Behind the Scenes Part III: Task Review
The third article in our “Behind the Scenes” category is intended to conclude the first thematic block, the process of publishing and reviewing tasks. The two previous articles dealt with the steps up to the request for publication on the side of the users and the criteria according to which we, the MCM team, decide whether a task is to be published or not yet. In the following, we would like to illustrate the steps of a review by means of a specific example.
In the task “Weißer Reiter” (“White Rider”) you have to observe the rotation of a figure and on the basis of the duration of a rotation you have to calculate how often the figure would rotate around its mounting in a whole day. The task actually corresponds to all criteria discussed in “Behind the Scenes Part II”, but the solution interval is designed in such a way that it does not lie evenly around the value of the sample solution. Here a duration of the rotation of 48 seconds was assumed. In the green solution interval one remains if one would measure 45 to 50 seconds. So, downwards there is a tolerance of three seconds, upwards a tolerance of only two seconds. The situation is similar for the orange interval. So before the task is published, we would contact the person who created the task. To do this, we click on the “Write Review” button that can be seen in the upper part of the left image.
Now you reach a screen where you can choose whether the task should be published or whether it should be revised again or, as in our case, checked. In addition, you can write a written feedback, in which you can either inform that the task has been accepted or address the criticisms and suggestions in such a way that the creator is encouraged to revise or review his task and resubmit it.
By clicking on ” Send “, the task creator will receive a email with the written text. In case of a preliminary rejection, he can now revise and resubmit the task. In addition, he will receive the contact details of the reviewer in order to be able to discuss the points mentioned before the resubmission, if necessary.
If the person who created the task or trail requests publication again, the MCM team member who reviewed the task or trail the previous time will receive a notification by email. The described process now starts again, whereby all previous developments and messages can be tracked and followed via a review log.