Exploring ‘reverse-tracing’ Questions as a Means of Assessing the Tracing Skill on Computer-based CS 1 Exams

Mohammed Hassan, C. Zilles
{"title":"Exploring ‘reverse-tracing’ Questions as a Means of Assessing the Tracing Skill on Computer-based CS 1 Exams","authors":"Mohammed Hassan, C. Zilles","doi":"10.1145/3446871.3469765","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, we perform a comparative analysis using a within-subjects ‘think-aloud’ protocol of introductory programming students solving tracing problems in both paper-based and computer-based formats. We demonstrate that, on computer-based exams with compiler/interpreter access, students can achieve significantly higher scores on tracing problems than they do on similar paper-based questions, through brute-force execution of the provided code. Furthermore, we characterize the students’ usage of machine execution as they solve computer-based tracing problems. We, then, suggest “reverse-tracing” questions, where a block of code is provided and students must identify an input that will produce a specified output, as a potential alternative means of assessing the same skill as tracing questions on such computer-based exams. Our initial investigation suggests correctly-designed reverse-tracing problems on computer-based exams more closely track a student’s performance on similar questions in a paper-based format. In addition, we find that the thought process while solving tracing and reverse-tracing problems is similar, but not identical.","PeriodicalId":309835,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research","volume":"86 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3446871.3469765","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

In this paper, we perform a comparative analysis using a within-subjects ‘think-aloud’ protocol of introductory programming students solving tracing problems in both paper-based and computer-based formats. We demonstrate that, on computer-based exams with compiler/interpreter access, students can achieve significantly higher scores on tracing problems than they do on similar paper-based questions, through brute-force execution of the provided code. Furthermore, we characterize the students’ usage of machine execution as they solve computer-based tracing problems. We, then, suggest “reverse-tracing” questions, where a block of code is provided and students must identify an input that will produce a specified output, as a potential alternative means of assessing the same skill as tracing questions on such computer-based exams. Our initial investigation suggests correctly-designed reverse-tracing problems on computer-based exams more closely track a student’s performance on similar questions in a paper-based format. In addition, we find that the thought process while solving tracing and reverse-tracing problems is similar, but not identical.
探索“反向追踪”问题作为评估计算机cs1考试追踪技能的一种手段
在本文中,我们使用入门编程学生在纸质和基于计算机的格式中解决跟踪问题的主题内“大声思考”协议进行比较分析。我们证明,在有编译器/解释器访问的计算机考试中,通过暴力执行提供的代码,学生可以在跟踪问题上取得比类似的纸质问题高得多的分数。此外,我们描述了学生在解决基于计算机的跟踪问题时使用机器执行的情况。因此,我们建议“反向追踪”问题,即提供一段代码,学生必须识别将产生指定输出的输入,作为评估相同技能的潜在替代方法,就像在此类计算机考试中追踪问题一样。我们的初步调查表明,在基于计算机的考试中,设计正确的反向跟踪问题可以更紧密地跟踪学生在纸质形式的类似问题上的表现。此外,我们发现在解决跟踪和反向跟踪问题时的思维过程是相似的,但并不完全相同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信