Hacktoberfest 2026: los issues que los mantenedores marcaron para octubre, abiertos y aptos para principiantes. Explorar issues de Hacktoberfest

[curriculum-eval] side-quest-01-02-environment-reference.md: checkpoint_quality — checkpoint invisible to rubric due to shortcode heading mismatch

Cerrado Apto para principiantes
  • ¿Algo no está bien?
#3,980 0 comentarios 0 reacciones 0 asignados Ver en GitHub

Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día

Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.

Evaluación

Dificultad
2/5
Tiempo estimado
1-3 horas
Aptitud para principiantes
75/100
Tipo de issue
Error
Claridad
Bastante claro
Estado de actividad
Activo
Stack tecnológico
markdown, python
Área
documentation, tooling

Línea de trabajo

Comience en .github/skills/curriculum-quantitative-assessment/curriculum_assessment.py leyendo CHECKPOINT_RE y la lógica relacionada de detección de checkpoints. Actualice el reconocimiento del formato de encabezado ✅, vuelva a ejecutar después la rúbrica del currículo sobre el corpus del workshop y verifique que las secciones de checkpoint válidas ya no reciban una puntuación checkpoint_quality de cero. Las sugerencias independientes sobre el contenido del workshop quedan como un alcance de seguimiento opcional.

Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.

Descripción

curriculum documentation quality

File: workshop/side-quest-01-02-environment-reference.md
Overall Score: 4.93 / 10.0 (corpus mean: 6.09 / 10.0)

Flagged Dimensions:

Dimension Score Benchmark Delta
checkpoint_quality 0.0 ≥ 4 items → ≥10 (has_checkpoint required) −10.0
active_learning 2.1 ≥ 3.0 density (10.0 cap) −0.9
cognitive_load 6.3 ≤ 800 words (10.0) −3.7

Root Cause (≤ 2 sentences):
The rubric's CHECKPOINT_RE only matches a literal ✅ emoji heading (## ✅ Checkpoint), but this file (like 90 of 93 workshop files) uses the :white_check_mark: shortcode instead, so has_checkpoint evaluates to False and checkpoint_quality is forced to 0.0 even though the page has a real, well-formed checkpoint with 7 checklist items. Separately, at 1,433 words this reference page is nearly double the 800-word cognitive-load ceiling and its 0.63 activity density (2 code blocks + 7 checklist items per ~1,430 words) is far below the ideal density of 3.

Evidence (quoted from the file):

✅ Checkpoint

  • You can name each environment and tool used in this workshop and describe its role

Learning Science Rationale:
Mayer's Signaling Principle holds that clear, consistently recognized structural cues (like a checkpoint heading) help learners self-assess progress; a checkpoint that exists in the markdown but is invisible to the scoring tool represents a measurement gap, not a content gap, and should be fixed at the rubric level, not by rewriting a correct heading. Independently, Sweller's Cognitive Load Theory predicts that a 1,433-word single-pass reference page with low activity density forces learners into passive reading rather than active retrieval, increasing extraneous load and reducing retention — the page would benefit from being split or from adding retrieval-practice checkboxes throughout, not just at the end.

Improvement Prompt (for an agent):

In .github/skills/curriculum-quantitative-assessment/curriculum_assessment.py, update CHECKPOINT_RE (and any related prereq/checkpoint detection regex) to also match the ":white_check_mark:" shortcode heading format used across the workshop (e.g. "## :white_check_mark: Checkpoint"), in addition to the literal "✅" emoji. Re-run the rubric against the workshop corpus and confirm checkpoint_quality scores are no longer zero for files that have a valid checkpoint section. Separately, in workshop/side-quest-01-02-environment-reference.md, consider adding 2-3 short "quick check" checklist items or mini code snippets distributed through the glossary and screenshot sections (not just at the end) to raise activity_density above 3, and evaluate whether the glossary table and the conceptual-screenshots section could be split into two shorter pages to bring word_count under 800.

Expected Score After Fix: 7.0 / 10.0 (assuming rubric regex fix restores checkpoint_quality to ~10 and activity density improves modestly)

Generated by 🔬 Curriculum Quality Evaluator · copilot · auto · 125.2 AIC · ⌖ 7.43 AIC · ⊞ 9K · ◷

  • expires on Sep 30, 2026, 1:09 PM UTC
Lenguaje dominante
JavaScript
Estrellas
52
Forks
26
Merge medio
12 h 25 min
PR fusionados (30 d)
18

Preparar el entorno

Abrir en Codespaces

Inicia el contenedor de desarrollo del proyecto en tu navegador, con tu propia cuenta de GitHub.

  • Sin Dockerfile ni archivo de Docker Compose
  • Sin plantilla de pull request
  • Sin guía de contribución

Primeros pasos

  1. Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
  2. Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
  3. Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
  4. Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.

Más de githubnext/gh-aw-workshop

Todos los issues de githubnext/gh-aw-workshop

Issues similares

Más issues de JavaScript

Recibe los nuevos issues en tu correo

Un resumen breve de issues de GitHub para principiantes.