Forums | Mahara Community
Lock SmartEvidence partialy
24 December 2021, 1:20
After a long break of working with Mahara (screw you, Corona), I'm now again testing it to see which functions I can use to meet my requirements.
I'm currently playing around with SmartEvidence and a question popped up recently. What I want to know is if there's a way to lock some nodes/crossings of the SmartEvidence matrix so that the portfolio creators can't add annotations everywhere. Here's the scenario: I have a SmartEvidence framework and some pre structured portfolio templates within my collection. On page A of the collection, only standard Z of my framework can be achieved and on page B only standard X can be reached. When a learner copies the collection he then can freely click on every crossing in the matrix to create an annotation, so he can have X on page A, although this isn't intended in my framework.
So I'd like to know if there's a way to pre structure a matrix so that only some specific crossing are marked as "ready for assessment" in advance when the collection is copied.
I hope that my explanations are understandable.
Thank you and kind regards,
10 January 2022, 13:29
Welcome back to Mahara and ein gesundes Neues!
You can't 'lock' individual pages in SmartEvidence or not allow other standards to be selected. However, if you have a one-to-one mapping of page to standard, you may be better of with the 'Portfolio completion' functionality. Like SmartEvidence, you activate on the institution level and then a new page is added to the front of the collection if you allow it in a collection. That functionality works with the 'Sign-off' block and can be paired with the 'Review' block as well, which then has the capability to lock the entire portfolio once it has been reviewed.
15 January 2022, 3:08
Just to let you know the progress completion functionality is not available when setting up a collection in a Group's - Pages and Collections tab which is a problem if you want to push portfolios to group members.
20 January 2022, 8:32
That is correct. That feature is not yet implemented, but it shouldn't be too difficult to do as long as it is used just as a template like we have implemented for SmartEvidence.
15 January 2022, 3:03
I have the same problem of trying to get participants to add the annotation block in the correct alignment on the grid, I have not found a solution other than carrying out extensive training with the participants. Like you, I would like to be able to link the pages to the appropriate grey dot in the grid so a participant can only select the correct one. I think if a page could be linked to the standard and the grid to show only that grey dot that matches the standard with the page that might solve the problem. The issue then arises if somebody wants to include two standards on a page.
The annotation block text field is meant to be mandatory but it is not. It will allow it to be saved blank resulting in multiple annotation blocks on a page with no feedback buttons. As an admin, I cannot delete these redundant annotation blocks.
I favour the use of the annotation blocks over the progress bar because they manage the feedback process between a participant and their mentor which is a key element for us.
20 January 2022, 8:40
The annotation block is a required field and thus can't be left empty unless you made a customisation in your code base to remove the required 'flag' or your students just put in a space.
It is good to read your feedback on the SmartEvidence functionality as I usually only hear that organisations want to be more granular and be able to add annotations alongside individual pieces of evidence rather than for an entire page. That's why we have a proposal open to make changes to allow for both: page mapping and evidence mapping and also the support for frameworks that consist of multiple levels if you'd like to take a look.
20 January 2022, 11:01
28 January 2022, 7:28
Right now, the mapping of annotation to artefact is per page as the mapping to individual artefact is still only at the proposal stage.
The issue you describe for empty annotation blocks is being resolved for Mahara 22.04, due for release in the second half of April this year. Please see the bug report that also links to the code if you'd like to backport it to your instance of Mahara.