1,a) 2 4 WC C WC C Grading Student programs for visualizing progress in classroom Naito Hiroshi 1,a) Saito Takashi 2 Abstract: To grade student programs in Computer-Aided Assessment system, we propose the method WC which is passed testing counts weighted by types of specifications for programming assignment. Comparing grade value between CAA system and teachers, teachers grade programs holisticly and change weights flexibility. By analyzing the association between grade and learning record data, method WC is a little better than not weighted method C. By questionnaire, teachers can not be concluded that either WC and C method are better but they think it s highly useful to display the progress using these methods. 1. TA TA 1 Department of Media Science, Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Osaka Institute of Technology 2 Department of Information Systems, Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Osaka Institute of Technology a) naitoh@is.oit.ac.jp computer-aided assessment, CAA [1], [2] CCA C CAA Hercules 2003 [3], C Java GUI [4] XML [5] Hercules 100 6 1) 1
2) TA Hercules CAA 5 [6], [7] CAA BOSS [8] 2. C II C. ( 1 ) C. ( 2 ). ( 3 ) 100. ( 4 ). 20 100 9 () HTML NFS Hercules 3. 3.1 ( ) 4 1 1 2
2 WC C 4 2 2 1 1 5 4 3 2 1 37 1 1 3 3.2 5 5 4 1 0 2 5 5 4 3 2 1 5 2 3 1 3 5 4 3 ( WC ) () 100 0 3 ( C ) WC C 2 5 WC 5 4 WC 57 C 53 WC 3 5 5 90 4 80 3 70 2 60 1 60 4. 3.2 1 work16 316 164 1 1 3
#include <stdio.h> int main(void) { int data[100]; int N, x, i, max; i = 0; while (scanf("%d", &x)!= EOF) { data[i] = x; i++; N = i; if (N > 0) { max = data[0]; for (i = 1; i < N; i++) { if (data[i] > max) max = data[i]; printf("%d %d \n", N, max); return 0; 3 4 0 5 6 6 16 1 9 2 27 for 7 27 () 7 4 WC C 12 WC C 1 while for for 8, 12 13 21 24 ( 1 ) 8 1 ( 2 ) 12 1 for while for ( 3 ) 13 for 1 while 12 ( 4 ) 21 ( 5 ) 24 main void gcc ( 1 ) ( 2 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 ) WC C 217 214 WC 20.2 31.0 C 30.6 19.5 WC 5. 4
5 WC 6 7 6 C 6 a2 WC C 6 5 6 5 WC5 WC1 5 1 SYA CMP WC5+WC4 5 4 Updates 6 C5 C1 5 1 C5+C4 5 4 5 12 12 a2 88 5 WC5+WC4 81 6 C5+C4 77 2 5 WC2 6 C4 a2 6 11 25 11 35 WC5+WC4 8 C5+C4 11 25 11 25 11 25 77 7 8 1.8 1.84 1 8 12.37 13.05 0 57 11 25 () 1 0 11 25 5 9 10 11 25 9 1 WC5 12 2 19 3 8 6 6 WC5 4 WC1 1 3 6 WC1 2 11 5
9 WC 12 C 10 C 13 a2 11 WC X 8 1 11 25 WC1 8 3 8 3 WC1 WC1 7 4 7 7 4 WC1 11 12 1% WC -0.529 C -0.548 C WC 1.24 1.56 C 1.17 1.60 WC 6. 4 4 1 7 8 13 14 5 6 WC C WC 7 1 3 Hercules 5 13 5 13 8 7. ( WC) 27 6
4 1 1 4 5 1 0 2 2 5 4 5 1 0 3 2 3 2 1 4 1 1 4 3 5 4 6 0 0 5 4 2 0 6 1 3 2 7 3 3 2 1 ( 70 ) 3 3 0 8 4 2 0 9 5 1 0 10 6 0 0 11 4 1 1 12 3 1 2 13 2 1 3 14 1 C II 4 5 1 0 1) 2) 3) ( C) WC C WC C 20 C II [3] Vol. 2008, No. 13, pp. 33 40 (2008). [4] GUI Vol. 2008, No. 93, pp. 81 88 (2008). [5] VMA Vol. 24, pp. 7 15 (2009). [6] Olson, D. M.: The reliability of analytic and holistic methods in rating students computer programs, 9th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pp. 293 298 (1988). [7] Smith, L. and Cordova, J.: Weighted primary trait analysis for computer program evaluation, Computer Science Education, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp. 14 19 (2005). [8] Joy, M., Griffiths, N. and Boyatt, R.: The BOSS online submission and assessment system, Educational Resources in Computing, Vol. 5, No. 3 (2005). [1] Ala-Mutka, K.: A Survey of Automated Assessment Approaches for Programming Assignments, Computer Science Education, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 83 102 (2005). [2] Douce, C., Livingstone, D. and Orwell, J.: Automatic test-based assessment of programming: A review, Educational Resources in Computing, Vol. 5, No. 3 (2005). 7