2017 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) 2017
DOI: 10.1109/fie.2017.8190658
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Teaching software quality via source code inspection tool

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The existence or the planning of an evaluation of the proposed tool was also a condition to include a study to this research. From the selected studies one described an evaluation that is planned to take place (Yang et al, 2015) and the rest of the studies (Alonso et al, 2008; Alonso & Py, 2009; Ardimento et al, 2020; Azimullah et al, 2020; Blau & Moss, 2015; de Andrade Gomes et al, 2017; Dietrich & Kemp, 2008; Dominique et al, 2013; Fehnker & de Man, 2019; Hashiura et al, 2009; Herout & Brada, 2015; Mirmotahari et al, 2019; Silva & Dorça, 2019; Vallejos et al, 2018; Yan et al, 2020; Yang et al, 2018; Zaw et al, 2018) presented a completed evaluation. From the evaluation data, the most accurate and complete were the study evaluation context [V6], the number of participants [V7], and the evaluation outcome [V8].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The existence or the planning of an evaluation of the proposed tool was also a condition to include a study to this research. From the selected studies one described an evaluation that is planned to take place (Yang et al, 2015) and the rest of the studies (Alonso et al, 2008; Alonso & Py, 2009; Ardimento et al, 2020; Azimullah et al, 2020; Blau & Moss, 2015; de Andrade Gomes et al, 2017; Dietrich & Kemp, 2008; Dominique et al, 2013; Fehnker & de Man, 2019; Hashiura et al, 2009; Herout & Brada, 2015; Mirmotahari et al, 2019; Silva & Dorça, 2019; Vallejos et al, 2018; Yan et al, 2020; Yang et al, 2018; Zaw et al, 2018) presented a completed evaluation. From the evaluation data, the most accurate and complete were the study evaluation context [V6], the number of participants [V7], and the evaluation outcome [V8].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In other cases, the tools had indirect effects at the learning process. In studies (de Andrade Gomes et al, 2017; Yan et al, 2020; Zaw et al, 2018) the tools helped the learners understand what code quality is. Yang et al (2018) came to the conclusion that the students understood object-oriented programming concepts and had better understanding of the program execution, by using their proposed tool.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These techniques require datasets of pre-existing student solutions, enabling them to compare a new submission to any solution in the dataset that demonstrates better code style [2,6,7,12,26]. Other miscellaneous tools focus on improving style in young learners using Scratch [30], or tools that are geared towards more advanced students and software engineers [4,9,15].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The findings expose many quality flaws and lack of expected quality improvement among the source codes of first-and second-year students. Several published studies have shown that continuous monitoring leads to significant improvements in students' achievements [4,15]. Snipes et al [16] provided practical guidance of using the IDE.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Their experience may be effective in computer science education. Over the past few years, there have been studies on the effective using of code review in teaching programming carried out [3,4]. The findings show that code reviews can assist students in looking back at their performance and improving their software development skills.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%