Reorganise content on formative assessment & exercises

[tobyhodges]

Fixes #336 Closes #327 Resolves #330

Some notes about what I am trying to achieve with this one.

1. Moves all "theory" around formative assessment and exercises into a single episode, cutting out most content on misconceptions. That content is not removed altogether, but relocated to an extra page in the More dropdown, as optional further reading for people who want it.
2. Renames that "theory" episode to "Designing Assessments" and the second, "practical" episode "Implementing Exercises". This would render #327 obsolete.
3. Expands the "exercise types" exercise to talk about activities for lessons that are not primarily about coding skills - this is the part that still needs some work
4. If everything looks good when I am finished with the above, I will also update the branch to resolve #330

Also resolves #332 by adding a link to the Spanish version of TtT

[github-actions[bot]]

Thank you!

Thank you for your pull request :smiley:

:robot: This automated message can help you check the rendered files in your submission for clarity. If you have any questions, please feel free to open an issue in {sandpaper}.

If you have files that automatically render output (e.g. R Markdown), then you should check for the following:

• :dart: correct output
• :framed_picture: correct figures
• :question: new warnings
• :bangbang: new errors

Rendered Changes

:mag: Inspect the changes: https://github.com/carpentries/lesson-development-training/compare/md-outputs..md-outputs-PR-347

The following changes were observed in the rendered markdown documents:

 audience.md                  |   2 +-
 config.yaml                  |   1 +
 exercises.md                 | 170 +--------------------
 formative-assessment.md      | 344 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
 links.md                     |   2 +
 md5sum.txt                   |  11 +-
 misconceptions-mcqs.md (new) | 203 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
 7 files changed, 407 insertions(+), 326 deletions(-)

What does this mean?

If you have source files that require output and figures to be generated (e.g. R Markdown), then it is important to make sure the generated figures and output are reproducible. This output provides a way for you to inspect the output in a diff-friendly manner so that it's easy to see the changes that occur due to new software versions or randomisation.

:stopwatch: Updated at 2024-05-09 13:40:56 +0000

[tobyhodges]

Thanks for the review, @sstevens2.

Does it seem odd to anyone else that the exercises episode is after the wrap up and separated from the formative-assessment episode by the end of a day?

Indeed. We opened #322 partly in recognition of this. For what it's worth, we have scheduled the interim wrap-up at the end of the third half-day (after Example Data and Narrative) in the training next week. Let's see how it works there...

[anenadic]

Here is a separate comment on the thing that bugs me a bit.

Wonder if we should call the episode "Designing exercises" (which is then followed by an episode "Implementing exercises") and then have reflection, concept maps and diagrams, checking in, think, pair, share all as "exercise types". And then the exercises in this bullet point list become "tasks" - setting challenges for learners to tackle and raising questions for discussion among the group. And then Parsons problems, fill-in-the blanks, etc. are all either separate "exercise types" or can fall under "tasks". In a way, formative assessment == exercise, which I am also not sure if I like 100%.

Ah, well, this is probably just a terminology issue and I am being unnecessarily pedantic and the episode is clear enough as is so should drop this. But here it is regardless 😆.

[sstevens2]

Thanks for bringing this up @anenadic. I was thinking something similar but I wasn't sure how to articulate it or if I just didn't know enough of the pedagogy. I think of them all as exercises and formative assessment interchangeably. I guess think-pair-share could be any other type of exercise too in a way - MCQ, discussion, parson's problem. It seems like they are kind separated by the types that are coding vs non-coding. In fact, we use them that way in the exercise, I believe.

[tobyhodges]

Thanks both, I would like to keep this discussion going in an issue, so I will pull your comments so far over there.