Using lab exams to ensure programming practice in an introductory programming course

Barros, João Paulo; Estevens, Luís; Dias, Rui; Pais, Rui; Soeiro, Elisabete

doi:10.1145/961511.961519

Cited by 26 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding suggests that using a single test form for asynchronous exams spread over 2 days does not compromise the integrity of the exam results as long as students are randomly assigned when to take the exam. There are a few studies that describe experiments with computer‐based exams in lab sections (i.e., asynchronous but at times that students chose before the start of the class) for computer science courses, but none of them has reported score trends over time (Barros, Estevens, Dias, Pais, & Soeiro, ; Bennedsen & Caspersen, ; Califf & Goodwin, ; Jacobson, ).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing the decline of student scores over time in self‐scheduled asynchronous exams

Chen

West

Zilles

2019

J of Engineering Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background When students are given a choice of when to take an exam in engineering and computing courses, it has been previously observed that average exam scores generally decline over the exam period. This trend may have implications both for the design of interventions to improve student learning and for data analysis to detect collaborative cheating. Purpose/Hypothesis We hypothesize that average exam scores decline over the exam period primarily due to self‐selection effects, where weaker students tend to choose exam times later in the exam period, while stronger students are more likely to choose earlier times. Design/Method We collected 31,673 exam records over four semesters from six undergraduate engineering and computing courses that had both synchronous exams (all students at the same time) and asynchronous exams (students choose a time). We analyzed student exam time choice and asynchronous exam scores, using synchronous exam scores in the same course as a control variable. Results We find that students with lower scores on synchronous exams generally elect to take asynchronous exams later and that controlling for student ability (via synchronous exams) removes 70% of the decline observed in average asynchronous exam scores over the exam period but does not eliminate the downward trend with time. Conclusions We conclude that self‐selection effects are primarily responsible for exam score declines over time, that exam time selection is unlikely to be a useful target for interventions to improve performance, and that there is no evidence for widespread collaborative cheating in the dataset used in this research.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing the decline of student scores over time in self‐scheduled asynchronous exams

Chen

West

Zilles

2019

J of Engineering Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, students ± 1 INTRODUCTION Laboratory exercises are included as an essential part in most of the programming courses to ensure that students are engaged in suffi cient programming practice. Some studies [1,2] say that the main cause of student's failure in introductory programming courses is lack of practice and insuffi cient assessments. Yet, in our experience, we observed that two aspects that are more important than the amount of practice exercises are practicing the right type of exercises and following the right process of problem solving through the exercises.…”

Section: Teaching Problem Solving Effectivelymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, teaching the problem solving process in class does not completely serve the purpose unless students follow these techniques during the lab exercises and programming assignments. Many papers [1,7,8,9 and 10] suggest on improving laboratory courses by introducing web-exercises for programming language [8], introducing lab exams [1,9], and improving lab contents [7, 10] but none of them focuses on teaching students the process of problem solving. Giving students enough exercises does not help to improve their problem solving skills if they are not taught to follow the proper process of problem solving.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Teaching problem solving effectively

Hasni

Lodhi

2011

ACM Inroads

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

of problem solving process. We have also observed that the students, new to programming, develop a bad habit of writing the program by guesses and trials. Moreover, most of times they get to the solution by asking for hint from the lab instructor or colleague.Another important factor is the type of problems given in the exercises. The lab exercises are not effective unless one carefully selects the problem statements. Even if a student is able to complete the exercises, it actually does not ensure that student has learned suffi ciently.In this paper, we propose to design lab exercises with a focus on teaching problem solving process to students through the exercises. In the section, we discuss some problems relating to the lab exercises that we have identifi ed though our experience. In the third section, we explain the design of lab exercises. In fourth section, we discuss the results of using the designed exercise in lab of programming course. ± 2 DESIGNING PROGRAMMING EXERCISES One of the important factors that count toward the effectiveness of laboratory manual or programming assignments is the combination of programming exercises. We have used some laboratory manuals for programming courses in the last few semesters. We have experienced that some of the lab exercises did not add to improve the programming and problem solving skills of students. The following are the reasons we identifi ed. I Most of the laboratory manuals contain exercises in which students have to fi ll the missing code. According to our experience, these types of exercises do not benefi t students to develop problem-solving skills. In this type of exercises, given the problem half solved, students are only required to complete the missing syntax. The students become familiar working on small parts of problem. Thus, students skip the process of learning to analyze a problem and synthesizing their own observations into a solution.I In some lab exercises, students are required to make small programs such as fi nding averages, sums of numbers, or calculating factorials. The other exercises are also merely the application of these basic programming problems. These type of exercise also do not prove to better the programming and problem solving skills. Although students are able to solve these exercises quickly, they lack the skills to apply these solutions to larger problems. Students are able to write some of these types of common problems quickly because these problems involve common logic, which student easily identify. However, students ± 1 INTRODUCTION Laboratory exercises are included as an essential part in most of the programming courses to ensure that students are engaged in suffi cient programming practice. Some studies [1, 2] say that the main cause of student's failure in introductory programming courses is lack of practice and insuffi cient assessments. Yet, in our experience, we observed that two aspects that are more important than the amount of practice exercises are practicing the right type of exercises and following the right...

show abstract

“…Some researchers have proposed using laboratory exams to test students [28]- [30] on their programming ability. For example, Califf and Goodwin proposed that a laboratory final exam was necessary since written exams in CS1 do not give instructors the needed perspective on the students' hands-on programming ability [29].…”

Section: A Related Work On Laboratoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They found that the exam has been beneficial in improving students' attitudes toward programming and their proficiency in programming, and it has improved the instructors' ability to determine which students are sufficiently good programmers to continue on to CS2. Instead of a final exam, Barros et al proposed a set of laboratory exams [30].…”

Section: A Related Work On Laboratoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing CS1 With Embedded Instructional Research Design in Laboratories

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Closed laboratories are becoming an increasingly popular approach to teaching introductory computer science courses. Unlike open laboratories that tend to be an informal environment provided for students to practice their skills with attendance optional, closed laboratories are structured meeting times that support the lecture component of the course, and attendance is required. This paper reports on an integrated approach to designing, implementing, and assessing laboratories with an embedded instructional research design. The activities reported here are parts of a departmentwide effort not only to improve student learning in computer science and computer engineering (CE) but also to improve the agility of the Computer Science and Engineering Department in adapting the curriculum to changing technologies, incorporate research, and validate the instructional strategies used. This paper presents the design and implementation of the laboratories and the results and analysis of student performance. Also described in this paper is cooperative learning in the laboratories and its impact on student learning.

show abstract

Using lab exams to ensure programming practice in an introductory programming course

Cited by 26 publications

References 7 publications

Analyzing the decline of student scores over time in self‐scheduled asynchronous exams

Analyzing the decline of student scores over time in self‐scheduled asynchronous exams

Teaching problem solving effectively

Implementing CS1 With Embedded Instructional Research Design in Laboratories

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About