See also MDL-43973.
I would like to know what you folks think.
It would be great if you could add the OU drag and drop question types to Moodle 2.7!
What are the arguments against adding these types?
I got a couple of "usefuls" for my request for reasons against so I will give a some pro's and cons.
Reasons to include in Core Moodle
The current core Cloze syntax is hard to learn and understand
The syntax for the OU types is much, much easier
They have widely downloaded implying a demand
The drag and drop support is pleasing to use for students
Reasons not to
An Increase in support/maintenance/testing of core Moodle
It's NOT my plugin which is lovely and easy to use and has overlapping functionality
I am not convinced the ddmarker type is easy enough to use for core (assuming ease of use is a criteria for going in core)
Marking the areas is just too hard. It needs some simplification such as offering a "select the rectangular area" and a way to draw the selected area that will update the box with the co-ordinates in it.
I suspect 99% of users will be happy with a rectangular area, and the other shapes can be left for the user to work out the co-ordinates.
I tend to agree with Marcus that it is still somewhat complex to set up - however the same could definitely be said for the Cloze question and that is part of core. I really am not sure if there is a huge advantage either way.
The only thing harder than Cloze is programming in zeroes and ones. (I am currently learning to program with just zeroes)
I just ran the program in that link through minify and the performance improvement was quite remarkable.
Here is a far simpler solution: Add a scale off to the side and below the grid that gives people numbers to start looking at. I haven't edited many of those questions recently but I can't remember off the top of my head if the major grid lines are 50 or 100 units. Having that on the scale would make it easier for new people to figure it out.
Good idea Joshua, I think it shows a grid, but not any numbers, add some numbers and life would be easier.
Thinking Pro and Con.
My question Tim would be "If it is in core, who maintains it?" The OU in general trundles along and does upgrades to plugins when it meets their needs, and there is always pressure on at upgrade time if you are at a new version of Moodle. ForumNG, not an insignificant plugin is like this for example.
I'm assuming from your Point of view it may be easier if it was in core?
Has anyone ever done a code review? I suspect it will of course be great. But even a remarkable plugin like book took a while to move through the fix up and get compliant process. Is the code for DnD OK?
If these questions types go into core, then they are part of the quiz and question system, so I still maintain them (for the foreseeable future).
If they are in core, then there must be QA tests (if not automated Behat tests), so that before every major release, they get tested and on release day we know they work.
Review of the code by HQ is a key step. We have done work on usability and accessibility, and code quality, but I am sure an independent review will pick up more things, and of course they must be fixed before this is added to core.
Yes, pretty please!
Agreed. This would be a really useful addition to the Quiz activity.
Absolutely - a great addition.
Definitely, they're essentially "core" for most people anyway.
+1 from me.
OK, guys, why all these +1 positive comments here and yet nowhere near the same amounts of votes in the tracker?
Well, I expect a majority of moodlers who browse these forums have never visited the tracker, probably because they think it's something reserved for programmers, and they are daunted by the idea.
Yes, but. Our school uses Drap-and-Drop Matching and Drag-and-Drop Ordering question types extensively. From the previews, these OU drag and drop questions types look very interesting and I could see them becoming popular. However, from the point of view of my teachers DDMatch and DDOrder are much higher priority to include in core. I do not know the reasons why they are not currently included, but I don't see their functionality included in the four proposed OU drag-and-drop questions types.
Don, I suspect that it is because the questions proposed are OU created and supported that they are proposed for inclusion. I think those are excellent question types, but if you look at the numbers of the ones you mention the OU types have much higher download counts.
My concern with relying on download statistics to determine popularity and what should be added to core is three fold:
Jason, what you say is true if you were trying to measure how many times it was installed (or how many questions instances were using it). However I have never viewed the numbers in that way. For me the stats are a very broad indication of how interesting an idea the question type represents, or possible how much of an improvement on some existing core functionality it represents. One other distorting factor is that if you release more versions (e.g. incremental updates), the big number will include multiple downloads. Or at least I assume that is true. You might also have mentioned that some downloads will happen from Github that are not recorded.
Anyway there are lies, danged lies and download statistics, but I think the statistics give some broad ideas of popularity.
It's going to take a bit of work to get some clarity on the best DnD options of the ones available with some sot of comparison.
Combining a few items to consider already mentioned in this thread, there is coding standards, ease of use, functionality, maintainability, ease of use etc.
I'm not quite gong to commit time yet. There is no evidence I know of that if we did some work in this MoodleINC would actually want these items in core.
What is MoodleINC?
Sorry Marcus, MoodleINC, just a light hearted shorthand for HQ + MP + key players who influence the decisions.
I would be curious for this specific question if Moodle HQ can split out the question statistics from the stats page by question type at all. I don't know if that stat includes all question types or just core Moodle question types.
If you look at admin/registration/lib.php, you will see that the data Moodle.org has comes from
$questioncount = $DB->count_records('question');
So, no question type information.
The only data I know on question types is https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvW3H1TnOxK-dEROU2dVQ2lkWDU3SlEzaXJqU2lSRUE&usp=drive_web#gid=0, from nearly 2 years ago before most of the OU question types existed, or had been shared with the community. Also, the methodology behind that spreadsheet was pretty unsound. We could try repeating that exercise, but I am not really inclined to do that myself.
For all the 'Yes, please' and '+1' folks please go to https://tracker.moodle.org/browse/MDL-43973 and vote for it there. That's what counts!
A (biased) yes, of course, answer. Will put in tracker.
As this may be useful to others, please note that when including a mention of a bug tracker issue in your forum posts, it's is not necessary to write the full URL. You just have to write the issue reference, and an ad hoc moodle filter will automatically convert this to a link to the URL.
So, please vote for MDL-43973.
Done. My 'Yes please' was converted in a +1 vote at tracker.
I'd like to support the idea of Joshua to improved the creation of this questiontype adding a numbered scale on or around the grid. I was unable to create my first drag and drop qtype without reading instructions at one OU site (don't remember the URL now) first. And as someone already mentioned, I had to repeat my visit to OU docs each time I needed to create new ones to refresh how to manage the scale. So that's why I think the idea of Joshua 'seems to be' simple and brilliant.
Let me also post here a weird thing that happened to me this week doing a quiz where there was a OU drag and drop question type in Moodle 2.4.6 (drag & drop markers 2013031400 ) . The question consisted on a periodic table of elements image (with only chemical symbols) where students had to drag and drop labels (names of elements or groups) on the right place. It worked as expected but I noticed that it was giving feedback when 'submit all and finish' when it shouldn't because I had only selected 'the attempt' and 'overall fedback' as review options for immediately after the attempt.
The unexpected feedback provided was about labels placed incorrectly. I mean, students could see how many wrong answers they had and which ones they are after having submitted. I hadn't time to investigate this issue but, if I'm not wrong it shouldn't have occurred.
Anyone can confirm what I'm saying?
Another 'problem' using this qtype is that the image used must fit the right dimensions set up for this qtype. This leads to two common problems:
A. If the original image exceeds the required dimensions some 'elements' in the picture will be difficult to read/understand. For example I had to resize my original periodic table picture before using it otherwise some elements symbols were not legible. Of course this has nothing to do with the qtype but I wonder if is there a way to sort it out or to inform a user (a teacher) to resize the picture before using it.
B. Another problem is caused by large labels. For example my label for 'noble gases' couldn't be placed properly at the periodic table without previously doing a 'Ctrl-' to reduce the screen resolution. This trick works even if after placed the label properly you return to normal resolution. A simple solution for this issue could be to change the 'target' to the upper right corner.
Anyway, even if nothing of what I said can be improved I'd keep my +1 for including it (if possible) in core. The OU qtypes are amazing! Thanks guys for creating such a great product
The OU question types are amazing but I sometimes think the people who create them have huge brains, and what they need is some people with smaller brains to say "that's a bit hard to understand" (grins). I would definitely use the ddmarker type more if it didn't involve taking my shoes and socks off to get the co-ordinates correct.
Toni "... I was unable to create my first drag and drop qtype without reading instructions at one OU site (don't remember the URL now) first. And as someone already mentioned, I had to repeat my visit to OU docs ..."
I expect, once the OU question types have been included in Moodle core, the relevant documentation will be available in the Moodle Docs Wiki (rather than on a OU site).
Regarding the possible bug, if someone can confirm that, it would be very helpful. Should not be hard to fix if we know exactly what the problem is.
Image sizing is an issue. Moodle has never had a built-in image manipulation tool. I don't think we want to build such a thing just for this qtype. Would be good to have one in Moodle (e.g. for people uploading their profile images) that we could just re-use.
I found out why my drag & drop qntype was giving what i called an 'unexpected feedback'. I had selected the option "Highlight drop zones which have not had the correct marker dropped on them" placed below General feedback text area and that was what was giving the initially unexpected feedback.
So it's not a bug because if I deselect the option all works as it's expected.
I usually control correct(green)/partially correct(yellow)/incorrect(red) feedback for core questions through: Review options -> whether correct so I thought that it would be similar for drag&drop qtype but it isn't. Sorry! it was my fault
Regarding to what Tim said about a built-in image manipulation tool, I remember that in Moodle 1.9 I was able to resize, crop, rotate,.. images with a pluging called lightboxgallery. Manipulation of Images is an issue not only for this qtype but for many other areas of Moodle (creation of resources as pages or books, forums, submission of assignments, profile pictures,..). Every year I have to spend hours in my School teaching students (and my colleagues) about resizing, cropping images before using/submitting to Moodle.
My +1 also for a Moodle manipulation tool in core as Tim suggests
Absolutely! Especially with the move here in the USA to PARCC/Smarter Balance CCSS assessments, drag-drop question types will be a boon for schools getting students used to the new question formats.
I am afraid I had not seen this thread earlier, so I posted in the wrong place at https://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=271063
But... (partly duplicated from post at https://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=271063 , please don't delete):
The stats seem to show a tendency for an increasing number of downloads over time.
I like these plugins a lot, and I think that these two plugins (as well as many others), contributed by the Open University, have been thoroughly tested, are well written and well maintained. So, in my very personal opinion, I think they would make prime candidates to consider for suggestion for inclusion into a future Moodle core.
If these (and all other) additional question types made by the Open University were included in Moodle core, all Moodle sites using that branch could use them very easily (no extra expenses/fuzz for installing them), which will contribute to their use in both formative and summative assessments. This will greatly improve the academic use of Moodle.
I have been translating the Moodle Docs for these additional question types into spanish, so that spanish-speaking teachers can easily use many of these question types. The original plugins documentation in English, hosted at the OU site, is very comprehensive and easy for a novice to follow, but the pages are slow to load sometimes.
Should the title for this thread be changed to Moodle 2.8 ?
adding this would not mean any need for YUI then. Oh I am learning, do bare with me. My thinking is that Moodle core use YUI library for JS and CSS....but this enhancement would only be based on HTML....which means no need for YUI anyway-as it is being phased out-oh I know I could be confused about that, but just ignore me if I am right-ha ha
I can't seem to get a vote in where indicated but I use these question types with great success. I consider them very good candidates for inclusion in the regular release.
I am not enough of a geek to comment with certainty on the underlying code but the questions seem caught up in moodle's reliance on the Yahoo User Interface, which seems overtaken by advances in other areas.
Perhaps one day I will acutally have time to make it happen.