Which version of stats do you prefer – the detailed charts of the legacy 1.0 website, or the simplified charts of 2.0 Beta?
I prefer the 1.0 charts. With their clearly labeled axes, they are easier to read, and it is easy to change the range of the time axis from week to month to year. The 2.0 charts are unlabeled and they automatically scale so it looks pretty much the same whether you learned 1 character last week or 100.
(sorry OP, not really a response to your question)
Stats I am most interested in are the retention rate, and the completion rate of each list. Secondary are time spent studying per day and total chars/words learned.
Retention Rate: 1.0 and 2.0 seem to use different definitions for this. On 2.0 my retention rate is stable around 86-89 (poor), on 1.0 it is displayed as 96-97 (pretty good). Can someone explain what causes this difference? I know when 2.0 displays a single figure they present the lowest of all percentages (writing/definition/reading/tone * chars/words) and that seems right.
If the 2.0 site has the more reliable figures shouldn’t Skritter make me do more reviews so that I may attain my set goal of 98% retention rate?
Completion Rate: Before the last update the progress bar of each list would have a percentage displayed in it. This number was not available on the android app, barely legible on a tablet, and crystal clear on a laptop. Since that last update a week or so ago the number is gone. Am I missing something? I would love to have it back.
+1. Unless I imagined it, for the 2.0 version the % was being overlaid on the blue bars, for at least some of them. Now you can only see the percentage by going into the list’s page and mousing over the bar for a tooltip to pop up (after a time). Is there any reason why % completed shouldn’t be displayed over every blue bar, regardless of where it appears?
Thanks
Thanks for pointing out the secret mouse-over!
I also strongly prefer the 1.0 stats page. Both because it’s easier to understand (axis labels, etc.) and has more information (and all of the information seems relevant). In 2.0, the “All Time” section lists characters and words “learned”, but what does that mean? Writing? Definition? Reading? All three? (I’ve deduced it is writing only by comparing against 1.0’s stats.) There is also no way to see the number of items added, not just learned, for all time (which personally I use to see how much I still need to learn from what has been added to judge how quickly to add more new items), nor is there any way to see more granular information relating to reviews done (not just the total for all time).
Personally, I find the “This Month” section on the 2.0 stats page useless. I don’t care about the longest streak for this month, since my streak could have started in a previous month. Having my “streak” arbitrarily reset to zero essentially defeats the purpose of a streak. Similarly, we have a measure of “items learned,” but no indication of what that means.
All of the line and bar graphs in the 1.0 stats page make sense, are clear, and accurately update to reflect the current time period selected (week, month, year). But, in 2.0, in addition to the readability issues @wcon already mentioned for the graphs, the bar chart right below the drop down to select a date range does not change based on the selected date range. The number of hours studies next to the drop down does change, so it is really unclear whether the bar chart’s behavior is a feature or a bug.
My last point is a minor one: when learning Japanese, for the most case any “characters” studied only have a writing component, while “words” have writing, definition, and reading. This means, in the charts at the bottom of the 2.0 stats page, the character definition and reading graphs are 99% of the time (maybe 100%?) completely flat, with 0 reviews and 0 added. I understand it makes the six graphs line up nicely, but it’s kind of a waste of space, and those graphs aren’t even available in the 1.0 stats page.
Hey guys, just wanted to chime in that we have been seeing what you all are saying and are discussing it as a team. The stats page definitely needs more love, and while it isn’t something we’ll be working on this week, it is a short-term goal to refine and improve it. We appreciate the feedback and suggestions!
One more suggestion on stats:
When calculating the completion rate of a list, Skritter calculates the already studied items from this list to the total number of items in that list. However, sometimes (regularly/almost always) there will be items further down in that list that the user has already studied as part of another list. So the effective completion rate is higher than the displayed number.
Would be nice if Skritter could scan the list ahead for such items and calculate them in. This would allow a user to better estimate how much time will be required to learn the remaining items on this list.
Does this make sense?
The newer stats page is better looking and has less irrelevant information. Unfortunately they both don’t show the things that are important to me.
What matters to me: How many things do I have left to learn? How long will it take to learn what I have queued? How many things do I know right now?
Only the latter is avaliable right now.
It takes me 7.2 minutes to learn a new word now, and knowing it lets me pick the ideal amount to add each day. This is such a critical statistic, and I always have to calculate it myself every time.
Secondly, I wish there was an easy way to know how many characters are in the lists I have queued. Then I would know how many hours I have committed myself to. Right now it shows the number of items in the lists, including those I already know. I want it to show the true number of items I have queued to study. I always go back to legacy Skritter to visually check how many words have the green circle beside them.
Thanks for the feedback, those are some good suggestions for future stats improvements.
Having some sort of data about how many characters/items you reviewed/learned at the end of a session is something we’d like to add. We’re working on allowing study experiences on Skritter to be less like endless marathons and more like discrete sessions with definite ends. Like a set when you’re working out.
Right. This is something that’s annoyed me personally too. And once we have that information, it’s possible to get a better overview of what vocabulary new lists actually give you (and we could intelligently suggest new lists based on what you already know…). Unfortunately with the way the data is currently setup, this is slow and computationally expensive, especially on larger accounts. As we migrate to our new API and database, functionality like this opens up more and becomes a possibility.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.