[curriculum-eval] curriculum_assessment.py: checkpoint_quality — regex misses `:white_check_mark:` shortcode, 0/10 on every page

已关闭 适合新手
  • 哪里不对？
#5,146 0 条评论 0 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

维护者通常 1 天内回复

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

评估

难度
2/5
预计耗时
1-3 小时
新手友好度
78/100
Issue 类型
缺陷
描述清晰度
描述清楚
活跃度
活跃
技术栈
python
领域
testing-qa

调研方向

从 .github/skills/curriculum-quantitative-assessment/curriculum_assessment.py 开始，重点查看 CHECKPOINT_RE、前置条件检查，以及使用 checkpoint 模式的 Bloom 活动提示代码。将这些模式与 issue 中展示的 shortcode 标题进行比较，然后添加一个小型单元测试，覆盖 emoji 和 shortcode 两种形式。对 workshop/*.md 运行评估；当 checkpoint 和前置条件部分均能被识别，并报告所要求的每页评分及语料库均值时，即为完成。

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

描述

curriculum documentation quality

File: .github/skills/curriculum-quantitative-assessment/curriculum_assessment.py
Overall Score: affects all 94 pages (corpus mean 6.06; threshold 5.52)

Flagged Dimensions:

Dimension Score Benchmark Delta
checkpoint_quality 0.0 (all pages) ≥ 7.5 (≥ 3 items) −7.5 or worse
scaffolding 5.0 (all pages) 10 −5.0

Root Cause (≤ 2 sentences):
CHECKPOINT_RE matches ##\s+✅\s*Checkpoint and the prerequisite check matches ##\s+📋\s*Before You Start, but workshop pages use the GitHub shortcodes ## :white_check_mark: Checkpoint and ## :clipboard: Before You Start. Result: has_checkpoint and has_prereq_section are false everywhere, so missing_checkpoint is flagged on pages that have one (e.g. 04-github-actions-intro.md line 138, side-quest-11-06-anthropic-key.md line 109).

Evidence (quoted from the file):

## :white_check_mark: Checkpoint (workshop/04-github-actions-intro.md) vs. CHECKPOINT_RE = re.compile(r"##\s+✅\s*Checkpoint", re.IGNORECASE)

Learning Science Rationale:
A rubric is only a valid proxy for Bloom-aligned formative assessment if it measures the construct it claims to. Misclassifying present checkpoints as absent creates systematic construct-irrelevant error, hides genuine gaps (pages with weak checkpoints), and produces misleading trends such as the two −2.00 swings seen in the history window.

Improvement Prompt (for an agent):

In .github/skills/curriculum-quantitative-assessment/curriculum_assessment.py, update CHECKPOINT_RE to match both the emoji and shortcode forms, e.g. r"##\s+(?:✅|:white_check_mark:)\s*Checkpoint", and update the has_prereq_section regex to accept r"##\s+(?:📋|:clipboard:)\s*Before You Start" as well as "## Prerequisites". Also check the Bloom activity-cue code near line 157 that uses CHECKPOINT_RE. Add a small unit test covering both forms, rerun the assessment over workshop/*.md, and report the new corpus mean and per-page checkpoint_quality scores. Do not change workshop content.

Expected Score After Fix: ~7.0 / 10.0 corpus mean (checkpoint +2.0 weight on 4+ item pages, scaffolding +1.5 weight)

Generated by 🔬 Curriculum Quality Evaluator · copilot · auto · ~34 AIC · ⌖ ~1 AIC · ⊞ 5K · ◷

  • expires on Oct 31, 2026, 4:04 AM UTC
主要语言
JavaScript
星标
56
派生
40
平均合并
2 天 15 小时
30 天内合并 PR
14

环境准备

在 Codespaces 中打开

在浏览器里用你自己的 GitHub 账号启动这个项目的开发容器。

  • 没有 Dockerfile 或 Docker Compose 文件
  • 没有 Pull Request 模板
  • 没有贡献指南

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue，再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库，在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request，并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

githubnext/gh-aw-workshop 的其他 Issue

查看 githubnext/gh-aw-workshop 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 JavaScript Issue

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。