The Instructure Community is in read-only mode as we prepare to migrate to our new Community platform in early December.
Community members cannot post or update content in the Community during this time. All content is still available to view.
Read our blog post for more info about this change.Found this content helpful? Log in or sign up to leave a like!
We were so excited to have Checkpoints, and indeed those work really well; points, calendar, grading and more. We turned the feature on immediately on Jan 18. Thank you Instructure! Teachers love it. Canvas Canvas Release Notes (2025-01-18) - Instructure Community - Discussion Checkpoints
But, the change to Speedgrader for all graded discussions, whether or not they use checkpoints, is causing distress.
Are others trying out this new feature?
Solved! Go to Solution.
This is actually the biggest problem with this rollout. It is only available at the root account level as a feature option. That means you can't make it an option at the course level or even the sub-account level. Instead, having it on at all enforces it across the entire instance. The best short term fix I can recommend to Instructure is, if possible, make it function like a regular feature option that can be controlled at the course level. That way, while the kinks are being worked out, faculty who want the checkpoints feature and are willing to deal with any bugs and an interface in SpeedGrader that they consider sub-optimal can have checkpoints, and since it's otherwise obviously not ready for prime time everyone else can turn it off in their courses.
Hello Everyone - Thank you for your patience today!
I wanted to share that Sam recently posted Addressing Your Feedback on Recent Discussion Checkpoints in the Product Blog. She outlines Instructure's next steps and provides opportunities to provide feedback. I hope you participate in the Maze survey included in the blog and follow or contribute to the developing conversation.
Thanks @Nancy_Webb_CCSF for getting a post up on this topic.
I'm personally far less jazzed about how checkpoints have been implemented, and I've registered those concerns over in the Discussions Redesign group: A Few Key Pain Points with Checkpoints. For all of the concerns I expressed in that post, the one thing I did not expect was that the SpeedGrader experience was going to be blown up in a manner that would send my faculty into an absolute panic.
I see the logic of the Previous and Next Reply buttons as one way to grade discussions, but I feel like, unfortunately not for the first time, design decisions have been made with a Canvas product that completely fly in the face of regular use cases. Please understand that AI has already radically increased the work load for faculty when it comes to discussions as they seek to sort out real posts from students using AI against assignment directions, and in some cases dealing with large numbers of fraudulent student accounts using AI. I also feel compelled to add that shoving more AI tools into Canvas will not help faculty deal effectively with the problems that AI is creating for them when students use it in unsanctioned manners or fraudsters use it and flood the environment with garbage posts.
Having a clean, quick workflow for reviewing how a student has contributed to a discussion is vital. I'm also pretty certain that the scroll animation is a big time accessibility failure. I recognize that this isn't a bug from the Canvas team's perspective, but it is effectively a severe bug in the grading User Experience for faculty who use discussions heavily. It's a smaller matter for my campus right now because we're in winter session, but a lot of schools are starting their spring terms now and this is once again a disastrous product rollout just when we're starting a term, very much like the huge mess with threaded discussions that plagued the start of the fall term. We really can't go on like this. We need our teaching and learning environment to still behave in an efficient, predictable, and as bug free ass possible manner even as product improvements are implemented. This needs a fix ASAP.
This also seems like the right place to mention again that the feature user group is set to be archived tomorrow, but given the status of the redesign this seems like an incredibly bad idea.
Thanks for the link to your post in the redesign group, @mwolfenstein . Some things I just haven't tried and clearly need to.
I enabled it for the Campus on the 18th and came back into work with a list of email complaints that took me an hour to reply to after disabling the feature. Why would you even show the previous/next if there are no more posts to look at. The SpeedGrader should have a button for old view/new view and if there aren't any additional postings to view other than the one, the instructor should just see the one posting and no previous/next.
Hi Nancy,
We're taking a look at this too. We've received the same kind of feedback about SpeedGrader suddenly being changed for all Discussions, whether or not an instructor chose to use the new feature on a Discussion.
In their release notes for the Feature Option, no statement or implication tells us that enabling it would impact SpeedGrader for *all* Discussions. Instructor confusion has quickly followed and seems predictable/preventable.
I tested in Beta and found that enabling the Feature Option introduces new elements to the instructor UI in a Discussion's SpeedGrader entry for *all* Discussions, while Disabling it returns the UI to the prior experience.
@DavidChampoux Yes, the Canvas Admin can do this at the account level. We just looked to see if this was a course feature option that individual faculty could enable or disable checkpoints within their course and unfortunately that was not the case.
We have this enabled today too. And like what everyone has mentioned, the SpeedGrader look that (based on reading the release note) is meant only for discussions with the Assign graded checkpoints enabled is also applying for any discussions. We have a lot of users excited for this feature, but applying this speedgrader change even for discussions not using checkpoints is really bad. I have reached out to out CSM about this. There was no indication in the release note that this is intended this way. I did chat with L1 support who mentioned that it is intended but I hope we hear from the product group about this.
Hey there,
The L1 support I spoke with said this was actually not intended. We've since disabled the new Feature Option which has allowed SpeedGrader for all Discussions to revert to the prior experience.
There's really two major issues here, better detailed by Nancy above:
Thanks for this! I was hoping to hear from our CSM or the product team here since we've had history of L1 not really being reliable. 😣
Thanks for the reply! I really cannot seem to figure out if/where I can disable this feature and revert to the previous DIscsusion Post format in Speedgrader. Do you know how this can be done? I went into Feature Options but had no luck.
Hey there,
You should be able to disable it in the same area it was enabled initially. Canvas Admin > Settings > Feature Options, Discussion Checkpoints.
Disabling the Feature Option seemed to instantly revert the SpeedGrader UI in Discussions to the prior experience, where only one student's posts and replies populate for that student's SpeedGrader entry.
Unfortunately, "DIscussion Checkpoints" is not listed under Feature Options. I trie in the Canvas settings and then in the course settings.
This is actually the biggest problem with this rollout. It is only available at the root account level as a feature option. That means you can't make it an option at the course level or even the sub-account level. Instead, having it on at all enforces it across the entire instance. The best short term fix I can recommend to Instructure is, if possible, make it function like a regular feature option that can be controlled at the course level. That way, while the kinks are being worked out, faculty who want the checkpoints feature and are willing to deal with any bugs and an interface in SpeedGrader that they consider sub-optimal can have checkpoints, and since it's otherwise obviously not ready for prime time everyone else can turn it off in their courses.
Wish I could click the like button a thousand times.
This is exactly what I wish to happen but could not "communicate." Thank you.
PLEASE, Instructure, can you do this?
As it stands, I am going to have to manually keep track of each "reply" while grading and "moving forward" to the next reply as there are three types that are graded in different ways for a total point value. Then I have to tabulate the points along the way in a very archaic fashion. My whole assignment/grading process was created AROUND the (previous) speedgrader view. This is so much more than a matter of inconvenience. ☹️
I am a "go with the flow" sort of person, but I need to communicate my frustration with this new feature. I cannot believe this change was instituted upon us - and right in the middle of the Winter semester for me! Really? There are various "components" to my entire assignment/grading system and this change is not conducive to my well-established grading process. Why could this not have been an "option" versus something not asked for? This is incredibly disruptive, increases the time necessary to grade student work, and is incredibly disappointing.
I second what "akellostone" wrote, stated exactly to match how I felt when logging in to grade the latest discussion board assignments for my winter courses.
An updated that is supposed to improve efficiency has made the load time and process of identifying student discussion posts and peer replies extremely cumbersome and time consuming in comparison to the pre-update interface. I dread what the spring will be like for those with multiple online courses that consist primarily of graded discussion board assignments!
I agree! I was shocked to have this thrust upon us after the semester had started. I hope they just scrap this idea.
Thank you for so articulately describing what my problems are. I am so angry about this new feature. I find it hard to string coherent sentences together. Here is another issue with this type of grading. I had a student ask me about a comment I left on his discussion post. I had to go back to the grade book, select that specific student and that specific assignment. It was very difficult to find my comment. In the past, I would have just gone to that assignment and then selected the students name. This feature is terrible and it has doubled the amount of time that it has taken me to grade these discussion posts. Why are we subjected to these awful changes. Did no one test this?
Sadly with all the poor design and functionality it appears there are no usability testers. When you have programmers who only program without really understanding how tools are used this is what you end up with.
Bingo! God forbid we ask an actual teacher to test something. What do they know?
I agree! Horrible update! Leave it alone!
Bingo! God forbid we ask an actual teacher to test something. What do they know?
Piggybacking a change that NO ONE WANTED on a change that everyone has been waiting for FOR YEARS is mind boggling. I don't know what the logic is over there, but this needs to be reverted. Why on earth would you get rid of the filtered view? What was possibly wrong with allowing us to keep the OPTION to click the button to view the entire thread in context if needed.
The next button freezes when trying to navigate longer response chains. As stated above, how many replies in total are we looking at? Now the instructor has to search at the top of the thread to filter by name. Just adding more steps for them. This is absolutely horrible. I really cannot believe this is the way you guys chose to roll this out.
SHORT-TERM WORKAROUND
My DIscussion Posts have 5 components, three different types, that are reviewed and graded with specific criteria for each. I am in the middle of the semester (WInter) and need to find a solution on my own. I decided to create a GOOGLE FORM for each of my Discussion Post assignments. Students would post on Canvas and then COPY and PASTE their responses into the Google Form (the link of which I will provide). I will then download the responses into a spreadsheet and be able to view all the submissions, Student By Student, and enter the grade in Canvas. I am throwing the students some extra points as an incentive.
Hope this helps someone!
Glad you found a work around. I do not have time to do that with 200 students!
I agree with wmccracken. While it's great that this was a work around for you; it does not really simplify the process for me. And for RSI purposes, I have weekly, and sometimes discussions 2x a week. To grade for all of my classes takes an exorbitant amount of time, as that is 300 students, and potentially 600 discussions. As it is currently, I will probably eliminate most of the discussion assignments because I am not able to be productive this way. It's crazy making as it is good for RSI, as well as doing its' job of engaging students and as an instructor being able to keep a pulse on what is being understood and what is not.
I absolutely hated the change and made my Discussions grading much more difficult! I hope they just leave it alone and let me see just the students submissions. Having the assignment post under each submission and not being able to write a comment until it loaded just made my reading clunky and laborious. The change took the speed out of speed grader. I hope they do not change it again or give us, the professors, the option to not have to use it!
This change is realy making grading much harder and confusing. - Martha Anderson, VHCC
It is really difficult now just to see the posts of the student being graded. WHY did they change that? Now it appears as if the WHOLE view of the discussion is just being loaded into the frame - including edit and "speedgrader" options - as if you are in the discussion itself. Silly.
Can this be reverted??!! I sure sure would love that. It worked before just fine. Why do they mess with it?
I don't understand why they have done this either and I really really hope that they will revert it and quickly. The change that they have implemented is akin to having two windows side by side (which can already be accomplished without Canvas' help) and searching that way. The "next" reply button causes a freeze after a few clicks and the scrolling is disorienting as hell. If anything, why not instead provide a pop out list of all students so you can click a name and add scores/notes as you read through the discussion board? Wouldn't that have made more sense than jumping all over the place? But also, no one asked them to "fix" this all we wanted was multiple due dates. I'm so annoyed by this.
Plus the feeling of getting seasick watching the scrolling looking for the replies and not being able to type in the comments box while it does so. Another great idea for people who have never taught before....
We had a faculty member with tons of Studio videos as discussion posts. Needless to say, her computer/connection was struggling to load everything for every student. I just don't understand the reasoning. Why take a process that was so simple before and require faculty to click next reply over and over again and to load tons of content that isn't necessary?
When Discussion Checkpoints was enabled at our institution, it changed the way Discussions appear in Speedgrader and removed the view of a student's replies being included with their initial post in Speedgrader, which is very important in allowing an instructor to fully grade each student's participation in the Discussion by seeing their initial post and their replies all together. Enabling Checkpoints totally changed the instructor's view of Discussions in Speedgrader.
I have disabled Checkpoints at our institution and will not enable Checkpoints again until this issue is resolved and instructors are able to view both a student's initial post and their follow-up replies together in the Speedgrader view.
Thank you @Nancy_Webb_CCSF for starting this discussion. The change in the SpeedGrader is mentioned as a note in the checkpoints section on changes to the SpeedGrader tray (“This update includes all checkpoints and non-checkpointed discussions”). I was so excited about checkpoints that I overlooked this change, which affects all discussions in a course whether or not checkpoints are enabled for any discussions in a course.
This to me is a significant change in the SpeedGrader unrelated to checkpoints and is a missed opportunity to separately celebrate this change as a response to user feedback (there are a couple of ideas that ask for context to be more easily viewable within the SpeedGrader). It is also a step back from the point of view of those of us who are used to seeing all of the students’ posts without context. While I appreciate being able to jump from post to post within context, it would be better if it were an option (seems like a SpeedGrader option) and separately publicized. This change in SpeedGrader view is unwelcome and leads me to change my recommendation regarding this feature. I have asked locally that we wait to enable checkpoints.
Instructors at our college are really thrown off by the changes to SpeedGrader. We too, got really excited about Checkpoints and turned on the feature option without realizing the consequences in SpeedGrader. Our instructors are asking for a way to revert the SpeedGrader experience back to what it previously was.
While Instructure takes all of this feedback and improves the "new" SpeedGrader experience for discussions, we NEED Checkpoints to be a feature option at the Course Level so instructors can make their own decisions about whether the pros of setting Checkpoints outweighs the cons of the SpeedGrader experience.
RobbieParm, just disable Checkpoints and the view of Discussions in Speedgrader will revert to normal.
Thank you, I understand that. The problem is, instructors have been begging for the Checkpoint feature for a long time. Now that it's on and they are running with it in their live courses, we don't want to take it away and cause issues for them and their students. Having it as a course level Feature Option puts the power in the hands of each individual instructor.
I wish that were true. It is not. Checkpoints were not enabled, but the Speedgrader is still the screwed up mess that somehow someone liked. I just don't see how that was possible. When in doubt, more clicks is always worse than fewer clicks.
Community helpTo interact with Panda Bot, our automated chatbot, you need to sign up or log in:
Sign inTo interact with Panda Bot, our automated chatbot, you need to sign up or log in:
Sign in
