Logo ICITKM

Annals of Computer Science and Information Systems, Volume 14

Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Information Technology and Knowledge Management

Logo PTI

E-Assessment Tools for Programming Languages: A Review

,

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15439/2017KM31

Citation: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Information Technology and Knowledge Management, Ajay Jaiswal, Vijender Kumar Solanki, Zhongyu (Joan) Lu, Nikhil Rajput (eds). ACSIS, Vol. 14, pages 65–70 ()

Full text

Abstract. Continuous Evaluation and feedback not only helps in improving learning of a student, but also acts as a constant motivator to put in more efforts. But then, feedback and assessment are very difficult and time consuming in practice. Thus, automating the entire system of assessment, evaluation and feedback will be highly beneficial. But, building such tools for all courses is yet not feasible. However, e-assessment tools for programming courses in Computer Science discipline can be developed. In this paper, we review various grading techniques used by these tools to assess a student's programming assignment. Further, this paper discusses various types and features of tools according to which an appropriate tool should be selected. And, in the end, we will be highlighting the extent to which students and instructors are actually benefited by these tools.

References

  1. Matthíasdóttir, Ásrún & Arnalds, Hallgrímur. (2016). e-assessment: students' point of view. 369-374
  2. S. M. Arifi, I. N. Abdellah, A. Zahi and R. Benabbou, "Automatic program assessment using static and dynamic analysis," 2015 Third World Conference on Complex Systems (WCCS), Marrakech, 2015, pp. 1-6.
  3. Kirsti M Ala-Mutka (2005),’ A Survey of Automated Assessment’,Approaches for Programming Assignments, Computer Science Education, 15:2, 83-102
  4. Rahman, Khirulnizam Abd, and Md Jan Nordin. "A review on the static analysis approach in the automated programming assessment systems." In Proceedings of the national conference on programming, vol. 7. 2007.
  5. D. M. Souza, K. R. Felizardo and E. F. Barbosa, "A Systematic Literature Review of Assessment Tools for Programming Assignments," 2016 IEEE 29th International Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEET), Dallas, TX, 2016, pp. 147-156.
  6. Fonte, Daniela, Daniela da Cruz, Alda Lopes Gançarski, and Pedro Rangel Henriques. "A Flexible Dynamic System for Automatic Grading of Programming Exercises." In OASIcs-OpenAccess Series in Informatics, vol. 29. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 2013.
  7. Truong, Roe, Bancroft, “Static Analysis of Students’ Java Programs”, Sixth Australian Computing Education, Conference (ACE2004), Dunedin, New Zealand, Vol. 30.
  8. S. H. Edwards and M. A. Perez-Quinones. Web-CAT: automatically grading programming assignments. In Proc. Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE), pages 328–328, 2008.
  9. Mike Joy, Nathan Griffiths, and Russell Boyatt. 2005. The boss online submission and assessment system. J. Educ. Resour. Comput. 5, 3, Article 2 (September 2005). 
  10. W. Tiantian, S. Xiaohong, M. Peijun, W. Yuying and W. Kuanquan, "AutoLEP: An Automated Learning and Examination System for Programming and its Application in Programming Course," 2009 First International Workshop on Education Technology and Computer Science, Wuhan, Hubei, 2009, pp. 43-46.
  11. José Luis Fernández Alemán, ‘Automated Assessment in a Programming Tools Course IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 54, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 2011
  12. Higgins, C., Hergazy, T., Symeonidis, P., and Tsinsifas, A. The CourseMarker CBA System: Improvements over Ceilidh, Education and Information Technologies, 8(3), 2003, pp. 287– 30.
  13. David Jackson and Michelle Usher. 1997. Grading student programs using ASSYST. In Proceedings of the twenty-eighth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education (SIGCSE '97), James E. Miller (Ed.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 335-339.
  14. Maria Hristova, Ananya Misra, Megan Rutter, and Rebecca Mercuri. 2003. Identifying and correcting Java programming errors for introductory computer science students. In Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education (SIGCSE '03). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 153-156. 
  15. Tom Schorsch. 1995. CAP: an automated self-assessment tool to check Pascal programs for syntax, logic and style errors. In Proceedings of the twenty-sixth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education (SIGCSE '95), Curt M. White, James E. Miller, and Judy Gersting (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 168-172.
  16. Yusofa,, Zinb , Adnana, ‘Java Programming Assessment Tool for Assignment Module in Moodle E-learning System’, International Conference on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (ICTLHE2012) in conjunction with RCEE & RHED 2012, 1877-0428 © 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Centre of Engineering Education, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
  17. D. M. de Souza,J. C. Maldonado and E. F. Barbosa PROGTEST: An Environment for the Submission and Evaluation of Programming Assignments based on Testing Activities. Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEET), 2011 24th IEEE-CS Conference.
  18. Ricardo Alexandre Peixoto Queirós and José Paulo Leal. 2012. PETCHA: a programming exercises teaching assistant. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education (ITiCSE '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 192-197
  19. Auto Grader: http://www.csail.mit.edu/node/1886
  20. Guillaume Derval, Anthony Gego, Pierre Reinbold, Benjamin Frantzen and Peter Van Roy. Automatic grading of programming exercises in a MOOC using the INGInious platform. Proceedings of the European MOOC Stakeholder Summit 2015.
  21. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Curator: an electronic submission management environment. http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~eags/Curator.html.
  22. A. Kurnia, A. Lim, and B. Cheang. OnLine Judge. Computers & Education, 36(4):299–315, May 2001.
  23. B. Cheang, A. Kurnia, A. Lim, and W.-C. Oon. On automated grading of programming assignments in an academic institution. Computers & Education, 41(2):121–131, September 2003
  24. C. Douce, D. Livingstone, and J. Orwell, “Automatic test-based assessment of programming: A review,” J. Educ. Resources Comput., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1–13, 2005.
  25. Pettit, R. S., & Homer, J. D., & Holcomb, K. M., & Simone, N., & Mengel, S. A. (2015, June), Are Automated Assessment Tools Helpful in Programming Courses? Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, Washington. 10.18260/p.23569
  26. Stephen H. Edwards. 2003. Improving student performance by evaluating how well students test their own programs. J. Educ. Resour. Comput. 3, 3, Article 1 (September 2003). 
  27. Denise Woit and David Mason. 2003. Effectiveness of online assessment. In Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education (SIGCSE '03). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 137-141.
  28. Colin A. Higgins, Geoffrey Gray, Pavlos Symeonidis, and Athanasios Tsintsifas. 2005. Automated assessment and experiences of teaching programming. J. Educ. Resour. Comput. 5, 3, Article 5 (September 2005).
  29. Amruth N. Kumar. 2005. Generation of problems, answers, grade, and feedback---case study of a fully automated tutor. J. Educ. Resour. Comput. 5, 3, Article 3 (September 2005). 
  30. Lauri Malmi, Ville Karavirta, Ari Korhonen, and Jussi Nikander. 2005. Experiences on automatically assessed algorithm simulation exercises with different resubmission policies. J. Educ. Resour. Comput. 5, 3, Article 7 (September 2005). 
  31. Tiantian Wang, Xiaohong Su, Peijun Ma, Yuying Wang, and Kuanquan Wang. 2011. Ability-training-oriented automated assessment in introductory programming course. Comput. Educ. 56, 1 (January 2011), 220-226. 
  32. García-Mateos, Ginés & Fernández-Alemán, José. (2009). A Course on Algorithms and Data Structures Using On-line Judging ABSTRACT. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. 41. 45-49.
  33. Christopher Brown, Robert Pastel, Bill Siever, and John Earnest., JUG: a JUnit generation, time complexity analysis and reporting tool to streamline grading, 17th ACM annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education (ITiCSE '12).
  34. Tom Schorsch, Cap: An Automated Self-Assessment Tool To Check Pascal Programs For Syntax, Logic And Style Errors, SIGSCE 1995.
  35. Anne Venables and Liz Haywood. 2003. Programming students NEED instant feedback, Fifth Australasian conference on Computing education - Volume 20 (ACE '03), Tony Greening and Raymond Lister (Eds.), Vol. 20
  36. Queirós, R., & Leal, J. P., “Programming exercises evaluation systems: An interoperability survey”, 4th international conference on computer supported education, 2012, (pp. 83–90).
  37. Colin A. Higgins, Geoffery Gray, Pavlos Symeonidis, and Athanasios Tsintsifas., Automated assessment and experiences of teaching programming. Journal on Educational Resources in Computing (JERIC), 2005.
  38. Ahmad Taherkhani, Ari Korhonen, and Lauri Malmi. 2012. Automatic recognition of students' sorting algorithm implementations in a data structures and algorithms course, 12th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research.
  39. Matheus Gaudencio, Ayla Dantas, and Dalton D. S. Guerrero. Can Computers Compare Student Code Solutions as Well as Teachers,SIGCSE.