Usability issues with new assignment editor

[jakeob28]

There are a few usability issues I experienced while working with the new assignment editor, so I wanted to document them here so that they can be eventually addressed to make things more intuitive for new instructors. I understand usability might come second to getting things working though.

• As far as I'm aware, there's no documentation for the editor features, so you just have to try common syntax to stumble across different markup features. A formatting toolbar or at least a list of supported syntax below the editor would help. Examples:
  • Slash commands
  • Single backticks for inline code, triple backtick for code blocks
  • Dollar signs for math with LaTeX syntax
  • To create a named link, you should type the text you'd like, highlight it, and paste the URL from your clipboard over it.
  • Headings use markdown-style formatting with # symbols
• If you attempt to specify a language for a code block (by typing a language name after the triple backtick), syntax highlighting is not provided in the editor. It does show up once the question is rendered however (this confused me for a while since I didn't realize highlighting was supported at all). I believe tiptap has an extension to provide highlight functionality in the editor.
• "Check all that apply" type questions are automatically created when a multiple-choice question has multiple correct answer choices. However, there are times when you only have one correct answer, but you'd still like the "check all that apply" behavior (so that students must think about each answer choice instead of stopping once they've found a correct one). RST allowed us to force this behavior with :multiple_answers:, but I don't believe the new editor has this option. I think separating radio vs checkbox questions into separate types might be more intuitive and also allow us to force checkboxes with a single correct choice (or even no correct choices?)

[Tanaquil18]

"Check all that apply" type questions are automatically created when a multiple-choice question has multiple correct answer choices. However, there are times when you only have one correct answer, but you'd still like the "check all that apply" behavior (so that students must think about each answer choice instead of stopping once they've found a correct one). RST allowed us to force this behavior with :multiple_answers:, but I don't believe the new editor has this option. I think separating radio vs checkbox questions into separate types might be more intuitive and also allow us to force checkboxes with a single correct choice (or even no correct choices?)

I'll add that I've had the same thought when writing multiple choice interactive exercises in PreTeXt. It'd be great if there were an attribute or something that allowed for checkboxes even when there is only 1 correct answer. The effect on student thinking is different if they have to read each answer and think about it versus if the first one is correct so they can skip reading whatever the next answers say. I'll post on -dev about it.

[bnmnetp]

@morozov-av

A couple of high priority things here:

1. We need to make it clear that typing a / brings up the menu of format options. Maybe the tip should be "type a / to see your editing options" or something instead of "Be concise and specific with your question for better responses"
2. It would be nice if the menu you get when you type / included adding code. Typing the three back quotes ``` only works if it is the FIRST thing you do in the edit box.
3. line numbers are a lower priority than the bugs at the moment.
   4.Allowing teachers to write a question that looks like it has multiple answers but really does not is also a lower priority for now.

[barbarer]

We should have line numbers on peer instruction questions, so I think that should be a high priority. We plan on adding more peer instruction questions this summer.

[bnmnetp]

Please create separate issues for separate problems. Its too hard to prioritize and discuss when you just dump a bunch of ideas and/or potential bugs into a laundry list.