Here were are the levels details!!!

In T13124#229973, @echarruau wrote:

Here were are the levels details!!!

The level details are the one described as for each multiple dataset as
Level1: Find equivalent cards up to 10 with multiplication of 1.
As this description is for the multiple data 1. Similar description is defined for other multiple datasets too.

@echarruau : this is the dataset content I asked for when reviewing the proposal: one dataset with one level per number table.

Ok

Le dim. 10 mai 2020 à 20:21, Timothée Giet <noreply@phabricator.kde.org> a
écrit :

timotheegiet added a comment.

@echarruau https://phabricator.kde.org/p/echarruau/ : this is the
dataset content I asked for when reviewing the proposal: one dataset with
one level per number table.

*TASK DETAIL*
https://phabricator.kde.org/T13124

*To: *dekumar, timotheegiet
*Cc: *echarruau, timotheegiet, amankumargupta, AkshayCHD, jjazeix,
dekumar, sanjayshetty, parimalprasoon, harrymecwan, ganeshredcobra,
asagtani, nityanandkumar, andreask, rahulyadav, scagarwal, bcoudoin

I still have doubts about this one.
The way we present it, we assume tables are learned in one time.
I really would prefer to have sub levels for each table.
Let say:

table 4
Level 1: up to 4*4
Level 2 up to 4*6
Level 3 up to 4*8
Level 4 up to 4*10

also we will could need a way to tell what the result of the multiplicaiton that has been wrongly chosen is

let say that card one is 4*4 associated with 20

It would be nice to have something like

4*4 = 16
not
20

We need to think "learning" not only "evaluation" :)

I see what you mean, though as the description ("Goal" text) says, the goal is to "practice", which implies already learnt somehow...
So I would prefer to keep full table like this for the arithmetic memory activities, and not change the activity behavior.

(note: just we would need to adapt the proposed numbers of stars according to what you said)

And for the "learning" step, I think we can easily develop a new activity dedicated for each operation.
Those activities would be more progressive, and give such hint as you describe for wrong answers...
That would make more sense to me.

Make sens, maybe we can use the introduction later on (outside of gsoc) to
point to activities that teache tables?

Le mer. 13 mai 2020 à 13:27, Timothée Giet <noreply@phabricator.kde.org> a
écrit :

timotheegiet added a comment.

I see what you mean, though as the description ("Goal" text) says, the
goal is to "practice", which implies already learnt somehow...
So I would prefer to keep full table like this for the arithmetic memory
activities, and not change the activity behavior.

And for the "learning" step, I think we can easily develop a new activity
dedicated for each operation.
Those activities would be more progressive, and give such hint as you
describe for wrong answers...
That would make more sense to me.

*TASK DETAIL*
https://phabricator.kde.org/T13124

*To: *dekumar, timotheegiet
*Cc: *echarruau, timotheegiet, amankumargupta, AkshayCHD, jjazeix,
dekumar, sanjayshetty, parimalprasoon, harrymecwan, ganeshredcobra,
asagtani, nityanandkumar, andreask, rahulyadav, scagarwal, bcoudoin

Maybe not in the introduction voices (as it would make them too long, and force to re-record specific voices for each arithmetic memory activity for all languages....).
But we could add such text note in the Manual parts, why not.

@echarruau @timotheegiet So the datasets description I have added is fine for this activity? Later, we can have a activity to teach multiplication of tables from 2 to 10 may be.

@dekumar:
I think the text can also be simplified for all the operations memory activities, similar to the enumeration memory, like:
"table of 1"
"table of 2"
...

And the difficulty levels (stars) should surely be adapted a bit. But this can be refined afterward.

Else, yes it's good.

In T13124#230297, @timotheegiet wrote:

@dekumar:
I think the text can also be simplified for all the operations memory activities, similar to the enumeration memory, like:
"table of 1"
"table of 2"
...

And the difficulty levels (stars) should surely be adapted a bit. But this can be refined afterward.

Else, yes it's good.

I have updated the description.

Consise efficient great goal ;)

Le mer. 13 mai 2020 à 21:41, Deepak Kumar
<noreply@phabricator.kde.org> a écrit :

dekumar added a comment.

In T13124#230297, @timotheegiet wrote:

@dekumar:
I think the text can also be simplified for all the operations memory activities, similar to the enumeration memory, like:
"table of 1"
"table of 2"
...

And the difficulty levels (stars) should surely be adapted a bit. But this can be refined afterward.

Else, yes it's good.

I have updated the description.

TASK DETAIL
https://phabricator.kde.org/T13124

To: dekumar
Cc: echarruau, timotheegiet, amankumargupta, AkshayCHD, jjazeix, dekumar, sanjayshetty, parimalprasoon, harrymecwan, ganeshredcobra, asagtani, nityanandkumar, andreask, rahulyadav, scagarwal, bcoudoin

@echarruau I have updated the diffculty levels please review it once and let me know if it's all good.

Here are my corrections

MultipleData 1: 4 star
Goal: Table of 1.
Level 1: Find equivalent cards up to 10 with multiplication of 1.

MultipleData 9: 5 stars
Goal: Table of 9.
Level 1: Find equivalent cards up to 90 with multiplication of 9.
MultipleData 10: 5 stars
Goal: Table of 10.
Level 1: Find equivalent cards up to 100 with multiplication of 10.

In T13124#233744, @echarruau wrote:

Here are my corrections

MultipleData 1: 4 star
Goal: Table of 1.
Level 1: Find equivalent cards up to 10 with multiplication of 1.

MultipleData 9: 5 stars
Goal: Table of 9.
Level 1: Find equivalent cards up to 90 with multiplication of 9.
MultipleData 10: 5 stars
Goal: Table of 10.
Level 1: Find equivalent cards up to 100 with multiplication of 10.

I have updated the description. Thanks for the review!

Actually for datasets description, for consistency I think it's better to use "multiplication table of ... " instead of just "table of ..." (same as you did for subtraction memory).

Maybe only for memory activities that mix operations we should use "table of ...".

In T13124#234077, @timotheegiet wrote:

Actually for datasets description, for consistency I think it's better to use "multiplication table of ... " instead of just "table of ..." (same as you did for subtraction memory).

Maybe only for memory activities that mix operations we should use "table of ...".

@timotheegiet Okay, I will update the description as per your suggestions.