table to “expert_review_to”

A new DB migration file would be added to change name of the two existing columns in the DB to a new one and all related search of these 2 column in the files involved above have to be changed to the new name.

===Change the checkbox title===

In assignment setting page (“General” tab), change the checkbox title from “Calibrated peer-review for training?” To “Add expert peer review?”. The related page is at app/view/assignment/index.html.erb.

===Change the tab name and partial file name===

When instructor clicks that checkbox, there will be a new tab named “Calibration”. Change the tab name from “Calibration” to “Expert review” on the assignment setting page and also change the partial file name from “_calibration.html.erb” to “_expert_review.html.erb”.

===Let expert review support the vary-rubric-by-round functionality===

To make second round review with different rubric, we can refer to the “/student_review/list” page by impersonating a student, clicking a vary-rubric-by-round assignment and then clicking the “Others' work” link. A student can conduct second or third round review by clicking the update link, then new review form with different rubric will be shown. The related page is at app/view/assignments/edit/_calibration.html.erb. On this page, an update link would be added when an assignment has the second round review as it is in student review page.

===Show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not===

Remove “@assignment.is_calibrated == true” condition from app/views/_responses.html.erb, line 80, which means this link will show if expert peer reviews are available no matter whether this assignment is a calibration assignment or not. After this condition is removed, the “Show calibration results” will always be presented to students in their review list rather than the assignment itself also have to be “calibrated”.

===Change the link title from “show calibration results” to “show expert peer-review results"===

===For student side, give a well-marked icon to represent the expert reviews to authors===

As the image shown above, among all the reviews received by the students, if Review 1 is the expert review by the Instructor, two asterisks will be added ahead of its name to indicate that it’s an expert review by the instructor rather than a normal student review.

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T02:24:14Z

Jwang59: /* Task Description and Design Process */

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T02:22:31Z

Jwang59: /* Change the checkbox title */

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T02:18:28Z

Jwang59: /* E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews */

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T01:43:34Z

Jwang59: /* E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews */

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016 E1679 Let experts as well as students do reviews

2016-11-14T01:32:04Z

Jwang59: Created page with "=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews="

=E1679. Let experts as well as students do reviews=

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1656. Improve imports

2016-11-04T19:33:31Z

Jwang59: /* UI Testing */

== E1656. Improve imports ==

This page provides a description of the Expertiza based OSS project.

__TOC__

==Introduction to Expertiza==
[http://expertiza.ncsu.edu/ Expertiza] is an open source project based on [http://rubyonrails.org/ Ruby on Rails] framework.

==Project Description==
===About Import===
In Expertiza, various kinds of data may be imported from [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma-separated_values csv files], including users, participants in an assignemnt, topics and teams. When importing data, a corresponding csv file have to be composed. In a csv file, each new line represent a piece of datum and the different fields of a datum are separated by delimiters. But there are rough edges in the way these imports are done and certain other data that should be importable is not. This project focuses on implementing following tasks about data import functionality:

*When a team with a duplicate name is imported, one of the options is to rename the new team. There should also be an option to rename an existing team. See Issue 329.
*Review assignments (“reviewer mappings”) should be able to be imported, but cannot be imported. See Issue 711
*It should be possible to import a list of users who have signed up for topics, but this feature does not yet exist. See Issue 153.
*For every kind of data to be imported, Expertiza currently specifies the ordering of fields. This isn’t very flexible; it may require the user (an instructor) to edit an existing CSV file. It would be better if, after importing the data, Expertiza showed the data together with dropdowns containing the default field headers. (This is similar to the way Excel shows data when it is imported from a CSV file.) Then the user could change the dropdowns to cause a different ordering of fields. See Issue 110.
*Create a way to export a list of teams that have signed up for topics, and who are waitlisted for topics, as well as participants in an assignment who have not signed up for topics. Choose the format, but keep it as consistent as possible with the other export formats. This would help the professor when students ask him for advice on finding teammates. Extra Issue

The following tasks were listed as a requirement, but after careful examination it was determined that these tasks were already implemented
*The simplest fix: If I try to import topics, the import page gives me this message: “The import process expects the following columns:” but it doesn’t say what the columns are (topic number, topic name, category, number of slots, category)! It used to be in the system; please revert the change to fix this bug. See Issue 719.
*When teams are imported in order to insert new members, the members are not inserted. See Issue 328.
*It should be possible to leave off the final fields in a line of a CSV file. These fields are often not specified anyway. For example, if a password isn’t specified when a new user is created, the system generates a password (see Issue 183). When importing topics, topic categories are rarely specified. But if the final field is blank, the import requires the CSV line to end with “, “ (comma and space). This should be fixed for all imports.

==About Versions Controller==
Git is a popular version control system, As a part of the project, We have made use of git for the purpose of version control. Our repository is a fork of the original Expertiza repository on which we have collaborated our work. And the project has been submitted through a pull request.

==About Tests==
New features implemented can be tested through UI operations or add some Rspec functional tests. Through deployment link, users can do overall tests on these features, test some edge cases and add some new scenarios. Therefore, in this project, some simple scenarios are added to Rspec tests and most of the tests are done through UI operations. The deployed link for remote access is: [http://104.236.1.180:3000/ http://104.236.1.180:3000]

==Handle Duplicates (Issue329)==
====Current Implementation====

When a team with a duplicate name is imported, one of the options is to rename the new team. There should also be an option to rename an existing team. See Issue 329.
The current implementation allows the user to handle duplicates, by the following techniques
*ignore the new team
*replace the existing team with the new team
*insert any new members into the existing team
*rename the new team and import
*rename the existing team and import

=====Functionality=====

The above functionalities make it easier to achieve the goal of handling duplicates while importing.

=====Drawbacks and Solutions=====

The above set of functionalities do not allow User to ever rename an existing team, rather force him rename his own team.
Thus the above requirement provides the necessary freedom to the User by providing him the option to rename an already existing team.

====New Implementation====

The option has been implemented using the update functionality that is already present in rails models, to update existing values of Active Records. To implement this feature we have also made use of the functionality for generating team names, that is already present within the Team model.

A code snippet is given below:
if handle_dups == "renameOldTeam" # rename: rename new team
if teamtype.is_a?(CourseTeam)
CourseTeam.update(team.id, :name => self.generate_team_name(Course.find(id).name))
return name
elsif teamtype.is_a?(AssignmentTeam)
AssignmentTeam.update(team.id, :name => self.generate_team_name(Assignment.find(id).name))
return name
end
end

====UI Testing====
The Above feature has been tested from the UI using the both course Teams and Assignment Teams, where new teams were added with conflicting names and the rename existing team option was selected, which lead lead to the desired behavior, that is the team that was extant was renamed and new team was imported with the same name as that specified in the CSV file

The feature can be tested from Add teams option in manage assignments. From where one can import teams and choose the required feature.

==Fix Reviewer and Metareviewer Mappings (Issue711)==
====Current Implementation====

When an instructor tries to assign reviewers for an assignment, if the review strategy of the assignment is‘Instructor-Selected’, he could assign reviewers by directly importing the reviewer mappings. But now, when the instructor attempts to submit the import, the system will raise an argument error showing:

[[File:reviewfail.PNG]]

The import fails and, clearly, it's a bug in Expertiza.

====New Implementation====
To solve this problem, first refer to the view/review_mapping/_list_review_mappings.html.erb file and find out that the model to be imported is ReviewResponseMap. The import method in review_response_map.rb model file takes in 3 arguments which are row, _session and id. A code snippet of import_file_controller.rb (the import controller) is given below:
[[File:Reviewcode.PNG]]

Before we add the code in parentheses, the ReviewResponseMap model was not explicitly specified which case it belongs to and falls into the else statement where the import method takes in 4 arguments. That’s the reason of getting the “wrong number of argument” error. To resolve the problem, a "or params[:model] == 'ReviewResponseMap'" is inserted into the parentheses to make the import method of reviewer mappings takes in 3 arguments again and then we can correctly import the reviewer mappings. The recovery method for MetareviewResponseMap is exactly the same with this one by adding
"or params[:model] == 'MetareviewResponseMap'" statement into the parentheses.

====UI Testing====
1. Login as instructor. Click on ‘Manage Assignment’ to see all assignments in the database.

2. Among all the assignments, click the ‘Review strategy’ card in edit page and find out one assignment with 'Instructor-Selected' strategy (e.g. 'Design exercise'). Creating a new 'Instructor-Selected' assignment and add some participants to it is also applicable.

3. 'Assign reviewers' for this assignment and click on the 'Import reviewer mappings' on the bottom of the page.

4. Compose a csv file in the given format of 'Contributor, Reviewer1, Reviewer2, …, ReviewerN' and import the file. The ‘Contributor’ here is the name of a team in this assignment.

5. Go back to reviewer mappings page to check if the 'Reviewers of the Contributor' in the file are listed in the 'Reviewed By' section of the 'Contributors'.

Following are screenshots of the UI tests. [http://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php/CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1656._Improve_imports/screenshots711#Test_Example Screenshots711]

==Import Sign Up Sheet (Issue153)==
====Current Implementation====

When a signup sheet is used in Expertiza, users are expected to sign up for topics. But, the instructor might've taken signups offline, e.g., by passing around a signup sheet in class. If the signup are not taken online by the students, the instructor has to impersonate all the students one by one and sign them up for a topic, which is tedious.

====New Implementation====
To implement this new issue, a model which is in charge of creating a sign_up and SignedUpTeam should be located first. In SignUpSheet model, methods are designed for the creation of a sign_up and SignedUpTeam using the data from data base and the new implementation should create them from an imported file. Hence, an ''import'' method is added to this model and a code snippet of it is shown as:

[[File:Signupcode.PNG]]

This new method imports new sign_up data in a format of "Topic identifier, User1, User2". Users here are the ones who signed up for the topic with a certain identifier (id). Some edge cases are also taken into consideration in this method to prevent importing a non-existing team in this assignment, a non-existing user or a user who is not a participant of this assignment.
Next, a link on the view page needs to be created to access this method. The instructor can view the sign up sheet of an assignment under the "topic" card of the "edit" section. An "Import sign up sheet" button is added beside the "Import topic" link

[[File:Button.PNG]]

and the corresponding code should be inserted in the "view/sign_up_sheet/_add_topics/html.erb" file.

[[File:View.PNG]]

After all of this, the new feature is successfully implemented and the instructor can directly import a large offline sign up sheet without tedious impersonating. The whole process of importing sign ups works exactly the same as student online sign ups. If the assignment does not have a topic yet, the 'Import sign up sheet' link will be invisible unless a topic is created or imported. If a imported user does not have a team, he will be automatically assigned a team and sign up for the topic. If users imported exceeds the limit a certain topic can hold, the leftmost users in the file (like the earliest signed up users) will have the topic and those right(later signed up) users will be in the wait list.

====UI Testing====
1. Login as instructor. Click on 'Manage Assignment’ to see all assignments in the database.

2. Click on 'edit', go to 'topic' card and find the "Import sign up sheet" link.

3. Compose a csv file in the given format of 'Topic identifier, User1, User2, …' and import the file. The ‘Topic identifier’ here is the 'topic#' in the sign up sheet.

4. Go back to sign up sheet page to check if the 'Users' in the file and their 'Teams' are listed under the 'Topic names' section.

Following are screenshots of the UI tests. [http://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php/CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1656._Improve_imports/screenshots153 Screenshots153]

==Export Assignment Participants (Extra Issue)==
===Current Implementation===
Current Implementation just allows users to Export the set of all Assignment Participants, of a given assignment. It doesn't allow any further filtering.

===Functionality===
The current functionality is very rigid and doesn't allow the user to know any more than the set of assignment Participants, which is also a major drawback

===New Implementation===
The new implementation allows user to export Assignment Participants in four ways.
* List of All Users mapped with team number and topic name who have signed up for an assignment topic
* List of All Users mapped with team number and topic name who are wait-listed for an assignment topic
* List of All Participants who haven't yet signed up for a topic and haven't formed teams yet
* List of All Participants

The functionality is present as a set of Radio buttons, which is checked by default to the fourth option that is to export all Participants. However that can be changed according to requirement.

The above has been implemented by creating a partial for the view to add the radio button. Further and If else bock has been used in the model, to identify the option selected and accordingly, on the required set of Rows are pushed to the csv file. To know whether a User has signed up or not for a topic, The SignedUpTeam model is used and to find if the team is wait listed or not, the is_waitlisted boolean value id used to determine if the team is wait listed or not.

A small Code snippet describing how one of these option was achieved is given below:
if options["participant_type"] == "signed"
Team.where(:parent_id=> parent_id).find_each do |team|
TeamsUser.where(:team_id=> team.id).find_each do |team_user|
user = User.find(team_user.user_id)
if SignedUpTeam.where( :team_id => team.id).where(:is_waitlisted => [false, nil," ", ""]).present?
assignemnt_team = SignedUpTeam.where( :team_id => team.id).where(:is_waitlisted => [false, nil," ", ""]).first
topic = SignUpTopic.find(assignemnt_team.topic_id)
csv << [
user.name,
user.fullname,
user.email,
user.role.name,
user.parent.name,
user.email_on_submission,
user.email_on_review,
user.email_on_review_of_review,
team.id,
topic.topic_name,
"handle"
]
end
end
end

===UI Testing===
UI testing for the above was done by exporting Assignment Teams for a given assignment using all the above options individually and checking if the result actually matched what was expected. Example 'all' should export all the participants listed withing the assignment. 'Signed Up Team' gives all the participants who have signed up mapped to their teams and respective topics.
If you are signed in as Instructor:
Feature can be tested by clicking on add participants button in manage assignments and then clicking on export course participants at the bottom of the page. And then following the applicable option for testing the respective features described above.

==Ordering of Imported Fields (Issue 110)==
====Current Implementation====

Currently the order of the columns is preset and the user has to change the csv to match it.

=====Drawbacks and Solutions=====

This is inconvenient for the user to keep editing csv files. The solution is to allow users chose the order of the columns as it appears in their csv file. This is done by providing drop down fields with all the column name based on the model that the import is related to. User is free to change he order or keep it as default.

====New Implementation====
In the view we added the drop down fields based on the expected_fields

*Please choose the order of the columns here:<br/>
<%@array_expected_values.each{|field|%>
<%=select_tag 'import_field_[field]', options_for_select(@array_expected_values.collect.with_index.to_a,field)%><br/>
<%}%>

In the import_file_controller.rb we made addition to the start method. Here we also return an array of values from the expected_fields. We unpack the values like Team Member1,2...N by returning the maximum number of Team Members. Full code can be found in import_file_controller.rb

@array_expected_values = parse_line(@expected_fields,',',params)

Also in the import_file_controller.rb we added function that reorders the columns as they are expected by expertiza. As the user changed the order of the fields in the main import form this order is processed by the controller. The reorder function matches the field name in the default order with the position in the newly chosen order and reorders the data as it is read line by line from the csv file.

def reorder_row(row,params)
...

expected_fields_variable=expected_fields_variable_default.reject.with_index { |x,i| i > row.length-1 }
expected_fields_variable.each_with_index { |field, index|
custom_order[params["import_field_#{index}"]]=row[index]
}
expected_fields_variable.each_with_index { |field, index| return_row[index]=custom_order[field]}
return_row
end

====UI Testing====
To test this in the browser first need to be logged in as instructor. Then go to Manage -> Assignments -> Assignments tab. Then select to add teams to any assignment -> import teams. Here you would need to create a CSV file with the Team name and team members - separated by comma. The order of the column are arbitrary, just have to match them in the drop down fields provided. For the team members there are maximum drop down fields, but you only need to fill out the relevant once. It will know to ignore irrelevant columns.

Following are screenshots of the UI tests [http://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php/CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1656._Improve_imports/screenshots Screenshots110]

==Improvement Scope ==
The above Import as well as export functionalities that have been implemented in due course of the project have a scope for improvement. Imports and exports are functionalities that are used very often used to insert data as well to transfer data stored into the Models to external CSV files. Thus these features can be further tested using rspec tests as well as capybara and cucumber tests so as to make it fool proof. However these tests cannot be made such that they hamper the flexibility of the implementation to achieve a particular functionality.
Further We can also add options to handle duplicates as well as to filter out exports in other models as well, instead of the ones it is already present. Thus there is a scope of a lot more improvement to make Expertiza more user friendly.

==References==
1. [http://104.236.1.180:3000 Deployed demo link]

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1656. Improve imports/screenshots711

2016-11-04T19:32:20Z

Jwang59: /* Test Example */

==Fix Reviewer and Metareviewer Mappings (Issue711)==
====Test Example====

1. Log in as instructor6

2. Select "Manage Assignments" then click on the "Assign review" link for "Design exercise" assignment because it has a review strategy of "Instructor-Selected"

[[File:Review1.JPG]]

3. Click on Import reviewer mappings

[[File:Review2.JPG]]

4. Create an import file 1.csv with the Contributor and reviewers. The content of our 1.csv is like

[[File:Review3.JPG]]

5. Import the 1.csv file

[[File:Revirew4.JPG]]

6. Check that the reviewers "student6372" and "student6371" are successfully added to "Designexercise_Team 23"

[[File:Review5.JPG]]

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1656. Improve imports

2016-11-04T19:31:29Z

Jwang59: /* Import Sign Up Sheet (Issue153) */

== E1656. Improve imports ==

This page provides a description of the Expertiza based OSS project.

__TOC__

==Introduction to Expertiza==
[http://expertiza.ncsu.edu/ Expertiza] is an open source project based on [http://rubyonrails.org/ Ruby on Rails] framework.

==Project Description==
===About Import===
In Expertiza, various kinds of data may be imported from [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma-separated_values csv files], including users, participants in an assignemnt, topics and teams. When importing data, a corresponding csv file have to be composed. In a csv file, each new line represent a piece of datum and the different fields of a datum are separated by delimiters. But there are rough edges in the way these imports are done and certain other data that should be importable is not. This project focuses on implementing following tasks about data import functionality:

*When a team with a duplicate name is imported, one of the options is to rename the new team. There should also be an option to rename an existing team. See Issue 329.
*Review assignments (“reviewer mappings”) should be able to be imported, but cannot be imported. See Issue 711
*It should be possible to import a list of users who have signed up for topics, but this feature does not yet exist. See Issue 153.
*For every kind of data to be imported, Expertiza currently specifies the ordering of fields. This isn’t very flexible; it may require the user (an instructor) to edit an existing CSV file. It would be better if, after importing the data, Expertiza showed the data together with dropdowns containing the default field headers. (This is similar to the way Excel shows data when it is imported from a CSV file.) Then the user could change the dropdowns to cause a different ordering of fields. See Issue 110.
*Create a way to export a list of teams that have signed up for topics, and who are waitlisted for topics, as well as participants in an assignment who have not signed up for topics. Choose the format, but keep it as consistent as possible with the other export formats. This would help the professor when students ask him for advice on finding teammates. Extra Issue

The following tasks were listed as a requirement, but after careful examination it was determined that these tasks were already implemented
*The simplest fix: If I try to import topics, the import page gives me this message: “The import process expects the following columns:” but it doesn’t say what the columns are (topic number, topic name, category, number of slots, category)! It used to be in the system; please revert the change to fix this bug. See Issue 719.
*When teams are imported in order to insert new members, the members are not inserted. See Issue 328.
*It should be possible to leave off the final fields in a line of a CSV file. These fields are often not specified anyway. For example, if a password isn’t specified when a new user is created, the system generates a password (see Issue 183). When importing topics, topic categories are rarely specified. But if the final field is blank, the import requires the CSV line to end with “, “ (comma and space). This should be fixed for all imports.

==About Versions Controller==
Git is a popular version control system, As a part of the project, We have made use of git for the purpose of version control. Our repository is a fork of the original Expertiza repository on which we have collaborated our work. And the project has been submitted through a pull request.

==About Tests==
New features implemented can be tested through UI operations or add some Rspec functional tests. Through deployment link, users can do overall tests on these features, test some edge cases and add some new scenarios. Therefore, in this project, some simple scenarios are added to Rspec tests and most of the tests are done through UI operations. The deployed link for remote access is: [http://104.236.1.180:3000/ http://104.236.1.180:3000]

==Handle Duplicates (Issue329)==
====Current Implementation====

When a team with a duplicate name is imported, one of the options is to rename the new team. There should also be an option to rename an existing team. See Issue 329.
The current implementation allows the user to handle duplicates, by the following techniques
*ignore the new team
*replace the existing team with the new team
*insert any new members into the existing team
*rename the new team and import
*rename the existing team and import

=====Functionality=====

The above functionalities make it easier to achieve the goal of handling duplicates while importing.

=====Drawbacks and Solutions=====

The above set of functionalities do not allow User to ever rename an existing team, rather force him rename his own team.
Thus the above requirement provides the necessary freedom to the User by providing him the option to rename an already existing team.

====New Implementation====

The option has been implemented using the update functionality that is already present in rails models, to update existing values of Active Records. To implement this feature we have also made use of the functionality for generating team names, that is already present within the Team model.

A code snippet is given below:
if handle_dups == "renameOldTeam" # rename: rename new team
if teamtype.is_a?(CourseTeam)
CourseTeam.update(team.id, :name => self.generate_team_name(Course.find(id).name))
return name
elsif teamtype.is_a?(AssignmentTeam)
AssignmentTeam.update(team.id, :name => self.generate_team_name(Assignment.find(id).name))
return name
end
end

====UI Testing====
The Above feature has been tested from the UI using the both course Teams and Assignment Teams, where new teams were added with conflicting names and the rename existing team option was selected, which lead lead to the desired behavior, that is the team that was extant was renamed and new team was imported with the same name as that specified in the CSV file

The feature can be tested from Add teams option in manage assignments. From where one can import teams and choose the required feature.

==Fix Reviewer and Metareviewer Mappings (Issue711)==
====Current Implementation====

When an instructor tries to assign reviewers for an assignment, if the review strategy of the assignment is‘Instructor-Selected’, he could assign reviewers by directly importing the reviewer mappings. But now, when the instructor attempts to submit the import, the system will raise an argument error showing:

[[File:reviewfail.PNG]]

The import fails and, clearly, it's a bug in Expertiza.

====New Implementation====
To solve this problem, first refer to the view/review_mapping/_list_review_mappings.html.erb file and find out that the model to be imported is ReviewResponseMap. The import method in review_response_map.rb model file takes in 3 arguments which are row, _session and id. A code snippet of import_file_controller.rb (the import controller) is given below:
[[File:Reviewcode.PNG]]

Before we add the code in parentheses, the ReviewResponseMap model was not explicitly specified which case it belongs to and falls into the else statement where the import method takes in 4 arguments. That’s the reason of getting the “wrong number of argument” error. To resolve the problem, a "or params[:model] == 'ReviewResponseMap'" is inserted into the parentheses to make the import method of reviewer mappings takes in 3 arguments again and then we can correctly import the reviewer mappings. The recovery method for MetareviewResponseMap is exactly the same with this one by adding
"or params[:model] == 'MetareviewResponseMap'" statement into the parentheses.

====UI Testing====
1. Login as instructor. Click on ‘Manage Assignment’ to see all assignments in the database.

2. Among all the assignments, click the ‘Review strategy’ card in edit page and find out one assignment with 'Instructor-Selected' strategy (e.g. 'Design exercise'). Creating a new 'Instructor-Selected' assignment and add some participants to it is also applicable.

3. 'Assign reviewers' for this assignment and click on the 'Import reviewer mappings' on the bottom of the page.

4. Compose a csv file in the given format of 'Contributor, Reviewer1, Reviewer2, …, ReviewerN' and import the file. The ‘Contributor’ here is the name of a team in this assignment.

5. Go back to reviewer mappings page to check if the 'Reviewers of the Contributor' in the file are listed in the 'Reviewed By' section of the 'Contributors'.

Following are screenshots of the UI tests. [http://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php/CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1656._Improve_imports/screenshots711#Test_Example Screenshots711]

==Import Sign Up Sheet (Issue153)==
====Current Implementation====

When a signup sheet is used in Expertiza, users are expected to sign up for topics. But, the instructor might've taken signups offline, e.g., by passing around a signup sheet in class. If the signup are not taken online by the students, the instructor has to impersonate all the students one by one and sign them up for a topic, which is tedious.

====New Implementation====
To implement this new issue, a model which is in charge of creating a sign_up and SignedUpTeam should be located first. In SignUpSheet model, methods are designed for the creation of a sign_up and SignedUpTeam using the data from data base and the new implementation should create them from an imported file. Hence, an ''import'' method is added to this model and a code snippet of it is shown as:

[[File:Signupcode.PNG]]

This new method imports new sign_up data in a format of "Topic identifier, User1, User2". Users here are the ones who signed up for the topic with a certain identifier (id). Some edge cases are also taken into consideration in this method to prevent importing a non-existing team in this assignment, a non-existing user or a user who is not a participant of this assignment.
Next, a link on the view page needs to be created to access this method. The instructor can view the sign up sheet of an assignment under the "topic" card of the "edit" section. An "Import sign up sheet" button is added beside the "Import topic" link

[[File:Button.PNG]]

and the corresponding code should be inserted in the "view/sign_up_sheet/_add_topics/html.erb" file.

[[File:View.PNG]]

After all of this, the new feature is successfully implemented and the instructor can directly import a large offline sign up sheet without tedious impersonating. The whole process of importing sign ups works exactly the same as student online sign ups. If the assignment does not have a topic yet, the 'Import sign up sheet' link will be invisible unless a topic is created or imported. If a imported user does not have a team, he will be automatically assigned a team and sign up for the topic. If users imported exceeds the limit a certain topic can hold, the leftmost users in the file (like the earliest signed up users) will have the topic and those right(later signed up) users will be in the wait list.

====UI Testing====
1. Login as instructor. Click on 'Manage Assignment’ to see all assignments in the database.

2. Click on 'edit', go to 'topic' card and find the "Import sign up sheet" link.

3. Compose a csv file in the given format of 'Topic identifier, User1, User2, …' and import the file. The ‘Topic identifier’ here is the 'topic#' in the sign up sheet.

4. Go back to sign up sheet page to check if the 'Users' in the file and their 'Teams' are listed under the 'Topic names' section.

Following are screenshots of the UI tests. [http://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php/CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1656._Improve_imports/screenshots153 Screenshots]

==Export Assignment Participants (Extra Issue)==
===Current Implementation===
Current Implementation just allows users to Export the set of all Assignment Participants, of a given assignment. It doesn't allow any further filtering.

===Functionality===
The current functionality is very rigid and doesn't allow the user to know any more than the set of assignment Participants, which is also a major drawback

===New Implementation===
The new implementation allows user to export Assignment Participants in four ways.
* List of All Users mapped with team number and topic name who have signed up for an assignment topic
* List of All Users mapped with team number and topic name who are wait-listed for an assignment topic
* List of All Participants who haven't yet signed up for a topic and haven't formed teams yet
* List of All Participants

The functionality is present as a set of Radio buttons, which is checked by default to the fourth option that is to export all Participants. However that can be changed according to requirement.

The above has been implemented by creating a partial for the view to add the radio button. Further and If else bock has been used in the model, to identify the option selected and accordingly, on the required set of Rows are pushed to the csv file. To know whether a User has signed up or not for a topic, The SignedUpTeam model is used and to find if the team is wait listed or not, the is_waitlisted boolean value id used to determine if the team is wait listed or not.

A small Code snippet describing how one of these option was achieved is given below:
if options["participant_type"] == "signed"
Team.where(:parent_id=> parent_id).find_each do |team|
TeamsUser.where(:team_id=> team.id).find_each do |team_user|
user = User.find(team_user.user_id)
if SignedUpTeam.where( :team_id => team.id).where(:is_waitlisted => [false, nil," ", ""]).present?
assignemnt_team = SignedUpTeam.where( :team_id => team.id).where(:is_waitlisted => [false, nil," ", ""]).first
topic = SignUpTopic.find(assignemnt_team.topic_id)
csv << [
user.name,
user.fullname,
user.email,
user.role.name,
user.parent.name,
user.email_on_submission,
user.email_on_review,
user.email_on_review_of_review,
team.id,
topic.topic_name,
"handle"
]
end
end
end

===UI Testing===
UI testing for the above was done by exporting Assignment Teams for a given assignment using all the above options individually and checking if the result actually matched what was expected. Example 'all' should export all the participants listed withing the assignment. 'Signed Up Team' gives all the participants who have signed up mapped to their teams and respective topics.
If you are signed in as Instructor:
Feature can be tested by clicking on add participants button in manage assignments and then clicking on export course participants at the bottom of the page. And then following the applicable option for testing the respective features described above.

==Ordering of Imported Fields (Issue 110)==
====Current Implementation====

Currently the order of the columns is preset and the user has to change the csv to match it.

=====Drawbacks and Solutions=====

This is inconvenient for the user to keep editing csv files. The solution is to allow users chose the order of the columns as it appears in their csv file. This is done by providing drop down fields with all the column name based on the model that the import is related to. User is free to change he order or keep it as default.

====New Implementation====
In the view we added the drop down fields based on the expected_fields

*Please choose the order of the columns here:<br/>
<%@array_expected_values.each{|field|%>
<%=select_tag 'import_field_[field]', options_for_select(@array_expected_values.collect.with_index.to_a,field)%><br/>
<%}%>

In the import_file_controller.rb we made addition to the start method. Here we also return an array of values from the expected_fields. We unpack the values like Team Member1,2...N by returning the maximum number of Team Members. Full code can be found in import_file_controller.rb

@array_expected_values = parse_line(@expected_fields,',',params)

Also in the import_file_controller.rb we added function that reorders the columns as they are expected by expertiza. As the user changed the order of the fields in the main import form this order is processed by the controller. The reorder function matches the field name in the default order with the position in the newly chosen order and reorders the data as it is read line by line from the csv file.

def reorder_row(row,params)
...

expected_fields_variable=expected_fields_variable_default.reject.with_index { |x,i| i > row.length-1 }
expected_fields_variable.each_with_index { |field, index|
custom_order[params["import_field_#{index}"]]=row[index]
}
expected_fields_variable.each_with_index { |field, index| return_row[index]=custom_order[field]}
return_row
end

====UI Testing====
To test this in the browser first need to be logged in as instructor. Then go to Manage -> Assignments -> Assignments tab. Then select to add teams to any assignment -> import teams. Here you would need to create a CSV file with the Team name and team members - separated by comma. The order of the column are arbitrary, just have to match them in the drop down fields provided. For the team members there are maximum drop down fields, but you only need to fill out the relevant once. It will know to ignore irrelevant columns.

