Assessment and grading for CS1: towards a complete toolbox of criteria and techniques

ABSTRACT

The low success and retention rates in CS1 are well-known problems. This paper discusses the importance of assessment and grading strategies when dealing with those problems, as both are seen as fundamentally important for improving student motivation and learning along the whole course. More specifically, the paper presents a set of criteria and a set of techniques that should be considered and balanced when defining the assessment and grading methodology. Both sets were identified based on the literature and on the author's experience teaching several introductory programming courses, with traditional high attrition and failure rates, in a small non-elite school. Yet, probably they are applicable and useful for defining the assessment and grading schemes for any CS1 course or even other subject matters. The paper also aims to provide a basis for the discussion of the right balance between student learning, fraud minimization, and available resources. The paper ends with a proposal for a concrete methodology for assessment and grading that has been refined over the last three years.

References

1. T. Ahoniemi and T. Reinikainen. Aloha - a grading tool for semi-automatic assessment of mass programming courses. In Baltic Sea '06: Proceedings of the 6th Baltic Sea conference on Computing education research, pages 139--140, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM.
2. J. Barros, L. Estevens, R. Dias, R. Pais, and E. Soeiro. Using lab exams to ensure programming practice in an introductory programming course. In ITiCSE '03: Proceedings of the 8th annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, pages 16--20, New York, NY, USA, 2003. ACM.
3. J. Bennedsen and M. E. Caspersen. Assessing process and product -- a practical lab exam for an introductory programming course. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference, pages 16--21, October 2006.
4. J. Bennedsen and M. E. Caspersen. Failure rates in introductory programming. SIGCSE Bull., 39(2):32--36, 2007.
5. J. Biggs and C. Tang. Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Open University Press, 3rd edition, 2007.
6. M. E. Caspersen. Educating Novices in the Skills of Programming. PhD thesis, University of Aarhus, Denmark, 2007. DAIMI PhD Dissertation PD-07-4.
7. H. B. Christensen. Reflections on the Teaching of Programming: Methods and Implementations, chapter Experiences with a Focus on Testing in Teaching, pages 147--165. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008.
8. L. D. Fink. Creating Significant Learning Experiences: An Integrated Approach to Designing College Courses. Jossey-Bass, 2003.
9. D. Gries. A principled approach to teaching oo first. In SIGCSE '08: Proceedings of the 39th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 31--35, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM.
10. N. Jacobson. Using on-computer exams to ensure beginning students' programming competency. SIGCSE Bull., 32(4):53--56, 2000.
11. G. Malpohl. JPlag, Detecting Software Plagiarism. http://www.ipd.uni-karlsruhe.de/jplag/.
12. K. Nørmark, L. L. Thomsen, and K. Torp. Reflections on the Teaching of Programming: Methods and Implementations, chapter Mini Project Programming Exams, pages 228--242. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008.
13. N. Parlante, T. P. Murtagh, M. Sahami, O. Astrachan, D. Reed, C. A. Stone, B. Heeringa, and K. Reid. Nifty assignments. In SIGCSE '09: Proceedings of the 40th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 483--484, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM.
14. A. Renkl and R. K. Atkinson. Structuring the transition from example study to problem solving in cognitive skill acquisition: A cognitive load perspective. Educational Psychologist, 38(1):15--22, March 2003.

Index Terms

• Applied computing

  • Enterprise computing

• Social and professional topics

  • Professional topics

    • Computing education

      • Computing education programs

        • Computer science education