Automatic marking with Sakai

Suleman, Hussein

doi:10.1145/1456659.1456686

Cited by 34 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Proving a reduction is correct can hardly be handled by an unknown automated test suite, it lies in the design of test cases. Our findings here are consistent with those of Suleman [9] -students can be working on outwitting the system, with the assignment only as side-scene if they solely wish to get acceptance from the system. At least two different approaches are possible to avoid the clash between different aspects of an assignment.…”

Section: Clashing Of Purposessupporting

confidence: 89%

“…In [9] Suleman describes a system, resembling the one used in this study, for automatic assessment. Among the conclusions are that some students set off to try to outwit the system rather than solving the problem, and actually sometimes believe that they have solved the problem in their assignment while the system is still making trouble.…”

Section: Previous Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Computer lab work on theory

Enstrom

Kann

2010

Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes an attempt to introduce computer lab exercises on NP-completeness proofs in a class already containing computer lab exercises on algorithms and data structures. In the article we are interested in the answer of the following question: Can the students feel that their understanding of theoretical computer science is improved by performing a computer lab exercise on the subject?The class is mandatory for students in a computer science program, and is taken by about 130 students each year. Theory of NP-completeness proofs with reductions has previous years been examined on an individual assignment with written solutions handed in and later explained orally by the student to a teacher. The new assignment is performed as a computer lab exercise where students are working in small groups of two. This exercise is placed before the individual assignment, and is examined first by running automated test cases and later by an oral presentation in lab to a teacher.An improvement can be observed of the students' average results since the new assignment was introduced. This is not enough to prove the benefit of using the new assignment. However, the responses to questionnaires at course evaluations show that almost all students think that the assignment really gave them better understanding of polynomial reductions in NP completeness proofs. The students' result on the new assignment corresponds closely to their results on the following individual assignment. Seemingly, the new assignment predicts accurately who is going to pass the following assignment.

show abstract

Section: Clashing Of Purposessupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Previous Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer lab work on theory

Enstrom

Kann

2010

Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most AATs accept and run student-provided source code, but some assess code tracing, promote good style techniques, or encourage a test-driven approach. In our review of existing literature, we found data relevant to our research questions for these tools: Aari, 1 Athene, 2 Autograder, 3 AutoLep, 4 Automatic Marker, 5 BlueFix, 6 BOSS, 7 CAP, 8 Ceilidh, 9 COALA, 10 CodeWrite, 11 CourseMarker, 12 Curator, 13 JUG, 14 Mooshak, 15 PGSE, 16 Retina, 17 Style++, 18 Submit, 19 Test My Code, 20 TRAKLA, 21 TRAKLA2, 22 Trillium, 23 and Web-CAT. 24 We recognize that published research exists on many comparable tools, but we did not readily find data that addressed our questions.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5 Just over 30% of the students did not find the grades given by the system fair, but Suleman attributed this to students likely not understanding the question (i.e., not understanding that "fair" meant that every student received grades assigned from the same scale). That portion of students may have believed the grades were too strict or arbitrary, disliking the scale itself rather than believing that students were marked differently.…”

Section: In 2004mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Are Automated Assessment Tools Helpful in Programming Courses?

Pettit

Homer

McMurry

et al.

2015 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Raymond S. Pettit teaches courses in programming, artificial intelligence, objected oriented design, algorithms, theory of computation, and related subjects in ACU's School of Information Technology and Computing. Prior to joining the ACU faculty, he spent twenty years in software development, research, and training the Air Force Research Lab and NASA's Langley Research Center as well as private industry. His current research focuses on how automated assessment tools interact with student learning in university programming courses. Are Automated Assessment Tools Helpful in ProgrammingCourses? AbstractAutomated assessment tools (AATs) are growing in popularity in introductory programming courses, but researchers may have a difficult time synthesizing valid data to draw conclusions about the tools' usefulness. Our first step addressing this issue was to break down our overriding question-are automated assessment tools helpful in programming courses?-into four more specific questions: (1) Have AATs proven to be helpful in improving student learning? (2) Do students think that AATs have improved their performance? (3) After having used the tools, do instructors think that the tools have improved their teaching experiences? and (4) Is the assessment performed by AATs accurate enough to be helpful? In discussing the many AATs that exist, many researchers have only reported results relevant to one or two of these specific questions. We address each of our four questions separately and draw on data from 24 different tools to arrive at our conclusions. We determine that the literature demonstrates AATs helpfulness in student learning, instructor support, and assessment accuracy. However, we found results about students' opinions regarding the helpfulness of AATs to be inconclusive. Given our findings, we make suggestions both for instructors using these tools and to researchers creating them.

show abstract

Improving marking efficiency for longer programming solutions based on a semi‐automated assessment approach

Buyrukoğlu

Batmaz

Lock

2019

Comp Applic In Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, many students in higher education have begun to learn programming languages. In doing so they will complete a variety of programming tasks of varying degrees of complexity. The students need to get consistent and personalized feedback to develop their programming skills. Human markers can provide personalized feedback using traditional manual approaches to assessment, but they may provide inconsistent feedback (especially for long programming solutions) since marking the programming solutions of multiple students can represent a significant workload for them. While full‐automated assessment systems are the best to provide consistent feedback, they may not provide sufficiently personalized feedback for novice programmers. This study develops a novel semi‐automated assessment approach in order to improve efficiency of human marker in the marking process and increase consistency of feedback (for both short and long programming solutions). It advocates the reuse of human marker's comments for similar code snippets, defined as segmented marking in this study. New full and partial marking models are developed based on segmented marking and they are tested by expert markers. The findings show that the two models are similar in efficiency, but that a partial marking approach potentially offers an improved efficiency for longer programming solutions. Such a finding has significant potential to reduce time spent on marking throughout the sector, which would have significant impact on both resourcing and timeliness of feedback.

show abstract

Automatic marking with Sakai

Cited by 34 publications

References 12 publications

Computer lab work on theory

Computer lab work on theory

Are Automated Assessment Tools Helpful in Programming Courses?

Improving marking efficiency for longer programming solutions based on a semi‐automated assessment approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About