Post-Exam Videos for Assessment in Computing Courses: See and Hear Students' Thinking
Pages 230 - 236
Abstract
The Covid-19 pandemic forced many institutions to offer online courses from March 2020 through June 2021. A challenge in the online setting is assessing student work while maintaining academic integrity. This paper reports on augmenting traditional written exam problems with short video explanations of student solutions. These exam videos share some of the learning goals of oral exams and technical interviews, getting a more complete understanding of students' thinking process on the way to a solution. While these exam videos were originally designed to combat non-authorized answer-seeking and answer-sharing practices (cheating), they were a positive learning tool for students. Over 85% of surveyed students want exam videos in future courses, even when returning to in-person instruction. The benefits expressed by students include getting a chance to reflect on the solution under less time pressure, correcting mistakes as they explain solutions, and demonstrating a more complete understanding. The main benefit for the instructor was to see and hear students' problem-solving processes. The time to record and watch videos was an additional task for both students and the instructor, so this solution may not scale to large classes.
References
[1]
Susan Adams. 2021. This $12 Billion Company Is Getting Rich Off Students Cheating Their Way Through Covid. Forbes Magazine (March 31, 2021).
[2]
Antonio Balderas and Juan Antonio Caballero-Hernandez. 2020. Analysis of Learning Records to Detect Student Cheating on Online Exams: Case Study during COVID-19 Pandemic. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM'20). Salamanca, Spain, 752--757. https://doi.org/10.1145/3434780.3436662
[3]
Yingjun Cao and Leo Porter. 2017. Impact of Performance Level and Group Composition on Student Learning during Collaborative Exams. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Conference. Bologna, Italy, 152--157. https://doi.org/10.1145/3059009.3059024
[4]
Binglin Chen, Matthew West, and Craig Zilles. 2017. Do Performance Trends Suggest Wide-spread Collaborative Cheating on Asynchronous Exams?. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale. Cambridge, MA USA, 111--120. https://doi.org/10.1145/3051457.3051465
[5]
Binglin Chen, Matthew West, and Craig Zilles. 2018. How Much Randomization is Needed to Deter Collaborative Cheating on Asynchronous Exams?. In Proceedings of the 2018 Learning @ Scale Conference. London, UK. https://doi.org/10.1145/3231644.3231664
[6]
Robert Deloatch, Brian P. Bailey, and Alex Kirlik. 2016. Measuring Effects of Modality on Perceived Test Anxiety for Computer Programming Exams. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Memphis, TN USA, 291--296. https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844604
[7]
Paul Denny, Andrew Luxton-Reilly, and Beth Simon. 2008. Evaluating a new exam question: Parsons problems. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM International Workshop on Computing Education Research. Sydney, Australia, 113--124. https://doi.org/10.1145/1404520.1404532
[8]
Brenda A. Fonseca and Michelene T. H. Chi. 2010. Research on Learning and Instruction .Taylor and Francis Group.
[9]
Hasmik Gharibyan. 2005. Assessing Students' Knowledge: Oral Exams vs. Written Tests. In Proceedings of the 2005 ACM Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Conference. Monte de Caparica, Portugal, 143--147. https://doi.org/10.1145/1151954.1067487
[10]
Graham Gibbs and Claire Simpson. 2005. Conditions Under Which Assessment Supports Students' Learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education 1 (2005), 3--31.
