What do teachers teach in introductory programming?
Proceedings of the second international workshop on Computing education research
The PeerWise system of student contributed assessment questions
ACE '08 Proceedings of the tenth conference on Australasian computing education - Volume 78
Student use of the PeerWise system
Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education
PeerWise: students sharing their multiple choice questions
ICER '08 Proceedings of the Fourth international Workshop on Computing Education Research
ACM SIGCSE Bulletin
Quality of student contributed questions using PeerWise
ACE '09 Proceedings of the Eleventh Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 95
StudySieve: a tool that supports constructive evaluation for free-response questions
Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the NZ Chapter of the ACM Special Interest Group on Human-Computer Interaction
The quality of a PeerWise MCQ repository
Proceedings of the Twelfth Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 103
Tools for "contributing student learning"
ACM Inroads
Tools for "contributing student learning"
Proceedings of the 2010 ITiCSE working group reports
Supporting student-generated free-response questions
Proceedings of the 16th annual joint conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education
Uses of peer assessment in database teaching and learning
BNCOD'10 Proceedings of the 27th British national conference on Data Security and Security Data
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
A recent approach to engaging students in deep learning involves an online tool, PeerWise, through which students contribute multiple-choice questions to a shared question bank. Earlier work demonstrated a strong correlation between the use of PeerWise and student performance. In this study we investigate the quality of the MCQ repository created by students in an introductory programming course by analysing the range of topics on which students chose to write questions (i.e.~the repository coverage) without guidance from an instructor. We assess the repository coverage by comparing it with a common list of typical introductory programming topics, and by looking at its extent. We find that, despite having freedom to choose any topic, students created a repository that covered all the major topics in the curriculum.