Unit testing frameworks

Noonan, Robert E.; Prosl, Richard H.

doi:10.1145/563340.563429

Cited by 17 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is our belief that senior-level students are not as capable in this area as desired. This belief is supported by anecdotal information from instructors here at the University of Alabama (UA) and by the literature [20,22]. As a result, the goal of this study is to gather some evidence about the testing ability of seniorlevel students.…”

Section: Goalsmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Noonan and Prosi observed that an important side effect of requiring test case submissions was to increase the quality of students' source code (e.g., lower coupling between classes because higher coupling makes testing more difficult) [20]. In another approach, Goldwasser based a student's grade both on how many faults their test cases identified in the other students' code and on how many of the other students' test cases their own code passed.…”

Section: Approach 1: Students Learn To Test By Submitting Test Cases mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating the testing ability of senior-level computer science students

Carver

Kraft

2011

2011 24th IEEE-CS Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEE&T)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Testing is a key skill for computer science students to acquire during their studies. To determine how well students are learning this skill, we conducted an empirical study in two offerings of a senior-level computer science course. The goal of the study was to determine whether students would be able to create a small, complete test suite for a simple program. The students created a test suite first without the aid of a coverage tool and then with the aid of a coverage tool. The results indicate that without a coverage tool, students achieved significantly less than 100% statement, branch or condition coverage. When provided with a code coverage tool, students increased coverage levels. Still, examination of the test suites indicated that they were significantly larger than the minimum required. These results indicate that students cannot conduct adequate testing of even a small program. To provide context for our results, we provide a literature survey summarizing various techniques proposed for teaching testing in the computer science curriculum. We discuss each technique, its strengths, and its weaknesses.

show abstract

Section: Goalsmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Approach 1: Students Learn To Test By Submitting Test Cases mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the testing ability of senior-level computer science students

Carver

Kraft

2011

2011 24th IEEE-CS Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEE&T)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such testing could be entirely batch using test scripts, interactive, or a mixture of the two. Assessment may incorporate other checks including: plagiarism detection [1], unit testing [5], test coverage, comment assessment, and code metrics.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%