Hi, There's a bug on "labtainer --redo", "checkwork" and "gradelab".

Checkwork/Gradelab/Redo bug,about mfthomps/labtainers

mfthomps commented on June 10, 2024 1

Next week I'll publish an update that changes the "checkwork" function so that it always uses a fresh container. That will allow a student to delete content of the labtainer_xfer/<lab> directory then run with a --redo so as to not have any remnant of past work appear in the future checkwork operations. In general we do not suggest that students delete from the labtainer_xfer directory. A central property of Labtainers is that students need manage different copies of zip files and need not worry about which results are turned in. The model is that all results always get turned in and you get credit if you ever achieved the goal. To clarify, the "checkwork" function was not reverting anything in the lab containers. It was simply answering the question, did you ever achieve these goals? More replies are in line with your message below:

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 8:04 PM Xigao Li ***@***.***> wrote: Hi Mike, Thanks a lot! Indeed, labtainer may need a command to erase the previous work. What I met today is a student did part of the work, then he used --redo and want a fresh start; however the labtainer preserved (and reverted) his previous work when he using the checkwork command.

As noted above, previous work was not being reverted. The checkwork containers was simply keeping track of past work, even if the xfer directory was delete. The change I'm making will cause checkwork to use a fresh container each time.

Another example is when I grading the lab using gradelab, I graded some students (A), and then want to grade some new student submissions (B) so I deleted the (A), but gradelab will still show the grade (A), mixed with (B). And if I want to do the lab myself, I can't get rid of the students' results - they are permanent if not "find then sudo rm" them.

It does not seem you are using Labtainers as intended. Collect all student zip files into the xfer directory and run gradelab. tt grades all of the student work at the same time, and produces a separate report for each student. As long as students use distinct email addresses, their results are separate. If you do the lab yourself, your results are separate. The fact that you also see assessment of the student work has no bearing on the assessment of your own work. Each time you run gradelab -r, it gathers fresh results from the xfer directory. So, even if you insist on wanting to delete artifacts (which is contrary to the intended use), you need only delete from the xfer directory and then run gradelab -r. There is no need for "sudo rm".

Sometimes labtainer labs runs into trouble such as work counter not increasing, checkwork not showing satisfied result, etc, students want to do it from a clean start, so using checkwork showing previous results make them confusing.

I'll think about adding an option to "check work subsequent to my previous --redo" so the student can elect to see only results that happen after the most recent redo. The default behavior will remain as "check my work as the instructor will see it, i.e., did I ever achieve the goals?".

For the --redo command, (correct me if I'm wrong), if a user did something else in labtainer using --redo, should it show the corresponding results? Otherwise it also may confuse the user; for the original version of finished work, From my personal view, user can(should) preserve the original output (copy the zip from labtainer_xfer) to somewhere else by himself.

As noted above, that is not the intent of redo. But the additional option should let such students view results subsequent to redo -- though the instructor will see all results, unless the student deletes from the xfer directory (which is not encouraged).

From a brief look at the redo (labutils.py:1973 - RedoLab() and StartLab()) python script, current implementation only starts a fresh container. Might be better if deletes all previously saved files (or get a new command doing this).

Again, "redo" is intended to give a fresh lab environment. It was not and will not be a means to delete artifacts. Thanks again for the report. I'll post again when the update is published. --Mike Really appreciated!

…

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#14 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AUSE29taQ-SsWmS8VbNGE0wUsdfQHct9ks5vUzLngaJpZM4bmaIw> .

from labtainers.

mfthomps commented on June 10, 2024 1

An update has been published to create a new container for checkwork operations. Use
update-labtainer.sh to get the update.

from labtainers.

mfthomps commented on June 10, 2024

Hi,
Thank for the report. I'll dig into it further, but would like to solicit opinions about the desired behavior of --redo when issued by the student. The original intent was to simply allow the student to get a fresh container that is free of any artifacts from previous work to allow performance of the lab without effects due to previous work. It was not intended to erase the history of the previous work, nor eliminate artifacts related to performance. For example, you do the lab, get it right and then decide you want to try some crazy stuff on the lab. So you use --redo and experiment and explore. Then you submit your work to the instructor. Shouldn't you get credit for getting it right, even though you later tried some experiments?

Perhaps Labtainers needs a distinct command to "hide my previous work from the world". I'd expect that deleting the zip and then doing a --redo would achieve that, but am only guessing for now.
Again, I'll dig into it some more, having forgotten much of what the current implementation does about the zip files in the --redo flag. Any thoughts on desired behavior are appreciated. Thanks again.

from labtainers.

xigaoli commented on June 10, 2024

Hi Mike,

Thanks a lot!

Indeed, labtainer may need a command to erase the previous work.
What I met today is a student did part of the work, then he used --redo and want a fresh start; however the labtainer preserved (and reverted) his previous work when he using the checkwork command.

Another example is when I grading the lab using gradelab, I graded some students (A), and then want to grade some new student submissions (B) so I deleted the (A), but gradelab will still show the grade (A), mixed with (B). And if I want to do the lab myself, I can't get rid of the students' results - they are permanent if not "find then sudo rm" them.

Sometimes labtainer labs runs into trouble such as work counter not increasing, checkwork not showing satisfied result, etc, students want to do it from a clean start, so using checkwork showing previous results make them confusing.

For the --redo command, (correct me if I'm wrong), if a user did something else in labtainer using --redo, should it show the corresponding results? Otherwise it also may confuse the user; for the original version of finished work, From my personal view, user can(should) preserve the original output (copy the zip from labtainer_xfer) to somewhere else by himself.

From a brief look at the redo (labutils.py:1973 - RedoLab() and StartLab()) python script, current implementation only starts a fresh container. Might be better if deletes all previously saved files (or get a new command doing this).

Really appreciated!

from labtainers.

xigaoli commented on June 10, 2024

Thanks!

from labtainers.

xigaoli commented on June 10, 2024

It worked, thanks a lot!

from labtainers.

Checkwork/Gradelab/Redo bug about labtainers HOT 6 CLOSED

Comments (6)

Related Issues (20)

Recommend Projects

React

Vue.js

Typescript

TensorFlow

Django

Laravel

D3

Recommend Topics

javascript

web

server

Machine learning

Visualization

Game

Recommend Org

Facebook

Microsoft

Google

Alibaba

D3

Tencent