Identifying topics for instructional improvement through on-line tracking of programming assignments

Huizinga, Dorota

doi:10.1145/377435.377664

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, if the instructor needs a tool that supports him/her in assessing programming assignments without spending much effort and time, he/she should consider automatic tools such as GAME [19,20,21] (T6), HOGG [45,46] (T8) and ONLINE ASSESSMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM [47] (T14). But, if the instructor also wishes students to have the opportunity to improve their programs continuously, he/she should consider tools which implement a student-centered approach, such as AUTOMARK [48] (T4), GLAB [49] (T7), JARPEB [50] (T9), KASSANDRA [51] (T11) and the tools developed by Hasan [14] (T26) and Huizinga [15] (T27). In addition, if the instructor wants students to develop more efficient programs, he/she should consider tools specialized in contests, such as ONLINE JUDGE [37,38] (T15).…”

Section: ) Comparing the Classification Schemes: The Bubble Chart Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Literature Review of Assessment Tools for Programming Assignments

Souza

Felizardo

Barbosa

2016

2016 IEEE 29th International Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEET)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The benefits of using assessment tools for programming assignments have been widely discussed in computing education. However, as both researchers and instructors are unaware of the characteristics of existing tools, they are either not used or are reimplemented. This paper presents the results of a study conducted to collect and evaluate evidence about tools that assist in the assessment of programming assignments. To achieve our goal, we performed a systematic literature review since it provides an objective procedure for identifying the quantity of existing research related to a research question. The results identified subjects in the development of new assessment tools that researchers could better investigate and characteristics of assessment tools that could help instructors make selections for their programming courses.

show abstract

Section: ) Comparing the Classification Schemes: The Bubble Chart Inmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Literature Review of Assessment Tools for Programming Assignments

Souza

Felizardo

Barbosa

2016

2016 IEEE 29th International Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEET)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the case of programming assignments, it is a difficult task to evaluate the student work without a direct contact with the student. Although there are some tools automatically assess student's works [11,17,14,18], we have considered developing our own tool using the XML framework. The programming assignment designer can write a set of visible tests as well as a set of hidden tests.…”

Section: Requirements Of the Idefix Sys-temmentioning

confidence: 99%

A generic e-learning multiparadigm programming language system

Gayo

Gil

Álvarez

et al. 2003

Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We describe the main features of an Internet based distance learning environment that we are developing to teach a course on logic and functional programming for computer science students. The main goal of the system is to provide a minimal set of capabilities for a generic interpreter that will be instantiated for different programming languages and paradigms. The architecture of the system is based on the use of XML and web services to facilitate the integration and independence between the different development platforms and systems.

show abstract

“…A more ambitious approach to CAA involves the use of fully-automated marking systems. These can be defined as systems that can mark electronically submitted assignments such as essays (Palmer, Williams et al, 2002) via online assignment submission management (OASM) (Benford, Burke et al, 1994;Darbyshire, 2000;Gayo, Gil et al, 2003;Huizinga, 2001;Jones & Behrens, 2003;Jones & Jamieson, 1997;Roantree & Keyes, 1998;Thomas, 2000;Trivedi, Kar et al, 2003), and automatically generate a final grade for the assignment with little to no interaction with a human marker. The obvious benefit to this approach is the ability to assess some higher order thinking as per Bloom's Taxonomy (1956) in a completely automated manner, thus improving marking turn-around times for large classes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%