-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
make messages more informative, e.g. vec_grade_vector()
#65
Comments
@garrettgman I like this suggestion a lot! I want to brainstorm a little bit to get your intuition on how this would work.
|
Can we reserve showing the first
I think we should err on the side of telling them what the missing value is. But if they are missing multiple values, I'd only mention the first. The intent isn't to give away the whole answer, but provide the next nudge to get them back on track. What I feel passionate about here is that the feedback messages always seem like welcome help, and never a second set of checks/error messages to figure out.
This will be more code, but could we have a two stage check? If the length is off by 1-2 we should give them the more informative wrong values message. If the length is off by a lot, we should take that as a sign the student has misunderstood something. We have little hope of guessing what that is, so we would revert to the length message because we cannot be more helpful.
Great point! I hadn't considered that. Could you give a more concrete example of the case you are describing here? |
I think this makes a lot of sense. If you got something totally wrong, this will give you a preview of what you should be aiming for. But if we have more specific feedback, we should focus on that.
Sounds good!
I like that and I don't think it should be too difficult to implement. I'll get back in touch if it causes any issues, but I think this is a good plan.
As an example, a student may have unexpected values in a |
I'm glad you thought of this, and you are absolutely right. I really liked something I saw in another one of your messages today, something like "I didn't expect your result to contain
vec_fail_if_extra_values("It looks like you added a value that is not in the solution, {.extra[1]}. Try removing it.")
vec_grade_vector() ^^^Not much thought went into this. So the details are probably flaky. But I like the idea that |
I love the swiss army knife approach of
vec_grade_vector()
, but the messages are not as customized to the student's code as they could be.Here are some examples
I'd like something that mentions the students code and points them to what went wrong, e.g:
I didn't expect your result to contain the value Dayona Beach.
I'd like to identify the offending value and suggest a remedy:
It looks like you added a value that is not in the solution, "Boston". Try removing it.
Why is this a problem?
The messages feel like R error messages. Since they don't talk about the student's code, the student needs to figure out what about their code caused the message. This can be frustrating.
The goal is to make the grading messages always sound like personalized feedback and advice coming from a friendly mentor who has read the student's code. Whenever possible, we should glue in pieces of the student code or result to make it clear what we are saying. And to make it feel personalized.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: