2011-Nov-1 Meeting Notes

Samigo Working Group Meeting Notes
Date: Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Time:   11am PDT  / Noon MDT / 2-3 EDT / 18:00 UCT
Phone number: (317) 278-7008 Access Code: 484896#
Team Pages in Confluence:

Agenda
2.9 QA
      https://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/SAM/QA
2.10         

Attendance:

  • Jackie Mai, Stanford University
  • Keli Amann, Stanford University
  • Lynn Ward, Indiana University
  • Ken Romeo, Stanford University
  • Makoto Tsuichitani, Stanford University
  • Jim Mezzanotte, rSmart
  • Andrea Schmidt, Indiana University
  • Bryan Holladay, Longsight
  • Sam ottenhoff?
  • Megan May 

Meeting Notes:
QA

  • Andrea and Jasmine haven't had a chance to test samigo 2.9 really to test due to local testing; Jim is volunteering but needs to be walked through
  • Lynn asks it worth doing a test fest where we all just agree to set aside an hour or two to test samigo, regardless of background. Something with test plans as opposed to adhoc.
  • Andrea has reviewed export/import, auhtoring and part of delivery
  • should probably test all individual JIRAs that are new to 2.9. Stanford has usually tested the things we donated.
  • Maybe we do testfest next meeting.

Settings revamp: regarding design in https://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/SAM/Settings+rework

  • Clustered settings: People liked reducing settings clustered from 14 to 4
  • Presets: Lynn suggested that presets move up because they also applied to feedback, not just one setting. Ken said after meetings that often, instructors just clone an assignment with the presets they wanted and delete the content out of it
  • customized settings for overrides: Lynn kind of liked that this was able to address multiple settings per group or individual exception in a way that Kristol's didn't. 
  • Indiana also has a patch they want to contribute which allows you to associate different assessments to gradebook item. She said that this patch is for a larger number of use cases than customized settings discussed above, since you could associate a paper test, or a completely different test with the same gradebook item. 
  • So Keli's question is whether the override part of reworked settings design is needed. after meeting. You can create special sections with individual students and set up a test just for them, then use Indianas's proposed patch so their test results flow into the same gradebook item as the rest of the class (the only drawback is that the special section shows up in all other applications that are group aware). Ken says that even without the patch or redesign, you can just fill individuals' alternative assignment scores manually on the main assessment--would they even find this easier Jackie pointed out that Mneme does allow overrides thought.

Indiana has more things to contribute-- Edit test that are publish