Local Mark Schemas in Repo Objects

1 Initial Problem

Mark schemas need to fit highly individualised needs in many learning scenarios. While centrally administered mark schemas may be a good solution for highly standadised / regulated scenarios (such as exams), they might not meet the demands in small, freely designed learning environments such as ILIAS course rooms for small facultative seminars when examination offices are not involved or when intructors want to manage marking an grading internally in their courses before deriving a final "official" mark to pass on to the examination office.

Instructors may very well use centrally provided mark schemas as a starting point for adaptation, but they will not want to fit their didactical concept into a small set of centrally available mark schemas.

2 Conceptual Summary

It should be possible, to select a mark schema for repository objects (courses, groups, tests, execises, individual assessments, ...) from a set of centrally provided mark schemas. However, it should, in addition, be possible to customize the mark schema to fit the needs of the respective didactical scenario.

For example, an instructor should be able to create two tests in their courses and have the mark schemas in both tests vary in terms of how many percent of possibly reachable points should be marked with grades 1, .., 6. While Test A might be passed with a "1"only if 95% of possible points have been reached, Test B might yield mark "1" already by getting 90% of the points available.

Using individual / custom mark schemas should not be the default case. It should be a deleiberate choice of a course admin to do so. Thus, the process of customization should be conducted in this order:

1. User creates a repo object and work on its content
2. User reviews the lists of mark schemas, has the chance of having a detailed (read only) look at the mark schema as such and finally chooses a mark schema from the list of centrally provided mark schemas.
3. The mark schema is assigned to the repo object.
4. The user now has the chance to hit the button "Customize" mark schema
5. By customizing the mark schema, the content of the selected schema will be "copied". In the backgroud a new mark schema will be created, attached and filled with the content of the previously selected mark schema. The new mark schema is not connected in anymore to the "original" mark schema it has been "copied" from.

A customizied mark schema may...

• contains more or less marks / levels
• different short / long names of the grade levels
• a different grading schema
• different percentages for each mark / level

1. User creates a repo object and work on its content
2. User reviews the lists of mark schemas, has the chance of having a detailed (read only) look at the makr schema as such and finally chooses a mark schema from the list of centrally provided mark schemas.
3. The mark schema is assigned to the repo object.
4. The user now has the chance to hit the button "Customize" mark schema
5. By customizing the mark schema, the content of the selected schema will be "preserved". In the backgroud a new mark schema will be created, attached and filled with the content of the previously selected mark schema. The new mark schema is not connected in anymore to the "original" mark schema it had b way 

3 User Interface Modifications

3.1 List of Affected Views

•  [Grading] --> Mark Schema

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. }

3.4 Accessibility Implications

{ If the proposal contains potential accessibility issues that are neither covered by existing UI components nor clarified by guidelines, please list them here. For every potential issue please either propose a solution or write down a short risk assessment about potential fallout if there would be no solution for the issue. }

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

none

6 Security

no

7 Contact

• Author of the Request: { Glaubitz, Marko [mglaubitz]}
• Maintainer: tba
  
• Implementation of the feature is done by: tba

8 Funding

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

• bwILIAS / Universität Freiburg

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}.