[11]
Scott Grissom, Renee McCauley, Laurie Murphy, and Sue Fitzgerald. 2016. Paper vs. Computer-based Exams: A Study of Errors in Recursive Binary Tree Algorithms. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Memphis, TN USA, 6--11. https://doi.org/10.1145/2839509.2844587
[12]
Arto Hellas, Juho Leinonen, and Petri Ihantola. 2017. Plagiarism in Take-home Exams: Help-seeking, Collaboration, and Systematic Cheating. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Conference. Bologna, Italy, 238--243. https://doi.org/10.1145/3059009.3059065
[13]
Geoffrey L. Herman, Zhouxiang Cai, Timothy Bretl, Craig Zilles, and Matthew West. 2020. Comparison of Grade Replacement and Weighted Averages for Second-Chance Exams. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM International Computing Education Research Conference. Virtual Event, 56--66. https://doi.org/10.1145/3372782.3406260
[14]
Thomas Lancaster and Codrin Cotarlan. 2021. Contract cheating by STEM students through a file sharing website: a Covid-19 pandemic perspective. International Journal for Educational Integrity, Vol. 17, 3 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-021-00070-0
[15]
Briana Morrison, Mike Clancy, Robert McCartney, Brad Richards, and Kate Sanders. 2011. Applying Data Structures in Exams. In Proceedings of the 2011 ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Dallas, TX USA, 353--358. https://doi.org/10.1145/1953163.1953269
[16]
Peter Ohmann. 2019. An Assessment of Oral Exams in Introductory CS. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Minneapolis, MN USA, 613--619. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287489
[17]
Andrew Petersen, Michelle Craig, and Daniel Zingaro. 2011. Reviewing CS1 exam question content. In Proceedings of the 2011 ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Dallas, TX, 631--636. https://doi.org/10.1145/1953163.1953340
[18]
Keith Quille, Brett A. Baker, Keith Nolan, and Sean McHugh. 2021. Developing an Open-Book Online Exam for Final Year Students. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Conference. Virtual Event, 338--344. https://doi.org/10.1145/3430665.3456373
[19]
Gili Rusak and Lisa Yan. 2021. Unique Exams: Designing Assessments for Integrity and Fairness. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Virtual Event, 1170--1176. https://doi.org/10.1145/3408877.3432556
[20]
Mihaela Sabin, Karen H. Jin, and Adrienne Smith. 2021. Oral Exams in Shift to Remote Learning. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Virtual Event, 666--672. https://doi.org/10.1145/3408877.3432511
[21]
Judy Sheard, Simon, Angela Carbone, Donald Chinn, Tony Clear, Malcolm Corney, Daryl D'Souza, Joel Fenwick, James Harland, Mikko-Jussi Laakso, and Donna Teague. 2013. How difficult are exams? a framework for assessing the complexity of introductory programming exams. In Proceedings of the 2013 Australasian Computing Education Conference. Adelaide, Australia, 145--154. https://doi.org/10.5555/2667199.2667215
[22]
Beth Simon, Mike Clancy, Robert McCartney, Briana Morrison, Brad Richards, and Kate Sanders. 2010. Making sense of data structures exams. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM International Workshop on Computing Education Research. Aarhus, Denmark, 97--106. https://doi.org/10.1145/1839594.1839612
[23]
Steve Stemler. 2000. An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, Vol. 7 (2000). https://doi.org/10.7275/z6fm-2e34
[24]
Ben Stephenson, Diane Horton, Michelle Craig, Danny Heap, Daniel Zingaro, and Elaine Huynh. 2017. Exam Wrappers: Not a Silver Bullet. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Seattle, WA USA, 573--578. https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017701
[25]
Benjamin Yu, George Tsiknis, and Meghan Allen. 2010. Turning Exams Into a Learning Experience. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Milwaukie, WI USA, 336--340. https://doi.org/10.1145/1734263.1734380
[26]
Mark Zarb and Jen BirtlesKelman. 2020. Through the Lens. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education Conference (June 2020), 187--192. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341525.3387376
[27]
Larry Yueli Zhang, Andrew K. Petersen, Michael Liut, Bogdan Simion, and Furkan Alaca. 2021. A Multi-Course Report on the Experience of Unplanned Online Exams. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Virtual Event, 17--23. https://doi.org/10.1145/3408877.3432515
[28]
Daniel Zingaro, Andrew Petersen, and Michelle Craig. 2012. Stepping Up to Integrative Questions on CS1 Exams. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Raleigh, NC USA, 253--258. https://doi.org/10.1145/2157136.2157215
Index Terms
- Post-Exam Videos for Assessment in Computing Courses: See and Hear Students' Thinking
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
February 2022
1049 pages
ISBN:9781450390705
DOI:10.1145/3478431
- General Chairs:
- Larry Merkle,
- Maureen Doyle,
- Program Chairs:
- Judithe Sheard,
- Leen-Kiat Soh,
- Brian Dorn
Copyright © 2022 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 22 February 2022
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Conference
SIGCSE 2022
Sponsor:
SIGCSE 2022: The 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education
March 3 - 5, 2022
RI, Providence, USA
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,595 of 4,542 submissions, 35%
Upcoming Conference
SIGCSE Virtual 2024
- Sponsor:
- sigcse
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 157Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)25
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 12 Sep 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View allView Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in