skip to main content
10.1145/3374135.3385321acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesacm-seConference Proceedingsconference-collections
abstract

Suitability of SCS1 as a Pre-CS2 Assessment Instrument: A Comparison with Short Deliberate-practice Questions

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 May 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

In an entry-level programming course, the instructor needs to assess students' prior knowledge or to evaluate their learning at important milestones. The Second CS1 Assessment (SCS1) is one of the best-known validated tests of programming knowledge. It is a multiple-choice test written in pseudo-code, covering concepts commonly presented in Computer Science 1 (CS1) courses. However, SCS1 is known to be an unwieldy assessment - the questions tend to be difficult and thereby may not provide good discrimination between students with average competencies against the weak ones. In our project, we created a set of short deliberate-practice questions for CS1 topics and used them to evaluate students' prior knowledge at the beginning of a Computer Science 2 (CS2) course. This set of deliberate-practice questions consists of 127 multiple-choice questions.

Both SCS1 questions and our short deliberate-practice questions were given to CS2 students as pre-CS2 assessments on an online practice system called HawkQB. Using Item Response Theory (IRT), we analyzed students' responses in both sets of questions as pre-CS2 assessments to examine whether the SCS1 questions are suitable to be used as a pre-CS2 assessment instrument. We found that the SCS1 questions are of greater difficulty and low discrimination compare with our short deliberate-practice questions based on the data from students in four sections of CS2 in fall 2019. Considering the time gap between CS1 and CS2 may vary, we question the suitability of SCS1 as a pre-CS2 assessment used in a formal test setup in the first or second week of CS2 courses.

References

  1. R. H. Austing, B. H. Barnes, D. T. Bonnette, G. L. Engel, and G. Stokes, "Curriculum'78: Recommendations for the Undergraduate Program in Computer Science---A Report of the ACM Curriculum Committee on Computer Science," Commun. ACM, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 147--166, 1979.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. A. Yadav, D. Burkhart, D. Moix, E. Snow, P. Bandaru, and L. Clayborn, "Sowing the Seeds: A Landscape Study on Assessment in Secondary Computer Science Education," Comp Sci Teach. Assn NY NY, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. M. C. Parker, M. Guzdial, and S. Engleman, "Replication, Validation, and Use of a Language Independent CS1 Knowledge Assessment," in Proceedings of the 2016 ACM conference on international computing education research, 2016, pp. 93--101.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. K. A. Ericsson, "The Influence of Experience and Deliberate Practice on the Development of Superior Expert Performance," Camb. Handb. Expert. Expert Perform., vol. 38, pp. 685--705, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Y. Song, "Alignment of Deliberate Practice to Micro-credentials in an Introductory Computer Science Course," in 2019 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Cincinnati, 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. R. J. De Ayala, The Theory and Practice of Item Response Theory. Guilford Publications, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Suitability of SCS1 as a Pre-CS2 Assessment Instrument: A Comparison with Short Deliberate-practice Questions

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ACM SE '20: Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Southeast Conference
      April 2020
      337 pages
      ISBN:9781450371056
      DOI:10.1145/3374135

      Copyright © 2020 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 25 May 2020

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • abstract
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate134of240submissions,56%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader