Validate lecturer quality metrics accuracy

[dcasota]

Task Description

Human validation that lecturer-reported quality metrics match reality.

Validation Areas

1. Grammar Issues: Spot-check 10-20 reported grammar issues

   • Are they real issues?
   • False positive rate?

2. Markdown Issues: Verify markdown violations

   • Heading hierarchy correct?
   • Code block detection accurate?

3. Link Issues: Verify orphan link detection

   • Are 404s real?
   • Any false positives?

4. Quality Score: Validate overall quality score calculation

   • Does 85% → 95% improvement seem reasonable?
   • Are weightings appropriate?

Decision Points

• Are metrics trustworthy for quality gates?
• Should we adjust thresholds?
• Ready for auditor integration?

Acceptance Criteria

• ✅ Spot-checked sample issues
• ✅ False positive rate <5%
• ✅ Quality score methodology validated
• ✅ Decision made on proceeding

Related

• Integration Analysis: Immediate Actions feat: add docs-maintenance team and quality audit system #4
• Prerequisites: "Review lecturer CSV report"

Labels

lecturer-integration, validation, decision-needed, high