(Standalone) tests as a part of study -> part of test URL

Ideally, all standalone tests should be part of a study.

Example: study 101 involves taking test 1 -> URL could be https://languagelab.be/tests/1/101 (= /tests/SURVEY_ID/STUDY_ID)

If no STUDY_ID is provided (/tests/1/), it falls into a default "pot" or "inbox" to be assigned later on.

changed milestone to %0.4: Tests and studies improvements

added Open for discussion Studies & tests labels

Should we just store the STUDY_ID provided, or does it has any impact on the test?

I'm moving the discussion from mails to here to keep a better record @sbibauw.

As of now, studies and surveys are two completely different features.

From my understanding, you would like to define the survey for a study in the study itself, so the URL should more be something https://languagelab.be/tests/<STUDY_ID>, and then skip asking for a code, or https://languagelab.be/tests/ and request a study code. Or is it possible to take part of a test alone, and we should have a separate https://languagelab.be/tests/study/[STUDY_ID]? But in such case, what should we do if the user doesn't have a code? (And thus provide an email) Do we have a fallback?

Without this kind of workflow, I don't really see either how you would like to integrate the typing test.

OK, good to discuss it. Ideally, the abstract hierarchy should be that everything is a study. Within a study, we define a series of tests to conduct sequentially.

E.g. STUDY=1 involves the following steps:

1. Register/login only (no CODE)
2. TEST=3
3. TEST=typing (could also be numbered, e.g. TEST=10, in case we need various typing tests)
4. TEST=1100 (survey questions)
5. tutor selection

Then STUDY=2

1. CODE (if not already logged in)
2. TEST=4
3. TEST=10 (typing)
4. TEST=1100
5. End/thank you

So in terms of URLs, I imagine something like https://languagelab.be/study/[STUDY_ID]/[TEST_ID] if you want, but the user enters from https://languagelab.be/study/[STUDY_ID].

I got how the second flow work, but I don't really see for the first one, how it mix with the current registration flow?

As the delivery time is short for now, could we imagine a first version where the code/login works as for now? So we would just have to create a study with the tests and with or without the typing test.

I came up with this UI: (for now it's only UI, I've not yet implemented the backend, I'm waiting your opinion before)

2025-01-27_18-53-20

What do you think of it? It seems to allow most of the variability we need.

Yes, this looks great! Being able to add + remove + reorder is perfect.

About the first step/above question, it's mostly about:

• Certain studies could require to register (and login) in all cases (when it involved tutoring)
• Other studies could let the user just input a code at the beginning (rather than need to register or login)

So rather than a "step", it could be a checkbox:

• Require the participants to be registered and logged in (username and password) -> if checked, first screen is login form -> if not checked, first screen could be code input (+ login/register button on top menubar, as currently, and hides code input if already logged in)

Does that work?

(Sidenote: Study description could be optional?)

Note: I also agree that time is short, so only consider what can be implemented in a few days, for now. For the EPHEC study that starts next Monday, we only need code input (then vocabulary test and typing test).

mentioned in issue #166

marked this issue as related to #166

assigned to @bridubois

closed