research-article

Open access

ASPA: A static analyser to support learning and continuous feedback on programming courses. An empirical validation

Authors:

Roope Luukkainen,

Jussi Kasurinen,

Valentina LenarduzziAuthors Info & Claims

ICSE-SEET '22: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training

Pages 29 - 39

https://doi.org/10.1145/3510456.3514149

Published: 17 October 2022 Publication History

Abstract

For decades there have been arguments how to teach programming in the basic courses. Supportive intervention methods to improve students' learning and methods to improve assessment process have been widely studied. There are various successful methods to each topic separately, but only a few of them fit for both. In this work, we aimed at validating ASPA a static analyser tool that supports learning and continuous feedback on programming courses. For this purpose, we designed and conduct an empirical study among 236 students enrolled in the basic programming course, that voluntary adopted the tools during the project development activities. We first profiled the students, then, evaluated the attitude toward using ASPA, the perceived ease of use, and the perceived usefulness. Results showed that ASPA is a good helper for the entire course and especially the student's programming assignments, and it also helps to improve the students' grades.

References

[1]

Joe Michael Allen, Frank Vahid, Kelly Downey, and Alex Daniel Edgcomb. 2018. Weekly Programs in a CS1 Class: Experiences with Auto-graded Many-small Programs (MSP). In ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. ASEE Conferences, Salt Lake City, Utah, 13.

[2]

Joe Michael Allen, Frank Vahid, Alex Edgcomb, Kelly Downey, and Kris Miller. 2019. An analysis of using many small programs in cs1. In Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 585--591.

Digital Library

[3]

Raul Andrade and João Brunet. 2018. Can students help themselves? An investigation of students' feedback on the quality of the source code. In 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, San Jose, CA, USA, 1--8.

Digital Library

[4]

Brett A. Becker and Keith Quille. 2019. 50 Years of CS1 at SIGCSE: A Review of the Evolution of Introductory Programming Education Research. In Symposium on Computer Science Education. ACM, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 338--344.

[5]

Janet Carter, Kirsti Ala-Mutka, Ursula Fuller, Martin Dick, John English, William Fone, and Judy Sheard. 2003. How shall we assess this? In Working group reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and technology in computer science education. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 107--123.

Digital Library

[6]

Sammi Chow, Kalina Yacef, Irena Koprinska, and James Curran. 2017. Automated data-driven hints for computer programming students. In Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization. ACM, Bratislava, Slovakia, 5--10.

Digital Library

[7]

Stephen Cooper, Wanda Dann, and Randy Pausch. 2000. Alice: a 3-D tool for introductory programming concepts. Journal of computing sciences in colleges 15, 5 (2000), 107--116.

Digital Library

[8]

David Croft and Matthew England. 2020. Computing with CodeRunner at Coventry University: Automated summative assessment of Python and C++ code. In 4th Conference on Computing Education Practice 2020. ACM, Durham, United Kingdom, 1--4.

Digital Library

[9]

Fred D. Davis. 1989. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly 13, 3 (1989), 319--340. Publisher: Management Information Systems Research Center, University of Minnesota.

Digital Library

[10]

Eric Foxley, Colin Higgins, Tarek Hegazy, Pavlos Symeonidis, and Athanasios Tsintsifas. 2001. The coursemaster cba system: Improvements over Ceilidh. In Proceedings of the 5th CAA Conference. Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom, 12. https://hdl.handle.net/2134/1809

[11]

Nupur Garg and Aaron W Keen. 2018. Earthworm: Automated Decomposition Suggestions. In Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research. ACM, Koli, Finland, 1--5.

Digital Library

[12]

Alex Gerdes, Johan T Jeuring, and Bastiaan J Heeren. 2010. Using strategies for assessment of programming exercises. In 41st Technical symposium on Computer science education. ACM, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA, 441--445.

Digital Library

[13]

Colin A Higgins, Geoffrey Gray, Pavlos Symeonidis, and Athanasios Tsintsifas. 2005. Automated assessment and experiences of teaching programming. Journal on Educational Resources in Computing (JERIC) 5, 3 (2005), 5--es.

Digital Library

[14]

Tony Jenkins. 2002. On the difficulty of learning to program. In Annual Conference of the LTSN. LTSN Centre for Information and Computer Sciences, Loughborough, United Kingdom, 53--58.

[15]

Erkki Kaila, M-J Laakso, Teemu Rajala, and Einari Kurvinen. 2018. A model for gamifying programming education: University-level programming course quantified. In International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO). IEEE, IEEE, Opatija, Croatia, 0689--0694.

[16]

Jussi Kasurinen. 2006. Python as a programming language for the introductory programming courses. Bachelor's thesis. Lappeenranta University of Technology.

[17]

Caitlin Kelleher and Randy Pausch. 2005. Lowering the barriers to programming: A taxonomy of programming environments and languages for novice programmers. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 37, 2 (2005), 83--137.

Digital Library

[18]

Hieke Keuning, Bastiaan Heeren, and Johan Jeuring. 2017. Code Quality Issues in Student Programs. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (2017-06-28) (ITiCSE '17). ACM, Bologna, Italy, 110--115.

Digital Library

[19]

Roope Luukkainen. 2020. ASPA: A static analyser to support learning and continuous feedback on the first programming course. Master's thesis. LUT University.

[20]

Roope Luukkainen. 2020. RoopeLuukkainen/ASPA: ASPA proof-of-concept release. Zenodo

[21]

Andrew Luxton-Reilly, Simon, Ibrahim Albluwi, Brett A. Becker, Michail Giannakos, Amruth N. Kumar, Linda Ott, James Paterson, Michael James Scott, Judy Sheard, and Claudia Szabo. 2018. Introductory programming: a systematic literature review. In Proceedings Companion of the 23rd Annual ACM Conference on Innovation and Technologyin Computer Science Education (2018-07-02) (ITiCSE 2018 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, Larnaca, Cyprus, 55--106.

Digital Library

[22]

Richard E Mayer, Jennifer L Dyck, and William Vilberg. 1986. Learning to program and learning to think: what's the connection? Commun. ACM 29, 7 (1986), 605--610.

Digital Library

[23]

Rodrigo Pessoa Medeiros, Geber Lisboa Ramalho, and Taciana Pontual Falcão. 2018. A systematic literature review on teaching and learning introductory programming in higher education. IEEE Trans. on Education 62, 2 (2018), 77--90.

Digital Library

[24]

Seppo Nevalainen and Jorma Sajaniemi. 2006. An Experiment on Short-Term Effects of Animated versus Static Visualization of Operations on Program Perception. In Second International Workshop on Computing Education Research. ACM, Canterbury, United Kingdom, 7--16.

Digital Library

[25]

Uolevi Nikula, Satu Alaoutinen, Jussi Kasurinen, and Toni Pirinen. 2009. Improving the Technical Infrastructure of a Programming Course. In International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. IEEE, Riga, Latvia, 374--376.

Digital Library

[26]

Uolevi Nikula, Orlena Gotel, and Jussi Kasurinen. 2011. A Motivation Guided Holistic Rehabilitation of the First Programming Course. ACM Trans. on Computing Education 11, 4 (Nov. 2011), 1--38.

Digital Library

[27]

Anthony Robins, Janet Rountree, and Nathan Rountree. 2003. Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion. Computer science education 13, 2 (2003), 137--172.

[28]

Elliot Soloway. 1984. What do novices know about programming. Directions in Human-Comupter Interaction (1984).

[29]

Juha Sorva, Ville Karavirta, and Lauri Malmi. 2013. A review of generic program visualization systems for introductory programming education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) 13, 4 (2013), 1--64.

Digital Library

[30]

Venkatesh, Viswanath, Morris, Michael G., Davis, Gordon B., and Davis, Fred D. 2003. User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View. MIS Quarterly 27, 3 (2003), 425--478.

[31]

Claes Wohlin, Per Runeson, Martin Hst, Magnus C. Ohlsson, Bjrn Regnell, and Anders Wessln. 2012. Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany.

[32]

Brad Wuetherick. 2010. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education 36 (12 2010).

Cited By

Izu CMirolo CBörstler JConnamacher HCrosby RGlassey RHaldeman GKiljunen OKumar ALiu DLuxton-Reilly AMatsumoto SCarneiro de Oliveira ERussell SShah AMonga MLonati VBarendsen ESheard JPaterson J(2025)Introducing Code Quality at CS1 Level: Examples and Activities2024 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education10.1145/3689187.3709615(339-377)Online publication date: 22-Jan-2025
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3689187.3709615
Liu DCalver JCraig MMonga MLonati VBarendsen ESheard JPaterson J(2024)Are a Static Analysis Tool Study's Findings Static? A ReplicationProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653545(80-86)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649217.3653545
Liu DCalver JCraig M(2024)A Static Analysis Tool in CS1: Student Usage and Perceptions of PythonTAProceedings of the 26th Australasian Computing Education Conference10.1145/3636243.3636262(172-181)Online publication date: 29-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3636243.3636262
Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Ne-course for learning programming
TEEM '16: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality

Difficulties in learning programming are a constant concern in engineering courses. In many research studies involving the learning programming must of the solutions presented, from the beginning of the first programming languages, was to apply different ...
Event-driven Programming in Programming Education: A Mapping Review

During the past two decades, event-driven programming (EDP) has emerged as a central and almost ubiquitous concept in modern software development: Graphical user interfaces are self-evident in most mobile and web-based applications, as well as in many ...
A novice's process of object-oriented programming
OOPSLA '06: Companion to the 21st ACM SIGPLAN symposium on Object-oriented programming systems, languages, and applications

Exposing students to the process of programming is merely implied but not explicitly addressed in texts on programming which appear to deal with 'program' as a noun rather than as a verb.We present a set of principles and techniques as well as an ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

ICSE-SEET '22: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training

May 2022

292 pages

ISBN:9781450392259

DOI:10.1145/3510456

Conference Chairs:
Cécile Péraire
Carnegie Mellon University
,
Alexander Serebrenik
Eindhoven University of Technology

Copyright © 2022 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part 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 components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

In-Cooperation

IEEE CS

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 17 October 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

ICSE '22

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

ICSE '22: 44th International Conference on Software Engineering

May 21 - 29, 2022

Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh

Upcoming Conference

ICSE 2025

2025 IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering

April 26 - May 3, 2025

Ottawa , ON , Canada

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

4
Total Citations
View Citations
314
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)167
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)21

Reflects downloads up to 16 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Izu CMirolo CBörstler JConnamacher HCrosby RGlassey RHaldeman GKiljunen OKumar ALiu DLuxton-Reilly AMatsumoto SCarneiro de Oliveira ERussell SShah AMonga MLonati VBarendsen ESheard JPaterson J(2025)Introducing Code Quality at CS1 Level: Examples and Activities2024 Working Group Reports on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education10.1145/3689187.3709615(339-377)Online publication date: 22-Jan-2025
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3689187.3709615
Liu DCalver JCraig MMonga MLonati VBarendsen ESheard JPaterson J(2024)Are a Static Analysis Tool Study's Findings Static? A ReplicationProceedings of the 2024 on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 110.1145/3649217.3653545(80-86)Online publication date: 3-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3649217.3653545
Liu DCalver JCraig M(2024)A Static Analysis Tool in CS1: Student Usage and Perceptions of PythonTAProceedings of the 26th Australasian Computing Education Conference10.1145/3636243.3636262(172-181)Online publication date: 29-Jan-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3636243.3636262
AlOmar EAlOmar SMkaouer MHaiduc SSchneider J(2023)On the Use of Static Analysis to Engage Students with Software Quality Improvement: An Experience with PMDProceedings of the 45th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training10.1109/ICSE-SEET58685.2023.00023(179-191)Online publication date: 17-May-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/ICSE-SEET58685.2023.00023

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Publication

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten