Computing desk
< December 14	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 15

Creating a digital test form

I am trying to teach a group of English as a second language students proper formatting in English (e.g. capitalization, space between periods and letters, etc.) I think the best way to go about getting them to practice is to assign a document filled with errors and have them correct the errors. But it would take a lot of time to individually mark each document they complete for any missed errors. Is there are a readily accessible digital way of doing this? Like an online document that once submitted automatically highlights any missed errors? Thanks for any help with ideas. Shimtl1970 (talk) 13:43, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would make it multiple choice for easy marking. Alternatively, ask them to underline the errors and have a template for marking, then just count the missed ones. Another alternative would be to ask them to correct a Word document containing all the errors, then use the "compare documents" feature for marking against your own correct document. (Other word processors are available.) (I assume that it is American English that you are teaching.) Dbfirs 17:39, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Use an online checksum. There are errors in the following example faulty sentence.

The quick brownfox Jumps over the lazy dog..

Paste the sentence here and look at the crc32 checksum. It will not be bd2cf7ab unless the errors are corrected. Note that any of the longer checksums work equally well for this purpose, and the website alows one to load a text essay file instead of pasting. A feature of this method is that an incorrect checksum gives no clue to whatever error(s) remain. So students can be allowed to test their own documents online. Blooteuth (talk) 21:17, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When teaching it will be better to give them good examples at first. Don't show the erroneous ones until they have a good idea already.

^T
_the^Q
_quick^B
_bbrown^F
_fox ....Pick the correct letters. Or have a sentence read out as .mp3, and ask students to type it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:47, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all of the suggestions. I might go with the compare document feature of word. Shimtl1970 (talk) 06:39, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You could do this quite easily with Moodle There is a quiz plugin which can automatically mark a students submission. The teachers were I work us it all the time. --TrogWoolley (talk) 11:25, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One problem with English grammar is that there are multiple opinions on many things. For example, the proper use of commas. So, I'd go with the multiple choice approach, as this will allow you to not ask about items which are optional, or, if you do ask, to allow for multiple correct answers. The approach of saying "this is the only correct way", and marking anything wrong which deviates from it, will get you into trouble. Another advantage is that you can check their reasons for picking the correct answer. For example, "'The' should be capitalized because that word is always capitalized" vs. "'The' should be capitalized because it's the first word in the sentence". StuRat (talk) 00:29, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have you set up a Wikipedia mirror?

I've posted this and some related questions at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Have you set up a Wikipedia mirror?. I haven't met anyone who has actually done it. If you have, I will be most impressed. Thank you. The Transhumanist 22:32, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many of us have set up MediaWiki - I've done so several times.

But to mirror Wikipedia's content is quite a bit more complex: start at Wikipedia:Database download. Depending on what content you want to mirror of download, you might be talking about gigabytes or petabytes. The compressed English encyclopedia text is over one hundred gigabytes - and it's not very useful while it remains compressed! If you also want media and photographs, the database size explodes to medium to large datacenter. This mirroring of all Wikipedia content is not a task that most mere mortals can self-finance. Once you reach these sizes, you'll probably need more than just a budget for computer hardware: you'll have to use so much computer hardware that you'll also need a budget for a staff of technicians. Realistically, you'll need a few full-time software engineers to work with software and manage the data: Wikipedia database dumps are complicated and require a great deal of expertise. There does not exist software that "just loads the database" - not even MediaWiki can do that. You need software developers to deal with the many idiosyncrasies.

Have a look at Current Mirrors of Wikimedia Projects. The only organizations that are listed are large, well-established archiving groups that categorically all receive large quantities of money from government or corporate sponsors to offset their operational costs.

Nimur (talk) 16:57, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]