Individual Assessment: Improve Participants Table

1 Initial Problem

With "Use Presentation Table for Participants in Individual Assessments" the Participants Table in the Individual Assessment was replaced with the Presentation Table from the UI-Framework. The replacement was performed rather naively by more or less just moving the various data fields to the Presentation Table. When a new tester (thx Colin!) took over the testing of the object, he unearthed some usability problems: #27369, #27358, #27367, #27371.

These might or might not have been existed previously to the introduction of the Presentation Table. However, the feedback is still valuable and hints at the possibility of usability improvements of the table.

Therefore, we want to look at various use cases of the table and improve the table according to the requirements in different usage scenarios:

• Picking the current examinee when the examination is just happening.
• Finishing the record of an examination.
• Correcting a record after examination was finished.
• Adding and removing participants.

2 Conceptual Summary

The fields and information in the participants table are adjusted to give more plausible and useful information for various use cases:

• tell why certain actions are not possible
• make transparent who can modify records

3 User Interface Modifications

3.1 List of Affected Views

{Please list all views (screens) of ILIAS that should be modified, newly introduced or removed.}

3.2 User Interface Details

{For each of these views please list all user interface elements that should be modified, added or removed. Please provide the textual appearance of the UI elements and their interactive behaviour.}

3.3 New User Interface Concepts

{If the proposal introduces any completely new user interface elements, you might consult UI Kitchen Sink in order to find the necessary information to propose new UI-Concepts. Note that any maintainer might gladly assist you with this.}

4 Technical Information

{The maintainer has to provide necessary technical information, e.g. dependencies on other ILIAS components, necessary modifications in general services/architecture, potential security or performance issues.}

5 Privacy Information

{ Please list all personal data that will need to be stored or processed to implement this feature. For each date give a short explanation why it is necessary to use that date. }

6 Security Implications

{ Does the feature include any special security relevant changes, e.g. the introducion of new endpoints or other new possible attack vectors. If yes, please explain these implications and include a commitment to deliver a written security concept as part of the feature development. This concept will need an additional approvement by the JourFixe. }

7 Contact

• Author of the Request: {Please add your name.}
• Maintainer: {Please add your name before applying for an initial workshop or a Jour Fixe meeting.}
• Implementation of the feature is done by: {The maintainer must add the name of the implementing developer.}

8 Funding

If you are interest in funding this feature, please add your name and institution to this list.

• …

9 Discussion

10 Implementation

{The maintainer has to give a description of the final implementation and add screenshots if possible.}

Test Cases

Test cases completed at {date} by {user}

• {Test case number linked to Testrail} : {test case title}

Approval

Approved at {date} by {user}.