From f868ed51654b0214005418e08965cdb4bb8e29a6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: mudith-perera Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2026 14:42:22 +1000 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] peer progress indicator research Init --- astro.config.mjs | 10 + .../peer-progress-indicator/ppi-research.md | 388 ++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 398 insertions(+) create mode 100644 src/content/docs/peer-progress-indicator/ppi-research.md diff --git a/astro.config.mjs b/astro.config.mjs index 3a08e15f..1cb161cb 100644 --- a/astro.config.mjs +++ b/astro.config.mjs @@ -256,6 +256,16 @@ export default defineConfig({ directory: '/security', }, }, + { + label: 'Peer Progress Indicator', + items: [ + { + label:'Research Document', + link: '/peer-progress-indicator/ppi-research/' + } + + ] + } ], }), ], diff --git a/src/content/docs/peer-progress-indicator/ppi-research.md b/src/content/docs/peer-progress-indicator/ppi-research.md new file mode 100644 index 00000000..9ecb6457 --- /dev/null +++ b/src/content/docs/peer-progress-indicator/ppi-research.md @@ -0,0 +1,388 @@ +--- +title: Peer Progress Indicator Research +--- +**[Peer Progress Indicator Research]{.underline}** + +**Team Member Names** + +**Name:** David Nganga\ +**Section worked on:** Existing Systems & Features + +**Name:** Faith Wandabwa\ +**Section worked on:** Existing Systems & Features + +**Name:** Mudith Makawitage\ +**Section worked on:** Functional & non-functional requirements + +**Name:** Sanjana Bottu\ +**Section worked on:** Brainstorm & draft initial user stories + +**Name:** Aparjot Kaur\ +**Section worked on:** + +# **Research: Existing Systems & Features** + +## **Overview** + +This report examines Learning Management Systems (LMS), student-facing +analytics dashboards, and project management platforms to identify +progress-tracking features, privacy models, and design patterns suitable +for the OnTrack Peer Indicator System**.** + +Currently, OnTrack provides: + +- Individual task and portfolio progress + +- Tutor feedback + +However, it lacks peer visibility features. The following systems were +reviewed: + +- Canvas + +- Moodle + +- My Learning Analytics (MyLA) + +- GitHub + +## **Systems and Features Reviewed** + +### **Canvas LMS** + +- Displays progress via status labels: Complete, In Progress, Locked + +- Instructor-only analytics dashboard + +- No peer visibility + +Key Ideas for OnTrack + +- Status labels can map directly to OnTrack tasks + +- Aggregate cohort data can be anonymised for students + +Reference**:** + +### **Moodle** + +- Uses progress bars and circular indicators + +- Students see only their own progress + +- Teachers access detailed reports + +Key Ideas for OnTrack + +- Familiar progress bar UI + +- Reinforces need for built-in privacy (not retrofitted) + +Reference**:** + +### **My Learning Analytics (MyLA)** + +- Privacy-first student analytics dashboard + +- Uses anonymised performance bands (e.g., 90--100%) + +- Visualisations include: + + - Timeline activity + + - Grade distributions + + - Content popularity + +Key Ideas for OnTrack + +- Performance bands (On Track / Behind / Ahead) + +- Anonymised cohort percentages + +- Opt-in sharing + tutor controls + +Reference**:** + + +### **GitHub** + +- Activity-based visibility (not grades) + +- Contribution heatmap + +- Public/private control + +Key Ideas for OnTrack + +- Activity heatmap (engagement only) + +- Opt-in visibility model + +Reference**:** + +1. **Privacy Controls** + +All reviewed systems share a privacy-first philosophy. The table below +maps key principles observed across systems to their application in our +design.  + + ----------------------------------------------------------------------- + Privacy Observed In Application to Peer Indicator System + Principle + -------------- -------------- ----------------------------------------- + Default Canvas, All peer visibility is off by default. + opt-out / Moodle, MyLA Students must explicitly opt in. + private + + Anonymised MyLA, Canvas Group-level statistics shown (e.g., \'72% + aggregates (instructor of your tutorial completed Task 3\'). No + only view) individual names or scores exposed. + + Performance MyLA Students grouped into broad bands (On + band grouping Track / Slightly Behind / Ahead) to + reduce direct comparison. + + Tutor enable / MyLA, Moodle Tutors can turn the peer panel on or off + disable plugins per unit. Students cannot override this. + + Minimal data All systems Only task status is shared no marks, + exposure reviewed feedback content, or submission scores. + + Right to MyLA Students can opt out at any time with + withdraw immediate effect and no residual data + retained in peer views. + ----------------------------------------------------------------------- + +2. **Key Insights** + +What Works Well + +- Anonymised Cohort Comparisons: Aggregate group-level data (e.g., + \'your tutorial is 72% complete on average\') motivates students and + supports self-regulated learning without triggering direct + competition. This is the most well-supported finding across the + literature. (MyLA, General LADs) + +- Visual, Glanceable Indicators: Progress bars, colour-coded status + icons, and activity heatmaps allow students to absorb progress + information instantly. Text-heavy reports are consistently less + effective for motivation. (Canvas, Moodle, GitHub) + +- Seamless Dashboard Integration: MyLA succeeds because it embeds within + the existing student dashboard rather than requiring navigation to a + separate system. Our peer indicator should live within OnTrack\'s + existing student view. + +- Tutor Oversight: Allowing tutors to enable or disable the peer panel + per unit prevents inappropriate use and gives staff control over + social dynamics in their cohort. + +- Status Labels Over Scores: Simple labels (In Progress / Needs Help / + Complete) carry enough information for peer support without exposing + grades. OnTrack already has these statuses, making implementation + straightforward. + +Potential Risks + +- Social Comparison Anxiety: Visible peer data can increase anxiety in + students who see themselves as behind. Risk is highest when individual + names are shown. Mitigation: anonymised aggregates by default; named + data only with mutual opt-in. + +- Gaming the System: Students may mark tasks complete prematurely if + progress is visible. Mitigation: maintain OnTrack\'s existing model + where only tutors can confirm final task completion. + +- Privacy Legislation: Sharing student records without explicit, + revocable consent may breach the Australian Privacy Act and Deakin + University\'s data governance policies. Mitigation: opt-in model with + clear consent and right to withdraw. + +- Leaderboard Backlash: Research consistently shows that ranking or + ordering students is negatively perceived. Avoid any ranking; use only + bands or aggregates. + + 1. **Recommended Features for OnTrack** + + ------------------------------------------------------------------------- + Priority Feature Description Inspired + By + ------------- -------------- --------------------------------- ---------- + Quick Win Cohort Anonymised bar showing percentage MyLA, + Progress Bar of the class that has completed Canvas + each task. No names, low privacy + risk, high motivational value. + + Core Tutorial Group Opt-in sidebar showing task MyLA, + Peer Panel status of peers in the same GitHub + tutorial group. Visible only when + both parties have opted in. + + Enhancement Performance Students grouped into On Track / MyLA + Band Summary Slightly Behind / Ahead rather + than raw percentages to reduce + comparison anxiety. + + Enhancement Activity Weekly activity chart showing GitHub + Heatmap days a student engaged with + tasks. Opt-in only; no grade or + score data. + + Future \'Who Needs Aggregated count of students who Moodle, + Help\' Signal flagged a task as \'Need Help\', OnTrack + enabling peer or tutor support + without naming individuals. + ------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +2. **Comparison Summary ** + + --------------------------------------------------------------------------- + System Category Peer Privacy Controls Key OnTrack Fit + Visibility + ------------ ------------ ------------ ----------------- ------------------ + OnTrack Academic LMS None Tutor-only Baseline add peer + (current) layer on top + + Canvas Academic LMS None Instructor-only Status label model + (students) + + Moodle Academic LMS Nonnative Instructor-only Progress bar UI + pattern + + MyLA (U. Student Yes Consent-based, Strongest privacy + Michigan) Analytics anonymised opt-in model performance + bands + + GitHub Project Full (public Public / private Opt-in activity + Management repos) toggle heatmap + --------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +2. **User Stories** + +Format: *As a \[user\], I want \[goal\] so that \[reason\]* + +**User Story 1**: + +As a student, I want to view the anonymised average progress of my +tutorial group so that I can benchmark my own performance without seeing +individual names. + +**User Story 2**: + +As a student, I want to see peers grouped into performance bands (On +Track / Slightly Behind / Ahead) so that I can understand where I stand +relative to the group. + +**User Story 3**: + +As a student, I want to opt-in (or opt-out at any time) to share my +task-status data with my tutorial group so that I control my own +privacy. + +**User Story 4**: + +As a tutor, I want to see an aggregated count of students who have +flagged a specific task as difficult so that I can prioritise which +tasks to address in my next tutorial session without singling out any +individual student. + +**User Story 5**: + +As a tutor, I want to enable or disable the Peer Indicator panel for my +entire unit so that I maintain oversight of social dynamics. + +**User Story 6**: + +As a tutor, I want to send a targeted in-app nudge to all students who +have not yet started a task by a set date so that I can prompt action +without revealing which specific students are behind.  + +3. **Functional Requirements** + +What the system must do. + + --------------------------------------------------------------------------- + ID Requirement Description + ----- ------------------ -------------------------------------------------- + FR1 View Peer Progress The system must allow students to view the + progress of peers enrolled in the same unit or + tutorial group using task completion data (e.g., + percentage, completed tasks, or progress + indicators). + + FR2 Privacy Control The system must allow students to opt in or opt + (Opt-in/Opt-out) out of sharing their progress. Only students who + opt in will have their progress included in peer + views. + + FR3 Anonymised Display The system must display peer progress in an + anonymised way (e.g., "Student A", averages, or + ranges) unless explicit consent and policy allow + identification. + + FR4 Tutor The system must allow tutors or unit staff to + Configuration enable or disable the peer progress feature at + unit or task level, ensuring appropriate use. + --------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +4. **Non-Functional Requirements** + +System quality requirements. + + ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- + ID Category Requirement + ------ --------------- ----------------------------------------------------- + NFR1 Performance The system should display peer progress data quickly + (within a few seconds) and support near real-time or + cached updates without noticeable delay to users. + + NFR2 Security / The system must protect student data by using + Privacy existing OnTrack authentication and role-based access + control. It must not expose identifiable progress + data without user consent. + + NFR3 Accessibility The system must comply with accessibility standards + (e.g., WCAG), ensuring the interface is readable, + usable with keyboard navigation, and does not rely + only on colour to convey information. + + NFR4 Scalability The system should support large numbers of students + across multiple units without performance degradation + and should scale as more users adopt the feature. + ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +5. **Constraints (OnTrack Integration)** + +- Must integrate with the existing task/portfolio model and task + statuses. + +- Must use current authentication system and user roles (student, + tutor). + +- Must respect the current Angular 17 migration state (components added + to migrated views only). + +- No new backend tables required -- reuse existing task-completion and + tutorial-group data. + +6. **References** + + + +i. Canvas Module Progress Guide: + + +ii. Moodle Tracking Progress Documentation: + + +iii. MyLA Dashboard Overview (University of Michigan): + + +iv. Peer-Comparison Dashboards Research (ScienceDirect): + + +v. Learning Analytics Dashboards Review (PMC): + + +vi. GitHub: From a7d1a08c9d866a69ac7b88f8a82d7d7fc21a240f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: mudith-perera Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2026 13:23:52 +1000 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Layout Changes Done --- .../peer-progress-indicator/ppi-research.md | 416 +++++++----------- 1 file changed, 166 insertions(+), 250 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/content/docs/peer-progress-indicator/ppi-research.md b/src/content/docs/peer-progress-indicator/ppi-research.md index 9ecb6457..fd49b857 100644 --- a/src/content/docs/peer-progress-indicator/ppi-research.md +++ b/src/content/docs/peer-progress-indicator/ppi-research.md @@ -1,264 +1,212 @@ --- title: Peer Progress Indicator Research --- -**[Peer Progress Indicator Research]{.underline}** -**Team Member Names** +## Team Member Names -**Name:** David Nganga\ -**Section worked on:** Existing Systems & Features + **Name:** David Nganga\ + **Section worked on:** Existing Systems & Features -**Name:** Faith Wandabwa\ -**Section worked on:** Existing Systems & Features + **Name:** Faith Wandabwa\ + **Section worked on:** Existing Systems & Features -**Name:** Mudith Makawitage\ -**Section worked on:** Functional & non-functional requirements + **Name:** Mudith Makawitage\ + **Section worked on:** Functional & non-functional requirements -**Name:** Sanjana Bottu\ -**Section worked on:** Brainstorm & draft initial user stories + **Name:** Sanjana Bottu\ + **Section worked on:** Brainstorm & draft initial user stories -**Name:** Aparjot Kaur\ -**Section worked on:** -# **Research: Existing Systems & Features** +## 1. Research: Existing Systems & Features -## **Overview** +### 1.1. Overview -This report examines Learning Management Systems (LMS), student-facing -analytics dashboards, and project management platforms to identify -progress-tracking features, privacy models, and design patterns suitable -for the OnTrack Peer Indicator System**.** + This report examines Learning Management Systems (LMS), student facing + analytics dashboards, and project management platforms to identify + progress tracking features, privacy models, and design patterns suitable + for the OnTrack Peer Indicator System. -Currently, OnTrack provides: + Currently, OnTrack provides: -- Individual task and portfolio progress + - Individual task and portfolio progress -- Tutor feedback + - Tutor feedback -However, it lacks peer visibility features. The following systems were -reviewed: + However, it lacks peer visibility features. The following systems were + reviewed: -- Canvas + - Canvas -- Moodle + - Moodle -- My Learning Analytics (MyLA) + - My Learning Analytics (MyLA) -- GitHub + - GitHub -## **Systems and Features Reviewed** +### 1.2. Systems and Features Reviewed -### **Canvas LMS** +#### 1.2.1. Canvas LMS -- Displays progress via status labels: Complete, In Progress, Locked + - Displays progress via status labels: Complete, In Progress, Locked -- Instructor-only analytics dashboard + - Instructor-only analytics dashboard -- No peer visibility + - No peer visibility -Key Ideas for OnTrack + Key Ideas for OnTrack -- Status labels can map directly to OnTrack tasks + - Status labels can map directly to OnTrack tasks -- Aggregate cohort data can be anonymised for students + - Aggregate cohort data can be anonymised for students -Reference**:** + Reference: -### **Moodle** +#### 1.2.2. Moodle -- Uses progress bars and circular indicators + - Uses progress bars and circular indicators -- Students see only their own progress + - Students see only their own progress -- Teachers access detailed reports + - Teachers access detailed reports -Key Ideas for OnTrack + Key Ideas for OnTrack -- Familiar progress bar UI + - Familiar progress bar UI -- Reinforces need for built-in privacy (not retrofitted) + - Reinforces need for built-in privacy (not retrofitted) -Reference**:** + Reference: -### **My Learning Analytics (MyLA)** +#### 1.2.3. My Learning Analytics (MyLA) -- Privacy-first student analytics dashboard + - Privacy-first student analytics dashboard -- Uses anonymised performance bands (e.g., 90--100%) + - Uses anonymised performance bands (e.g., 90--100%) -- Visualisations include: + - Visualisations include: - - Timeline activity + - Timeline activity - - Grade distributions + - Grade distributions - - Content popularity + - Content popularity -Key Ideas for OnTrack + Key Ideas for OnTrack -- Performance bands (On Track / Behind / Ahead) + - Performance bands (On Track / Behind / Ahead) -- Anonymised cohort percentages + - Anonymised cohort percentages -- Opt-in sharing + tutor controls + - Opt-in sharing + tutor controls -Reference**:** - + Reference: + -### **GitHub** +#### 1.2.4. GitHub -- Activity-based visibility (not grades) + - Activity-based visibility (not grades) -- Contribution heatmap + - Contribution heatmap -- Public/private control + - Public/private control -Key Ideas for OnTrack + Key Ideas for OnTrack -- Activity heatmap (engagement only) + - Activity heatmap (engagement only) -- Opt-in visibility model + - Opt-in visibility model -Reference**:** + Reference: + +### 1.3. Privacy Controls -1. **Privacy Controls** All reviewed systems share a privacy-first philosophy. The table below maps key principles observed across systems to their application in our design.  - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- - Privacy Observed In Application to Peer Indicator System - Principle - -------------- -------------- ----------------------------------------- - Default Canvas, All peer visibility is off by default. - opt-out / Moodle, MyLA Students must explicitly opt in. - private - - Anonymised MyLA, Canvas Group-level statistics shown (e.g., \'72% - aggregates (instructor of your tutorial completed Task 3\'). No - only view) individual names or scores exposed. - - Performance MyLA Students grouped into broad bands (On - band grouping Track / Slightly Behind / Ahead) to - reduce direct comparison. - - Tutor enable / MyLA, Moodle Tutors can turn the peer panel on or off - disable plugins per unit. Students cannot override this. - - Minimal data All systems Only task status is shared no marks, - exposure reviewed feedback content, or submission scores. - - Right to MyLA Students can opt out at any time with - withdraw immediate effect and no residual data - retained in peer views. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- - -2. **Key Insights** - -What Works Well - -- Anonymised Cohort Comparisons: Aggregate group-level data (e.g., - \'your tutorial is 72% complete on average\') motivates students and - supports self-regulated learning without triggering direct - competition. This is the most well-supported finding across the - literature. (MyLA, General LADs) - -- Visual, Glanceable Indicators: Progress bars, colour-coded status - icons, and activity heatmaps allow students to absorb progress - information instantly. Text-heavy reports are consistently less - effective for motivation. (Canvas, Moodle, GitHub) - -- Seamless Dashboard Integration: MyLA succeeds because it embeds within - the existing student dashboard rather than requiring navigation to a - separate system. Our peer indicator should live within OnTrack\'s - existing student view. - -- Tutor Oversight: Allowing tutors to enable or disable the peer panel - per unit prevents inappropriate use and gives staff control over - social dynamics in their cohort. - -- Status Labels Over Scores: Simple labels (In Progress / Needs Help / - Complete) carry enough information for peer support without exposing - grades. OnTrack already has these statuses, making implementation - straightforward. - -Potential Risks - -- Social Comparison Anxiety: Visible peer data can increase anxiety in - students who see themselves as behind. Risk is highest when individual - names are shown. Mitigation: anonymised aggregates by default; named - data only with mutual opt-in. - -- Gaming the System: Students may mark tasks complete prematurely if - progress is visible. Mitigation: maintain OnTrack\'s existing model - where only tutors can confirm final task completion. - -- Privacy Legislation: Sharing student records without explicit, - revocable consent may breach the Australian Privacy Act and Deakin - University\'s data governance policies. Mitigation: opt-in model with - clear consent and right to withdraw. - -- Leaderboard Backlash: Research consistently shows that ranking or - ordering students is negatively perceived. Avoid any ranking; use only - bands or aggregates. - - 1. **Recommended Features for OnTrack** - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Priority Feature Description Inspired - By - ------------- -------------- --------------------------------- ---------- - Quick Win Cohort Anonymised bar showing percentage MyLA, - Progress Bar of the class that has completed Canvas - each task. No names, low privacy - risk, high motivational value. - - Core Tutorial Group Opt-in sidebar showing task MyLA, - Peer Panel status of peers in the same GitHub - tutorial group. Visible only when - both parties have opted in. - - Enhancement Performance Students grouped into On Track / MyLA - Band Summary Slightly Behind / Ahead rather - than raw percentages to reduce - comparison anxiety. - - Enhancement Activity Weekly activity chart showing GitHub - Heatmap days a student engaged with - tasks. Opt-in only; no grade or - score data. - - Future \'Who Needs Aggregated count of students who Moodle, - Help\' Signal flagged a task as \'Need Help\', OnTrack - enabling peer or tutor support - without naming individuals. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- +|Privacy Principle | Observed In| Application to Peer Indicator System | +|-----------------|-----------|-----------------------------------------| +|Default opt-out / private | Canvas, Moodle, MyLA | All peer visibility is off by default. Students must explicitly opt in.| +| Anonymised aggregates only | MyLA, Canvas (instructor view) | Group-level statistics shown (e.g., '72% of your tutorial completed Task 3'). No individual names or scores exposed.| +| Performance band grouping | MyLA | Students grouped into broad bands (On Track / Slightly Behind / Ahead) to reduce direct comparison.| +| Tutor enable / disable | MyLA, Moodle plugins | Tutors can turn the peer panel on or off per unit. Students cannot override this.| +| Minimal data exposure | All systems reviewed | Only task status is shared no marks, feedback content, or submission scores.| +| Right to withdraw | MyLA | Students can opt out at any time with immediate effect and no residual data retained in peer views. | + + +### 1.4. Key Insights + + What Works Well + + - Anonymised Cohort Comparisons: Aggregate group-level data (e.g., + \'your tutorial is 72% complete on average\') motivates students and + supports self-regulated learning without triggering direct + competition. This is the most well-supported finding across the + literature. (MyLA, General LADs) + + - Visual, Glanceable Indicators: Progress bars, colour-coded status + icons, and activity heatmaps allow students to absorb progress + information instantly. Text-heavy reports are consistently less + effective for motivation. (Canvas, Moodle, GitHub) + + - Seamless Dashboard Integration: MyLA succeeds because it embeds within + the existing student dashboard rather than requiring navigation to a + separate system. Our peer indicator should live within OnTrack\'s + existing student view. + + - Tutor Oversight: Allowing tutors to enable or disable the peer panel + per unit prevents inappropriate use and gives staff control over + social dynamics in their cohort. + + - Status Labels Over Scores: Simple labels (In Progress / Needs Help / + Complete) carry enough information for peer support without exposing + grades. OnTrack already has these statuses, making implementation + straightforward. + + Potential Risks + + - Social Comparison Anxiety: Visible peer data can increase anxiety in + students who see themselves as behind. Risk is highest when individual + names are shown. Mitigation: anonymised aggregates by default; named + data only with mutual opt-in. + + - Gaming the System: Students may mark tasks complete prematurely if + progress is visible. Mitigation: maintain OnTrack\'s existing model + where only tutors can confirm final task completion. -2. **Comparison Summary ** - - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - System Category Peer Privacy Controls Key OnTrack Fit - Visibility - ------------ ------------ ------------ ----------------- ------------------ - OnTrack Academic LMS None Tutor-only Baseline add peer - (current) layer on top - - Canvas Academic LMS None Instructor-only Status label model - (students) - - Moodle Academic LMS Nonnative Instructor-only Progress bar UI - pattern - - MyLA (U. Student Yes Consent-based, Strongest privacy - Michigan) Analytics anonymised opt-in model performance - bands + - Privacy Legislation: Sharing student records without explicit, + revocable consent may breach the Australian Privacy Act and Deakin + University\'s data governance policies. Mitigation: opt-in model with + clear consent and right to withdraw. - GitHub Project Full (public Public / private Opt-in activity - Management repos) toggle heatmap - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - -2. **User Stories** + - Leaderboard Backlash: Research consistently shows that ranking or + ordering students is negatively perceived. Avoid any ranking; use only + bands or aggregates. + + ### 1.5. Recommended Features for OnTrack + +| Priority | Feature | Description | Inspired By | +| ----------- | ------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------- | +| Quick Win | Cohort Progress Bar | Anonymised bar showing percentage of the class that has completed each task. No names, low privacy risk, high motivational value. | MyLA, Canvas | +| Core | Tutorial Group Peer Panel | Opt-in sidebar showing task status of peers in the same tutorial group. Visible only when both parties have opted in. | MyLA, GitHub | +| Enhancement | Performance Band Summary | Students grouped into On Track / Slightly Behind / Ahead rather than raw percentages to reduce comparison anxiety. | MyLA | +| Enhancement | Activity Heatmap | Weekly activity chart showing days a student engaged with tasks. Opt-in only; no grade or score data. | GitHub | +| Future | 'Who Needs Help' Signal | Aggregated count of students who flagged a task as 'Need Help', enabling peer or tutor support without naming individuals. | Moodle, OnTrack | + + +### 1.6. Comparison Summary + + | System | Category | Peer Visibility | Privacy Controls | Key OnTrack Fit | +| ------------------ | ------------------ | ------------------- | ----------------------- | ----------------------------------------- | +| OnTrack (current) | Academic LMS | None | Tutor-only | Baseline add peer layer on top | +| Canvas | Academic LMS | None (students) | Instructor-only | Status label model | +| Moodle | Academic LMS | Nonnative | Instructor-only | Progress bar UI pattern | +| MyLA (U. Michigan) | Student Analytics | Yes anonymised | Consent-based, opt-in | Strongest privacy model performance bands | +| GitHub | Project Management | Full (public repos) | Public / private toggle | Opt-in activity heatmap | + + +## 2. User Stories Format: *As a \[user\], I want \[goal\] so that \[reason\]* @@ -298,61 +246,30 @@ As a tutor, I want to send a targeted in-app nudge to all students who have not yet started a task by a set date so that I can prompt action without revealing which specific students are behind.  -3. **Functional Requirements** +## 3. Functional Requirements What the system must do. - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ID Requirement Description - ----- ------------------ -------------------------------------------------- - FR1 View Peer Progress The system must allow students to view the - progress of peers enrolled in the same unit or - tutorial group using task completion data (e.g., - percentage, completed tasks, or progress - indicators). - - FR2 Privacy Control The system must allow students to opt in or opt - (Opt-in/Opt-out) out of sharing their progress. Only students who - opt in will have their progress included in peer - views. - - FR3 Anonymised Display The system must display peer progress in an - anonymised way (e.g., "Student A", averages, or - ranges) unless explicit consent and policy allow - identification. +| ID | Requirement | Description | +| --- | -------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | +| FR1 | View Peer Progress | The system must allow students to view the progress of peers enrolled in the same unit or tutorial group using task completion data (e.g., percentage, completed tasks, or progress indicators). | +| FR2 | Privacy Control (Opt-in/Opt-out) | The system must allow students to opt in or opt out of sharing their progress. Only students who opt in will have their progress included in peer views. | +| FR3 | Anonymised Display | The system must display peer progress in an anonymised way (e.g., "Student A", averages, or ranges) unless explicit consent and policy allow identification. | +| FR4 | Tutor Configuration | The system must allow tutors or unit staff to enable or disable the peer progress feature at unit or task level, ensuring appropriate use. | - FR4 Tutor The system must allow tutors or unit staff to - Configuration enable or disable the peer progress feature at - unit or task level, ensuring appropriate use. - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- -4. **Non-Functional Requirements** +## 4. Non-Functional Requirements System quality requirements. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ID Category Requirement - ------ --------------- ----------------------------------------------------- - NFR1 Performance The system should display peer progress data quickly - (within a few seconds) and support near real-time or - cached updates without noticeable delay to users. - - NFR2 Security / The system must protect student data by using - Privacy existing OnTrack authentication and role-based access - control. It must not expose identifiable progress - data without user consent. - - NFR3 Accessibility The system must comply with accessibility standards - (e.g., WCAG), ensuring the interface is readable, - usable with keyboard navigation, and does not rely - only on colour to convey information. - - NFR4 Scalability The system should support large numbers of students - across multiple units without performance degradation - and should scale as more users adopt the feature. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- +| ID | Category | Requirement | +| ---- | ------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | +| NFR1 | Performance | The system should display peer progress data quickly (within a few seconds) and support near real-time or cached updates without noticeable delay to users. | +| NFR2 | Security / Privacy | The system must protect student data by using existing OnTrack authentication and role-based access control. It must not expose identifiable progress data without user consent. | +| NFR3 | Accessibility | The system must comply with accessibility standards (e.g., WCAG), ensuring the interface is readable, usable with keyboard navigation, and does not rely only on colour to convey information. | +| NFR4 | Scalability | The system should support large numbers of students across multiple units without performance degradation and should scale as more users adopt the feature. | -5. **Constraints (OnTrack Integration)** +## 5. Constraints (OnTrack Integration) - Must integrate with the existing task/portfolio model and task statuses. @@ -366,23 +283,22 @@ System quality requirements. - No new backend tables required -- reuse existing task-completion and tutorial-group data. -6. **References** +## 6. References - -i. Canvas Module Progress Guide: +1. Canvas Module Progress Guide: -ii. Moodle Tracking Progress Documentation: +2. Moodle Tracking Progress Documentation: -iii. MyLA Dashboard Overview (University of Michigan): +3. MyLA Dashboard Overview (University of Michigan): -iv. Peer-Comparison Dashboards Research (ScienceDirect): +4. Peer-Comparison Dashboards Research (ScienceDirect): -v. Learning Analytics Dashboards Review (PMC): +5. Learning Analytics Dashboards Review (PMC): -vi. GitHub: +6. GitHub: