Show Advanced KnowledgeHide Advanced Knowledge

Matching Question

1 Description

It should be possible to use pictures in Matching Questions. Any Term can be a picture and/or a text as well any Definition can be a picture and/or a text. Any match between these two types of objects should be possible.

It should also be possible to assign a number of Terms with a different number of Definitions and vice versa. We would call this 1:n-matches, n:1-matches. This should be a replacement or an enhancement to the existuing Matching Question.

2 Status

• Scheduled for Release: Release 5.0
• Funding: Funded by Universität Bern
• Development: Feature is to be developed by Databay AG
• Contract settled: Yes
• Tested by / status: Yvonne Seiler iLUB, tested on 4.5

3 Additional Information

• If you want to know more about this feature, its implementation or funding, please contact: Brigitte Schmucki / brigitte.schmucki@net.ethz.ch

4 Discussion

Yvonne Seiler, 18. Mai 2010: In tests I'm missing the possibility to allocate several objects to one image or text too. At the time on the matching question there's only the possibility to allocate one thing to another. But there are questions, where multiple objects (text or grafic) should be allocated to the same answer field. It would be nice, when the matching question (perhaps the new question type Simple Drag and Drop too) would be expanded with the possibility not only to realise 1:1-relations but also 1:n-relations. Perhaps the "matching question" in the test could be expanded.

JF 31 May 2010: We highly appreciate this idea.

HJ, 15.3.2013: This is still an open feature-request, isn`t it? Funding is possible by Universität Bern

JF 15 Apr 2013: We still appreciate this idea and schedule it for 4.4. The use in learning modules should also be supported.

BH 13 Jun 2013:
 
At the time being any term can be a picture and/or a text as well as any definition can be a picture and/or a text, so here is no change required. The configuration of multiple matching terms for a single definition is possible, too. The only change I can identify would be the possibility to assign multiple terms to a single definition or to assign a single term to multiple definitions during the test pass. In consequence the terms have to be left on the right after dropping it on a definition, so you can drag them again.
 

• How would you expect the behaviour of the screen? Should the multiple terms per definition be arranged vertically or horizontally?
• How would you expect the configuration possibilities? I imagine a setting with two values (1:1 / n:n) that controls the response behavior.

YS&HL 18 Jun 2013:

• For screen design we have a proposal (see mockup).
• The configuration setting with two values (1:1 / n:n) would be a good implementation. Please discuss also this solution: It would be more easier, if test administrators doesn't have to decide if they want to use a 1:1 or a n:n matching. Could it be possible that they hasn't to decide between both possibilities in a setting, but only the matching pairs would define if it's a 1:1 or a n:n matching. So f.e. if test admins create for each definition one term, it's a 1:1 matching. If they create for definitions more possible terms, it's a n:n matching (see screenshot).

BH & MB 15 July 2013: We highly appreciate the extension of this question type by adding the possibility to require n:n matches as correct answer.
 

• A new setting for this question type is to be implemented (1:1 / n:n). It controls the behaviour of the question during the test pass.
• The calculation of reached points is to be conformed for the new n:n response mode.
• The presentation and handling of the question during the test pass is to be implemented regarding to the mockups of HL and YS added on 18 Jun 2013.

Since it is already possible to define definition-term-pairs in a n:n way, it is also possible to define two pairs with same definition but different terms and different score. Up to now the student can only match one of these pairs, so only one of the pairs score can be reached. By omitting the setting, that differentiates between the 1:1 and the n:n mode, the student gets able to reach the score for both pairs.

JF 16 Sep 2013: We still appreciate this feature for 4.4, if not possible it could be implemented for 4.5 as well. Please also update the javascript implementation used in SCORM / Learning Modules.

JF 13 Oct 2014: We finally accept this feature.

5 Implementation

MJ 08 May 2014: Implemented and integrated into v4.5.0 Alpha by Björn Heyser

6 Test Cases

YS, 21 July 2014: Test cases for this feature are collected by iLUB from Universität Bern on the authority of Databay.

initial = must be tested in first testing only
wk = (dt. wiederkehrend) must be tested for every new ILIAS-version

Initial position

1. Add question "Matching Question" to a test.

 
TAB "Edit Question"

1. Matching Mode
   1. Choose "One Term matches one definition".
   2. Choose "One or more terms match one or more definitions".
2. Definitions and Terms
   1. Adding several definitions (text) and several terms (text).
   2. Adding several definitions (image) and several terms (image).
   3. Adding several definitions (text and image) and several terms (text and image).
3. Matching Pairs
   1. If "One Term matches one definition"
      1. Every definition needs one term.
      2. Give negative points for wrong matching pairs.
   2. If "One or more terms match one or more definitions"
      1. Every definition can match one or more terms.
      2. Give negative points for wrong matching pairs.

STARTING TEST
<ol class="ilc_list_o_NumberedList"/>

1. If "One Term matches one definition"
   1. Term is available only once.
   2. Term can't be placed in a definition box, if there is another term inside.
2. If "One or more terms match one or more definitions"
   1. Term can be reused sveral times.
   2. Term can be placed in a definition box, even if there is another term inside.
   3. Term can be placed in several definition boxes.
   4. Term can't be placed several times in the same box (only once).
3. All Terms can be rearranged or put back to the stack on the right side.

7 Follow up

Jour Fixe, September 14, 2015: After implementing the feature and publishing it in 5.0 a conceptual problem has been reported, see Mantis #16539, #16540, #16538, #16386. The problem exists only in ILIAS learning modules where the former implementation allowed to create 1:n relations (prohibited in the test object). There are learning modules created in 4.4 that are not running as expected under 5.0.

We assume that a bug fix could re-establish the former behaviour at least in ILIAS LM - but would also highly appreciated in tests: We introduce a third matching option "One term matches one or more definitions (1:n)" and migrate existing questions with 1:n relation to this mode. A final implementation has to be discussed with the test maintainer Björn Heyser.