Following are screenshots of the UI tests [http://wiki.expertiza.ncsu.edu/index.php/CSC/ECE_517_Fall_2016/E1656._Improve_imports/screenshots Screenshots110]

==Improvement Scope ==
The above Import as well as export functionalities that have been implemented in due course of the project have a scope for improvement. Imports and exports are functionalities that are used very often used to insert data as well to transfer data stored into the Models to external CSV files. Thus these features can be further tested using rspec tests as well as capybara and cucumber tests so as to make it fool proof. However these tests cannot be made such that they hamper the flexibility of the implementation to achieve a particular functionality.
Further We can also add options to handle duplicates as well as to filter out exports in other models as well, instead of the ones it is already present. Thus there is a scope of a lot more improvement to make Expertiza more user friendly.

==References==
1. [http://104.236.1.180:3000 Deployed demo link]

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1656. Improve imports/screenshots153

2016-11-04T19:30:05Z

Jwang59: /* Test Example */

==Import Sign Up Sheet (Issue711)==
====Test Example====

1. Log in as instructor6

2. Select "Manage Assignments" then click on the "Edit" link for "Test_Import_SignUpSheet" assignment. This assignment is created for this tests and participants are added.

[[File:Signup1.JPG]]

[[File:Signup2.JPG]]

3. Under the "topic" card, some topics are added for tests. Feel free to add some new topics or participants for test use.

[[File:Signup3.JPG]]

4. Create an import file with the Topic identifiers and users. The content of our csv file is like

[[File:Signup4.JPG]]

5. Import the file and check that the user "student3383" and "student4444" are successfully assigned a team and signed up to topic "Test1". As there's only one slot available, the second imported user "student4444" is signed up "waitlisted".

[[File:Signup5.JPG]]

6. Import files with non-existing topics, non-existing users or users who are not in this assignment and check that corresponding error messages are given.

CSV file with incorrect topic identifier:

[[File:Signup6.JPG]]

[[File:Signup7.JPG]]

CSV file with non-existing user:

[[File:Signup8.JPG]]

[[File:Signup9.JPG]]

CSV file with user not in this assignment:

[[File:Signup10.JPG]]

[[File:Signup11.JPG]]

File:Signup11.JPG

2016-11-04T19:28:20Z

Jwang59:

File:Signup10.JPG

2016-11-04T19:28:13Z

Jwang59:

File:Signup9.JPG

2016-11-04T19:28:06Z

Jwang59:

File:Signup8.JPG

2016-11-04T19:27:59Z

Jwang59:

File:Signup7.JPG

2016-11-04T19:27:52Z

Jwang59:

File:Signup6.JPG

2016-11-04T19:27:42Z

Jwang59:

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1656. Improve imports/screenshots153

2016-11-04T19:15:02Z

Jwang59: /* Test Example */

==Import Sign Up Sheet (Issue711)==
====Test Example====

1. Log in as instructor6

2. Select "Manage Assignments" then click on the "Edit" link for "Test_Import_SignUpSheet" assignment. This assignment is created for this tests and participants are added.

[[File:Signup1.JPG]]

[[File:Signup2.JPG]]

3. Under the "topic" card, some topics are added for tests. Feel free to add some new topics or participants for test use.

[[File:Signup3.JPG]]

4. Create an import file with the Topic identifiers and users. The content of our csv file is like

[[File:Signup4.JPG]]

5. Import the file and check that the user "student3383" and "student4444" are successfully assigned a team and signed up to topic "Test1". As there's only one slot available, the second imported user "student4444" is signed up "waitlisted".

[[File:Signup5.JPG]]

6. Import files with "student6372" and "student6371"

[[File:Review5.JPG]]

File:Signup5.JPG

2016-11-04T19:09:01Z

Jwang59: uploaded a new version of "File:Signup5.JPG"

File:Signup3.JPG

2016-11-04T19:06:23Z

Jwang59: uploaded a new version of "File:Signup3.JPG"

File:Signup2.JPG

2016-11-04T19:03:52Z

Jwang59: uploaded a new version of "File:Signup2.JPG"

CSC/ECE 517 Fall 2016/E1656. Improve imports/screenshots153

2016-11-04T19:03:14Z

Jwang59: Created page with "==Import Sign Up Sheet (Issue711)== ====Test Example==== 1. Log in as instructor6 2. Select "Manage Assignments" then click on the "Edit" link for "Test_Import_SignUpSheet" as..."

File:Signup2.JPG

2016-11-04T19:02:38Z

Jwang59: uploaded a new version of "File:Signup2.JPG"

File:Signup5.JPG

2016-11-04T19:00:49Z

Jwang59: