Skip to content
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

Start a SVSU collection in Contrib #831

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

lahvak
Copy link
Contributor

@lahvak lahvak commented May 27, 2021

This first commit adds all our current College Algebra problems.

They are hopefully correctly tagged. We would be delighted if any of these eventually ended up in the OPL.

This first commit adds all our current College Algebra problems.
@lahvak
Copy link
Contributor Author

lahvak commented May 27, 2021

When reviewing the problems, I realize now that while most of the problems were written at SVSU, there are few problems that are modifications of existing problems from the OPL. The edits are mostly in terminology and notation, which is why we chose to fork the problems and create a local version rather than modifying the existing problems. I do not know what is the proper way of handling this, but I will at least add some explanations to the modified files.

@drdrew42
Copy link
Sponsor Member

there are few problems that are modifications of existing problems from the OPL

Would you be able to identify which problems are modifications, and perhaps also which problems they came from?

@lahvak
Copy link
Contributor Author

lahvak commented Jun 2, 2021

For now I removed all problems that were modifications of existing problems from the OPL. I will go through those one by one and see if some of them can be submitted as changes to the existing problems instead.

All the remaining problems after the last commit were written here at SVSU.

This problem was originally removed since it was a modification of
a problem from the OPL, but it is now completely re-written and has
almost nothing in common with the original problem.
This is the problem Mizzou/Algebra/graph_polynomials/find_all_info_01.pg
from the OPL, rewritten to use PGML and scaffold.  Hints and solutions
were also added.
@drdrew42
Copy link
Sponsor Member

drdrew42 commented Jun 4, 2021

Thanks @lahvak, for separating out those problems.

The way that modifications to existing problems have been handled to this point is through the more-like-this grouping feature. When you've identified the 'original' problems for each of your modifications, there are a few things that could be done.

If Library/original/problem.pg is the original problem and Contrib/modify/problem.pg is the revised problem:

  1. Check Library/original/problem.pg for an ## MLT(<<name>>) tag -- if one exists.
  2. Copy-paste the MLT tag line from Library/original/problem.pg into Contrib/modify/problem.pg and skip the remaining steps.
  3. If no MLT tag exists, add an ## MLT(<<unique_name>>) tag line to both Library/original/problem.pg and Contrib/modify/problem.pg (unique_name because we want to ensure that a new MLT group is formed)
  4. Add the line ## MLTleader(1) to Library/original/problem.pg only.
  5. If no MLT tag exists, (and steps 3 & 4 are too much), just add the file path: Library/original/problem.pg as a comment inside of Contrib/modify/problem.pg (and maybe a second comment to briefly describe what changes were made, e.g. 'terminology: this to that' or 'notation: this to that')

Ultimately, a 'modified' problem should have either

  • an MLT tag that is identical to the 'original' problem, or
  • a comment that contains the filepath of the 'original' problem with some mention that the problem is a modification

@lahvak
Copy link
Contributor Author

lahvak commented Jun 4, 2021

Thank you, this is really useful. Is there any policy on generating the unique MLT tags?

@drdrew42
Copy link
Sponsor Member

drdrew42 commented Jun 4, 2021

Is there any policy on generating the unique MLT tags?

Unfortunately, no, not really. I'm working on some tools to help address this though.

However, in the meantime, if you have command-line access, the following command can help confirm whether or not you do have a unique MLT name:

grep -r 'MLT(possibly_unique_name)' /opt/webwork/libraries/webwork-open-problem-library

For example, if you perform the above action for MLT(WorkProblem), you should see that there are already problems in the OPL using this MLT name, so using 'WorkProblem' would not create a new MLT group. On the other hand, if you get no results, then your chosen MLT name is unique.

MLT group names should not include any spaces, use underscore or hyphen or CamelCase to deal with multiple words.

@drdrew42
Copy link
Sponsor Member

drdrew42 commented Jun 4, 2021

For future reference, I have added these instructions to the Submitting problems to the OPL page of the WeBWorK wiki.

@lahvak
Copy link
Contributor Author

lahvak commented Jun 4, 2021

Sorry, I keep asking questions. I am now looking at another problem from our collection, and it is a problem from the OPL rewritten using PGML, with added hints and a solution, but with no modification to the actual wording of the problem. Would it be better to submit it as a new problem with the MLT tags, or to create a separate pull request changing the old problem in the OPL?

@drdrew42
Copy link
Sponsor Member

drdrew42 commented Jun 4, 2021

Sorry, I keep asking questions.

It's really no problem.

If an update doesn't change the main text or logic of the problem, it should be pushed as a replacement for the existing OPL problem rather than as an MLT modification. I view the addition of hints/solutions in the same way as bug fixes -- there's no benefit to keeping the 'old' version. (GitHub keeps track of changes, so the original is never actually 'lost'...)

This is a modification of an existing OPL problem
/UMN/algebraKaufmannSchwitters/ks_9_4_prob07.pg
The changes are as follows:

*  Rewrite in PGML, add solutions and hints
*  Choose $b randomly so it is not always 1
*  Change the notation from a,b,c to x_1, x_2, x_3
*  Add a leading coefficient
*  Randomly flip the polynomial horizontally and/or vertically for
   more variability
*  Scale the polynomial to better fit the window

Submitting as a new problem rather than a fix of old problem mainly
because of the change in notation, but also in case new bugs are
introduced.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants