Skip to content

[Feature:TAGrading] Allow changing graders without tagrading#12066

Merged
bmcutler merged 2 commits intomainfrom
view-without-grading
Oct 3, 2025
Merged

[Feature:TAGrading] Allow changing graders without tagrading#12066
bmcutler merged 2 commits intomainfrom
view-without-grading

Conversation

@lavalleeale
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Why is this Change Important & Necessary?

Currently when a assignment does not have manual grading there is no way for graders to be able to view submissions to help students during office hours.

What is the New Behavior?

There are now two select boxes to change the minimum group to grade an assignment, adding one in the "Submissions/Autograding" panel.
image

What steps should a reviewer take to reproduce or test the bug or new feature?

  1. Create a new gradeable without manual grading and use the new select
  2. Enable tagrading and make sure that both select boxes change each other.

Automated Testing & Documentation

Other information

…nGradeableAuto.twig and admin-gradeable-updates.js
@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov bot commented Sep 16, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 21.69%. Comparing base (e8d4cd0) to head (fe3a608).
⚠️ Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main   #12066   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     21.69%   21.69%           
  Complexity     9587     9587           
=========================================
  Files           268      268           
  Lines         36593    36593           
  Branches        475      475           
=========================================
  Hits           7940     7940           
  Misses        28182    28182           
  Partials        471      471           
Flag Coverage Δ
autograder 21.39% <ø> (ø)
js 2.07% <ø> (ø)
migrator 100.00% <ø> (ø)
php 20.71% <ø> (ø)
python_submitty_utils 80.08% <ø> (ø)
submitty_daemon_jobs 90.72% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@JManion32 JManion32 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When a gradeable is created, the dropdown says the lowest privileged access user is instructor. However, it seems that the lowest privileged user is TA. In fact, after some testing, I was unable to make it so that a TA could not have grading access when selecting instructor in the dropdown.

I think the dropdown should start with the lowest privileged access user as TA, or at least automatically change to TA when the instructor clicks the button to open it to them.

Also, you mention that this PR will allow graders to view a submitted assignment in office hours, but wouldn't that only be for the sections they are a part of?

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Seeking Reviewer to Work in Progress in Submitty Development Sep 19, 2025
@lavalleeale
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

When a gradeable is created, the dropdown says the lowest privileged access user is instructor. However, it seems that the lowest privileged user is TA. In fact, after some testing, I was unable to make it so that a TA could not have grading access when selecting instructor in the dropdown.

I think the dropdown should start with the lowest privileged access user as TA, or at least automatically change to TA when the instructor clicks the button to open it to them.

Also, you mention that this PR will allow graders to view a submitted assignment in office hours, but wouldn't that only be for the sections they are a part of?

Just to confirm @JManion32 was that behavior not present on main or does my dropdown keep replicating existing buggy behavior?

@JManion32
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

When a gradeable is created, the dropdown says the lowest privileged access user is instructor. However, it seems that the lowest privileged user is TA. In fact, after some testing, I was unable to make it so that a TA could not have grading access when selecting instructor in the dropdown.
I think the dropdown should start with the lowest privileged access user as TA, or at least automatically change to TA when the instructor clicks the button to open it to them.
Also, you mention that this PR will allow graders to view a submitted assignment in office hours, but wouldn't that only be for the sections they are a part of?

Just to confirm @JManion32 was that behavior not present on main or does my dropdown keep replicating existing buggy behavior?

You're right, this is existing buggy behavior.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@JManion32 JManion32 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Dropdown for grading permissions is now duplicated between the Submissions/Autograding tab and the Grader Assignment tab. Selected permission level remains constant between the two.

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Work in Progress to Awaiting Maintainer Review in Submitty Development Sep 30, 2025
@bmcutler bmcutler merged commit c821d7d into main Oct 3, 2025
22 of 25 checks passed
@bmcutler bmcutler deleted the view-without-grading branch October 3, 2025 21:27
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Awaiting Maintainer Review to Done in Submitty Development Oct 3, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

Archived in project

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants