Page tree

Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.


  • Developer: Tommy spring (40% Feb-May) and summer (100% Jun-Aug) 2020
    • At least Thursdays, in addition other day(s) based on when Jaakko and Markku are available
  • Technical instructor: Jaakko
  • Customer: Ari
  • Additional work:
    • Jaakko/Markku (A+)
    • Anni (modelling the process in collaboration with Mari)
  • Weekly: part of the team standup
  • Biweekly meeting with customer during the summer (Wed @ Noon)

Process description

Write here


  1. creating assignment templates: currently maintainers by hand → automatically generated templates: when creating an assignment, teacher chooses to use template submissions → the template is generated (every time) a student downloads an assignment (spring 2020, priority 1)
    1. Automatically filled-in contact details; a) visible for the student: student name and student ID b) hashed: student ID and assignment ID AND courseyear
    2. DONE
  2. policy issues
    1. how to inform students that they are monitored?
    2. active agreement 
    3. the reporting process from the teacher to Mari and how Mari handles the situation (spring 2020)
    4. teachers are not supposed to save documents locally
  3. student process
    1. how the student gets the template (requires renewal (currently uses an old version of personal assignmetns) / or rewriting) (spring 2020 priority 1)
    2. how the student uses and submits the assignment (currently available)
    3. sees what the analysis results are (option by teacher) (to be prioritized later)
    4. active agreement (during the enrollment) that they are aware of surveillance / proctoring
  4. teacher process
    1. reporting (Wed Jun 3)
      1. straightforward and simple comparison process (summer 2020)
      2. the system produces a list of suspected cases as pairs of original-copy assignment submissions, including links to A+ submissions, and the watermark of the original submission (preliminary visualization from Ari)
        1. report takes into account also previous years of the same course!
        2. report includes all submissions and their points
      3. the teacher can see both submissions (source and target) for comparison in chronological order
    2. functionality (Wed Jun 17)
      1. the teacher can write their comments on the comparison results, and mark a status on each case
      2. cases marked as identified plagiarism can be marked to be submitted further to the faculty
    3. follow-up and visualization of the submission process (e.g. numbers of submissions, time stamps, development of submission)
      1. process harmonization with Mari, spring 2020
      2. implementation later
  5. analyzing the response (Wed Jun 3)
    1. scripts that analyze the responses are currently local → to be implemented as a New Service or as part of Radar (spring-summer 2020) - Jaakko decides
  6. the reporting process from the teacher to Mari and how Mari handles the situation (spring 2020)
  7. support for other languages in addition to Python (autumn 2020 → )