UniverseUniversity


Home Projects Jobs Clientele Contact

uu


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Passing UMOs [was: Re:]



> Correct, we need to store "passage" information somewhere. However,
> there is no "authorization" as such. And "passed" in this case doesn't
> even mean "successfully passed" - only that a person studied the object
> to fullest extent possible. If they failed it - they have a right to
> vote it as
> extra-difficult unreasonable piece of crap, should they chose to do so.

The same UMO can belong to different courses or different UMOs within the
same course.
I have couple of questions:
1. Once user "studied" UMO in Course A, does it mean that he "passed" this
UMO in Course B without "studying" it too?
2. Once user "studied" UMO in Topic C that belongs to Course A, does it
mean that he "passed" this UMO in Topic D in the same Course A without
"studying" it?


>
> Alexey Parshin wrote:
>> Then we need a structure to indicate that UMO is passed. It could be a
>> flag in permissions tables. I, however, suspect, that we need a
>> reference to the reason - how or why this UMO is considered as
>> 'passed' and who authorized that.
>>
>> 2006/12/19, Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh <ilya@total-knowledge.com
>> <mailto:ilya@total-knowledge.com>>:
>>
>>     Problem can be soled (successfully or not).
>>     Test can be passed by solving problems within it.
>>     Topic - well - you already answered that.
>>     Course can be passed by passing final exam.
>>     etc.
>>
>>     Alexey Parshin wrote:
>>     > I'm not exactly sure what it means - to pass an UMO. In my
>>     > understanding it was completing associated tasks, but we only
>>     have it
>>     > for topics..
>>     >
>>     > 2006/12/19, Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh < ilya@total-knowledge.com
>>     <mailto:ilya@total-knowledge.com>
>>     > <mailto:ilya@total-knowledge.com
>>     <mailto:ilya@total-knowledge.com>>>:
>>     >
>>     >     Not exactly what I had in mind :)
>>     >
>>     >     Let's see. Here are some thoughts:
>>     >
>>     >     1. Voting is associated with each UMO.
>>     >     This, among other things, means, that when one votes for a
>> child
>>     >     UMO, it
>>     >     has _no_ effect on parent UMO. i.e. no cumulative/derived
>>     voting.
>>     >     Reasoning:
>>     >     While every individual element of some topic might be easy,
>>     >     overall topic
>>     >     might be too difficult due to sheer amount of material.
>>     >     Or other way around: while some explanations might be
>> extremely
>>     >     terse,
>>     >     others might be very clear and detailed, combined with good
>>     subset of
>>     >     problems, making overall topic very easy to digest.
>>     >
>>     >     2. Voting subjects are not fixed in database
>>     >     i.e. we don't have separate table "topic_difficulty_votes" and
>>     >     "topic_relevance_votes".
>>     >     Instead each UMO type has a "_vote_subjects" and
>>     "_vote_counts" tables
>>     >     associated
>>     >     with it. "_vote_subjects" lists things one can vote on...
>>     >
>>     >     3. Only people who tried to pass an UMO can vote on given UMO.
>>     >     What does
>>     >     "tried to pass" mean is dependent on UMO type. All UMO types
>>     do have
>>     >     concept of being passed however.
>>     >
>>     >     Questions/comments/etc. before I put this into UU spec?
>>     >
>>     >     Alexey Parshin wrote:
>>     >     > Well, in this case it's pretty simple. Every completed
>>     test gets a
>>     >     > vote, and we can always find all the tests within the
>>     topic or with
>>     >     > the course (TLT) - for all the tree of topics.
>>     >     >
>>     >     > I'm starting to suspect, that we need an acceleration field
>>     >     > top_level_topic in every topic.. A slight de-normalization..
>>     >     >
>>     >     > 2006/12/18, Anatoly Volynets < av@total-knowledge.com
>>     <mailto:av@total-knowledge.com>
>>     >     <mailto: av@total-knowledge.com
>> <mailto:av@total-knowledge.com>>
>>     >     > <mailto:av@total-knowledge.com
>>     <mailto:av@total-knowledge.com> <mailto:av@total-knowledge.com
>>     <mailto:av@total-knowledge.com>>>>:
>>     >     >
>>     >     >     Sounds reasonable.
>>     >     >
>>     >     >     Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh wrote:
>>     >     >     > We could limit voting to only those who tried to
>>     pass an
>>     >     object.
>>     >     >     I don't
>>     >     >     > know if its a good idea, but if we do this, there
>>     will be no
>>     >     >     need for
>>     >     >     > separate
>>     >     >     > voting tables.
>>     >     >     >
>>     >     >
>>     >
>>     >     --
>>     >     Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
>>     >     Total Knowledge. CTO
>>     >     http://www.total-knowledge.com
>> <http://www.total-knowledge.com>
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > --
>>     > Alexey Parshin,
>>     > http://www.sptk.net <http://www.sptk.net>
>>
>>     --
>>     Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
>>     Total Knowledge. CTO
>>     http://www.total-knowledge.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alexey Parshin,
>> http://www.sptk.net <http://www.sptk.net>
>
> --
> Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
> Total Knowledge. CTO
> http://www.total-knowledge.com
>
>



Authoright © Total Knowledge: 2001-2008