The reliability of analytic and holistic methods in rating students' computer programs

Authors:
David M. Olson
Affiliations:
Western Oregon State College, Monmouth, OR
Venue:
SIGCSE '88 Proceedings of the nineteenth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education
Year:
1988

Citing 2
Cited 5

Program Style, Design, Efficiency, DeBugging and Testing

Program Style, Design, Efficiency, DeBugging and Testing
A method for evaluating student written computer programs in an undergraduate computer science programming language course

ACM SIGCSE Bulletin

Progressive project assignments in computer courses

SIGCSE '89 Proceedings of the twentieth SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education
On criteria for grading student programs

ACM SIGCSE Bulletin
Interactive program demonstration as a form of student program assessment

Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges
In-person grading: an evaluative experiment

Proceedings of the 36th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education
Automated assessment in CS1

ACE '06 Proceedings of the 8th Australasian Conference on Computing Education - Volume 52

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

The study examined analytic and holistic methods of scoring students's programs. The sample included 30 students in an introductory computer science class. The inter-rater reliabilities for both scoring methods was significant (analytic, r = .66; holistic, r = .73). The correlation between students' holistic and analytic scores on the programs was moderate (r = .66), indicating that the two scoring methods measure different attributes of a student's program.