Automating the execution of student programs

J. Educ. Resour. Comput.

Griffiths

Boyatt

2005

224

129

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

The boss online submission and assessment system

J. Educ. Resour. Comput.

Griffiths

Boyatt

2005

224

129

“…This avoids security problems, but leaves a large burden on the instructor, because students will invariably make mistakes in the testing process, and submissions will require further evaluation without tools to assist in that process. MacPherson [6] simply transfers ownership of files from students to the instructor at an appropriate time, while Isaacson and Scott [8] require students to place files readable by the instructor in directories under the instructor's filestore. In this latter work, some limits are imposed on CPU time and file sizes, but both of these have minimal security features, and still require significant manual effort in terms of marking beyond efforts to compile and run the submitted programs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Isaacson and Scott [8] use a C shell script for automating the compilation and testing of student programs against sets of test data once students have placed their program files in an appropriate directory structure. Similarly, Reek's TRY program [2] copies student programs into the instructor's filestore, runs them against sets of test input data, and produces a log file that can be used to provide feedback to students.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A secure on-line submission system

Lück

1999

Softw: Pract. Exper.

As student numbers on computer science courses continue to increase, the corresponding demands placed on teaching staff in terms of assessment grow ever stronger. In particular, the submission and assessment of practical work on large programming courses can present very significant problems. In response to this, we have developed a networked suite of software utilities that allow on-line submission, testing and marking of coursework. It has been developed and used over the course of five years, and has evolved into a mature tool that has greatly reduced the administrative time spent managing the processes of submission and assessment. In this paper, we describe the software and its implementation, and discuss the issues involved in its construction. The problemAs has been documented elsewhere [1-3], it is generally not possible to assess the correctness of a program with a large degree of accuracy simply by inspecting the source code 722 M. LUCK AND M. JOY listings. While this is obviously true of large programs, it also holds even for small programs on introductory programming courses. The only way to arrive at an accurate assessment of a program is by running the program against several sets of test data, yet this is time-consuming, and can be prohibitive if done manually with large classes. It is possible to require students to provide evidence of their own testing, but this requires further skills on the part of the students that are not typically covered by introductory programming courses. Moreover, such tests might easily be faked by students modifying the output from their programs to give the desired results.By automating the processes of submission and testing, these problems, at least to some extent, can be addressed. Indeed, several distinct requirements of systems for such a purpose were identified by a recent panel discussion [1], and elsewhere [4,5].(a) The system must copy the student's source code program to a location accessible only by the instructor, noting the date and time of submission. (b) It should allow for multiple source files of various types, including documentation. (c) It should allow late submission of assignments. (d) Before submission, the system should compile and run the program against public test cases to alert the student to obvious errors. (e) After submission, the program should be compiled and run against several sets of test data. Related workThere have been several attempts to address some of the concerns outlined above, with varying degrees of success. MacPherson [6] describes a system that allows students to work in a special course directory in their own filestore, but at the appropriate time transfers ownership to an instructor who can then subsequently run and test the programs. Canup and Shackelford [7] have developed a suite of programs for assisting in automatic submission, but do not address automated testing of programs. Isaacson and Scott [8] use a C shell script for automating the compilation and testing of student programs against sets of test data once...

“…Other packages have been developed by, for instance, Collier at Northern Arizona University, Kay at UCLA, Isaacson and Scott at the University of Northern Colorado (Isaacson & Scott, 1989) and Reek at RIT (Reek, 1989). A major problem with most of these initiatives is that of security, and a decision was finally taken that local software was required.…”

Section: The Warwick Solution: Bossmentioning

confidence: 99%

Software standards in undergraduate computing courses

Computer Assisted Learning

Lück

1996

High‐quality software must be robust, reliable and maintainable. The design and coding of such software is no longer a craft; it is an engineering discipline, and the teaching of computer programming must reflect this. Consequently, students need to be aware of the importance of formulating accurate specifications for programming tasks, and of coding programs which correctly implement such specifications. However, the increase in student numbers experienced in recent years has caused manual methods of assessing students' programming assignments to become inefficient, and consistency more difficult to enforce. In order to support and motivate a rigorous approach in the context of these difficulties, an innovative on‐line assessment system for programming language modules has been developed which addresses both concerns. This paper describes the package and discusses its importance in the delivery and assessment of undergraduate programming modules.