Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!cf-cm!cybaswan!cslaurie From: cslaurie@cybaswan.UUCP (Laurie Moseley ) Newsgroups: comp.edu Subject: Re: Setting programming exams in Comp. Sci. courses Keywords: viability? experiences? Message-ID: <2546@cybaswan.UUCP> Date: 15 Jun 91 20:04:44 GMT Article-I.D.: cybaswan.2546 References: <13086@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> <1991Jun3.121448.23459@sarah.albany.edu> Reply-To: cslaurie@cybaswan.UUCP (Laurie Moseley (Comp Sci)) Lines: 28 I do not understand the fuss about group work. How on earth do you stop it ? Not only am I not going to be in our terminal rooms at 3 a.m. for several days before a deadline, we actually expect students to help one another. I would guess that a high proportion of the real teaching (the sort that produces the Aha! phenomenon) is done by students informally. If you think that cheating is taking place, include a programming section in the final examination and make the passing of that section (as well as the whole exam) compulsory. My experience is that few students narrowly pass such a section. They either pass very comfortably, or they fail abysmally. The marks on such a section are markedly bimodal at either end of the distribution. Our philosophy is "Make all assignments compulsory i.e. you fail if you do fail to hand in even one of them, grade them to give feedback to the students, but do not take these grades into account in the final assessment". If they have learned anything in an introductory course, they will be able to build linked list, binary trees, hash tables and the like in very short order. We find that the conceptual structures for doing these common operations are almost like form letters in the students' heads. Of course, the ones who cheated on the compulsory (but not counted) assignments will be completely lost in such an examination. The others will actually enjoy it, since we all enjoy doing things which we do well and which we find simple. Laurie