Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Gary Anderson -
Number of replies: 17
Nicolas and Helen asked to get community feedback on revising some of the terminology for improving usability in gradebook in 1.9 an beyond.

For background, many of the terms seemed to be sensible to the developers, but they were not intuitive to teacher in the field. Hence, special training has been required and remembering the meanings from term to term is also a problem.

Here are my suggestions and an attached page from the gradebook configuration page (Categories and items) with my suggested improvements

  • Aggregation -> Summarize by (Aggregation is a pretty technical term not used in grading)
  • Weighted mean of grades -> Weighted grades (Simplifies the term and people don't think of this as taking a mean)
  • Mean of grades -> Average of percentages (This method converts grade items to percentages and averages them. This term is more intuitive)
  • Simple weighted mean of grades -> Average of points (This common method totals points earned and divides by points possible.
  • Mean of grades (with extra credit) -> Eliminate and implement extra credit in a standard way
  • Mode of grades -> Eliminate or comment out in the source code to simplify
  • Multipliplicator -> Multiple grade by (The original term is too technical an not intuitive)
  • Offset -> Add to grade (The original term is too technical an not intuitive)
Please comment on whether you agree that these terms would improve usability, if you have other suggestions, an if you think he change is worth it.


Attachment NewGBTerms.png
In reply to Gary Anderson

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Barry Oosthuizen -
Hi Gary,

I would understand Aggregation -> Calculation Method or Grade Calculation better.

The other suggestions are great and would make it much easier to understand and to explain to others.
In reply to Barry Oosthuizen

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Gary Anderson -

Thanks, Barry and Marc.  I also agree that replacing the "aggregate" type words with words based on "calculate" gets at the issue of using plain language (and avoiding technical jargon) that I was trying to get at with the original suggestion.

In reply to Gary Anderson

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Marc Grober -
Much much better but I am concerned that we have gone from too technical to too general... for example, "Summarize by" ...

Also, weighted causes confusion in aggregation as well as to items.....

Don't know what to offer, but I think you are certainly moving in the right direction!
In reply to Gary Anderson

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Elena Ivanova -
I am going to transfer my suggestions from here, plus comment more.
However, before we jump into suggestions for Categories and Items interface, I think we need to know/decide if it will actually stay that way, or if the gradebook will use the LSU format.
<insert Question to Nicolas here!...> evil

Note: We have points vs grades language in the gradebook. We either need to stick to one word, or decide how and when to separate those.

p.s. this new css is breaking my tables sad

Column titles in "Categories and Items" interface:



Current
 		Suggestion 1
 		Suggestion 2
Aggregation Summarize by (Aggregation is a pretty technical term not used in grading) Calculation Method
(this last on is from Mark. I think it is the most straightforward)
Weight or extra credit
 -
 (I am lost. How this one is different form current Multiplicator?)
Max grade
-
 (I am lost again. Supposedly, one may type different number than sum for a category . But this is not working for me)
Aggregate only non-empty grades
 Include only non-empty grades
 Include only non-empty grades
Aggregate including subcategories
 Summarize including subcategories
 Include the Subcategories
Include outcomes in aggregation
 Include outcomes in summaries
Include the Outcomes
Drop the lowest
 -
 Drop X lowest or Drop X of the lowest attempts
(X helps to understand that you need to type the number of items. Otherwise it sounds like "drop just One lowest item")
Keep the highest
 -

 Keep X highest or Keep X of the highest attempts
Multiplicator
 Multiple grade by
(The original term is too technical an not intuitive)
 Multiple grade by X
Offset
Add to grade
(The original term is too technical an not intuitive)
 Add X to grade
Actions
-
 - (ok)
Select
 -
 - (ok)


Dropdowns in the current "Aggregation" column:



Current
 		Suggestion 1
 		Suggestion2
Mean of grades Average of percentages
(This method converts grade items to percentages and averages them. This term is more intuitive) 		Average/Mean or
Average/Mean of Points
(I do not think we need to add anything else, since it is intuitive enough. This one should be 4th in the dropdown)
Weighted mean of grades - Weighted grades
(Simplifies the term and people don't think of this as taking a mean) 		Weighted mean or Weighted mean of points.
(This one should be 5th in the dropdown)
Simple weighted mean of grades Average of points - thinking
Mean of grades (with extra credit) (Eliminate and implement extra credit in a standard way) - thinking
Lowest Grad -
 - (ok)
(This one should be 3rd in the dropdown)
Highest Grade -
 - (ok)
(This one should be 2nd in the dropdown)
Mode of Grades (Eliminate or comment out in the source code to simplify) - (ok)
(I think it is ok to have this , but Admin should be able not to "offer" it)
Sum of Grades
-
 - (ok)
(this one should be 1st in the dropdown and selected by default, since it is most commonly used)




Dropdown menu on the left (hopefully, we will convert it to tabs soon)

Current Suggested
View View reports
~ Grader Report ~ Course Grades
~ Outcomes Report ~ Outcomes
~ User Report ~ By User
~ Overview Report ~ My Grades
Edit Edit - (ok)
~ Categories and Items ~ Categories and Items - (ok)
~ Scales ~ Scales - (ok)
~ Letters ~ Letters - (ok)
~ Course Settings ~ Gradebook Settings
~ My Report preferences ~ My Own Report Preferences
Import from Import from - (ok)
Export to Export to - (ok)
In reply to Elena Ivanova

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Robert Russo -
Great suggestions guys. We are struggling with nomenclature as well over here at LSU.


We recently changed multiplicator to Curve To. We also changed how the user inputs the curve to data into the system as well. By default, the curve to item is greyed out and requires the user to click change curve to.

When the user changes curve to, it is based on the max grade for the item. So if an item is worth 10 pts, then the user can curve to 15 points. This has the same effect as a multiplier of 1.5.

there are a couple of screenshots attached.

In reply to Robert Russo

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Gary Anderson -
Robert:

I like that idea of "curve to" and the extra step needed to make sure that that it is not set too casually.

Perhaps for your feature in core, the multiply-by could be horizontally adjacent to the Curve-to. Clicking on the button would switch modes (disabling the setting of the other item), and javascript could show the conversion between multiply-by and curve to.

I don't think that would cause much confusion by itself and would make clear how the two are related.
In reply to Elena Ivanova

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Gary Anderson -
Elena:

Thanks for moving this along and your other suggestions for simplifying the gradebook.

A few notes:

1. What is currently called Sum of grades and Simple weighted mean of grades (average of points) are almost identical. In both cases, activities with more points contribute more than those with fewer. The second method has the benefit that, by default, items not yet graded are not factored into the total. Hence a student can determine, based on what has been graded, that they currently have a B+, etc.

2. I agree that Multiplicator, the ability to set category values (instead of having them computed from the items in them), and a separate weight field is very confusing. All seem to allow scores to be scaled in a very similar way. I think that weight does this best, and Multiplicator, if the name is changed and kept as advanced, does not do much harm. I have suggested to Nicolas that he not have category values be an editable field in the category and items setting page to help avoid confusion.

3. While I agree with you that Mean of grades seems to be the "average of points", but that is not how it is computed. Values are converted to percents first so that every item has equal weight. The phrase "Average of percentages" best describes what a teacher would be thinking if they did it manually. See strategry 2 in http://docs.moodle.org/en/Gradebook_1.9_Tutorial.

Thanks for your input and thoughts. Based on this and other comments received in this discussion I will ty to come up with a revised list in a few days that addresses the various observations.

--Gary
In reply to Elena Ivanova

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Kathy Cannon -
I think many of the suggestions have merit. However, I would prefer to make changes via the language editing page on our sites, rather than having the common confusion of re-learning the phrasings discussions here at the Moodle site. For example, we'd often be saying, "I have x suggestion about the presentation of the Calculation Method (formerly Aggregation) and the Course Grades (formerly Grader Report)...etc."

After carefully reviewing the terminology being suggested, I vote conservatively to avoid changing most of these terms now that they have been introduced as defaults. In the exceptions noted below, I favor re-phrasings that add to the original.

Other thoughts/votes:
Grades > Points
We need to avoid saying points and stick with "grades" as common nomenclature for American English en_us (and "marks" for other English speaking groups). IMHO, points can have too many meanings.

Aggregate > Summarize
Summarize is too similar to "sum" and would be objectionable to our Math faculty. I think most graders will be able to understand aggregation.

Aggregation Method > Calculation Method
Keep the same words used now and add the word Method. A calculation is a method and there are other functions that allow the user to set a calculation method. Saying Aggregation Calculation is also descriptive and yet awkward. With new gradebook 1.9 users I am finding that they need to distinguish settings that affect the calculation/method of aggregating vs. settings that affect the display of the aggregation result. Aggregation Method could replace Aggregation on the category editing page (grade/edit/tree/category.php) without increasing confusion.

On the Grader Report page (grade/report/grader/index.php):
My report preferences (tab) > My report display Preferences

On Category editing page (grade/edit/tree/category.php):
My report preferences > My category display preferences

And I agree and vote for the idea of changing the drop down menu item below:
Course Settings > Gradebook Settings (or Course Gradebook Settings)

Yes to all of these:
Add X to grade, Multiply grade by X, Drop X Lowest Grades, Keep X Highest Grades.

These are all improvements in the same approach, they clarify by adding to the existing default phrasing.

- Kathy C
Brandeis University
In reply to Kathy Cannon

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Gary Anderson -
Thanks for your thoughts, Kathy. I was hoping to also hear the more conservative view of caution in terms of preserving the training of faculty whom are currently using the system.

Still, I find that at would never use the term "aggregate" when talking to a student or a colleague about a grade computation, or "simple weighted mean of grades" to indicated that their grades was points earned divided by total points assigned, etc.. But I have been hoping to see if other English speaking countries use aggregate, and similar terms, for assigning computing grades.

Probably the best thing I can do is come up with a conservative list that considers the existing terms, and a second list that would be the best choice of those new to Moodle and see which list is the optimal approach.

And, again, I would love to hear from those from a diverse region to make sure that these terms are not too focused on a single cultural background.

Thanks for your perspective. It is very helpful.

Take care,

--Gary

Gary Anderson
Math Department Chair and Moodle Master
Gary Anderson
In reply to Gary Anderson

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Gary Anderson -
January 31 changes

I have made several adjustments based on suggestions received.

Please check out the page: http://test.moodle.org/1.9/grade/edit/tree/index.php?id=4

with

username: teacher
password: testm00dle

and post further ideas. After I get any more feedback, I will update the tracker with a list of suggestions.

--Gary
In reply to Gary Anderson

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Paul Ganderton -
Hi Gary,

I've just had a chance to look at your changes. A great improvement and far more intuitive. However, there are a few aspects I'd like to see reviewed alongside the other excellent contributions in this thread:

a) The colour used in the 'categories and items' part was very useful - could it be extended to the 'view' page as well? Colour aids understanding and connections between data. When I tested view and clicked on the '20 mark homework', when I returned the coloum was orange. Was that to show wher I'd been?

b) I see the debate on nomenclature and terminology is going to continue. Might I suggest we have a complete table of all terms used in gradebook so that we can see what is used where. I came across two different uses for "outcome" once (sorry, forgot where) but it did highlight the need for careful application in the use of terms. This is not being pedantic - each terms needs to be carefully defined. I'm not sure we can't use terms like "aggregate" providing it is carefully documented and an example is given;

c) there is a need for gradebook to be fully documented in ways it can be easily searched through. I know we have forums - that's where I get most of my problems solved but I'd love to be able to show my colleagues a book/monograph where gradebook workings , terms, icons (one per definition please to avoid confusion - another issue I think) are made explicit. There's great functionality but a guide on how to use/change items and one discussing the ideas behind grading ("grade to curve" being a case in point) would be useful. I know Moodle must have boundaries but some idea of how teaching and learning might be improved through Moodle's functionality would probably win over a few more converts.

Given this flurry of activity I am looking forward to seeing the results.
In reply to Paul Ganderton

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Gary Anderson -
Good points, Paul.

All of the strings which seem candidates for change are in the file /lang/en_utf8/grades.php which you can browse here: http://cvs.moodle.org/moodle/lang/en_utf8/grades.php?revision=1.111.2.60&view=markup&pathrev=MOODLE_19_STABLE

I also agree that once documentation that gives a global overview of the gradebook and the meaning of its terms would be helpful, although the more intuitive the terms are, the easier that will be to construct.

--Gary
In reply to Gary Anderson

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Paul Ganderton -
Hi Gary,

Thanks for the comments. I have just downloaded the file to find over 500 lines of code! I will comb through this and identify terms/conflicts/ideas etc. They do insist I teach a full load so my next post may take a few days!!sad

Paul
In reply to Gary Anderson

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Paul Ganderton -
Hi Gary,

Apologies for the delay in replying. This was a far more difficult task than I had imagined. I attach a file which shows the code lines you mentioned and my comments. I've tried to focus on clarity of term-usage and ideally make it more usable by the average teacher. This is my concern because if they are not in to Moodle, any excuse will do. The gradebook is clearly more complex than I had imagined.

My comments are offered in the spirit of moving forward. Some aspects I've never met before so my remarks may well cause mirth in some. My main goals have been those I posted about on other occasions:

1. uniformity of terminology to improve useability
2. keeping it as simple as possible
3. suggesting ways we might document the gradebook to help more users.

I hope this helps the debate.

Kind regards,

Paul
In reply to Paul Ganderton

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Gary Anderson -
Thanks for the ideas, Paul. I'll see what I can do about integrating them with the other things we have heard and come up with an updated list.

--Gary
In reply to Gary Anderson

Re: Community input requested on some Gradebook 1.9 terms

by Gary Anderson -
Thanks, everyone, for you input.

While I think there is general consensus that a number of the gradebook terms that make sense to programmers may not correspond to ways we as teachers describe grading to our students, colleagues, etc..., it is harder to know what to do about it. Clearly, making changes at this point cause problems with documentation, current training, etc.

One part of the solution is just to accept that a certain amount of required training is needed to use the tool.

In addition, instructions on how to locally change the language packs locally can address the concern for those who still would like the strings to be different. For example, if the grade.php file that is attached is placed by the site administrator into the folder /moodledata/lang/en_utf8_local, then it can be the starting point for a site to customize these strings to be somewhat more intuitive.

Unless one wants to be especially aggressive in dealing with this issue, it seems like the above two steps can be approaches that can address some of the concerns.

Take care,

--Gary