MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109014800 · doi:10.5753/cbie.sbie.2020.1573

Parameterized and automated assessment on an introductory programming course

2020· article· en· W3109014800 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Francisco de Assis Zampirolli, Paulo Henrique Pisani, João Marcelo Borovina Josko, Guiou Kobayashi, Francisco J. Fraga, Denise Goya, Heitor Rodrigues Savegnago

Bibliographic record

VenueAnais do XXXI Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação (SBIE 2020) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTeaching and Learning Programming
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloCanadian Bureau for International Education
KeywordsParameterized complexityPlug-inComputer scienceJavaContext (archaeology)Programming languageSoftware engineeringAnswer set programmingOpen sourceArtificial intelligenceSet (abstract data type)AlgorithmSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The generation of individualized exams can contribute to a more reliable assessment of the students. Manually performing this procedure may not be feasible, even more on a large scale. An alternative to deal with it is the automatic generation of questions. This paper discusses an innovative solution to simplify test generation and correction through parameterized questions in the context of a four-month Introduction to Programming course under a blended- learning (IP-BL) approach. It combines the open-source tool MCTest with Moodle and VPL plugin to generate and also automatically evaluate parameterized programming language questions. We applied an intervention based on this solution in two IP-BL groups (a total of 171 enrolled students) using Java.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnais do XXXI Simpósio Brasileiro de Informática na Educação (SBIE 2020)Same topicTeaching and Learning ProgrammingFrench-language works237,207