Combining unsupervised and invigilated assessment of introductory programming

We compared student performance on large-scale take-home assignments and small-scale invigilated tests that require competency with exactly the same programming concepts. The purpose of the tests, which were carried out soon after the take home assignments were submitted, was to validate the students' assignments as individual work. We found widespread discrepancies between the marks achieved by students between the two types of tasks. Many students were able to achieve a much higher grade on the take-home assignments than the invigilated tests. We conclude that these paired assessments are an effective way to quickly identify students who are still struggling with programming concepts that we might otherwise assume they understand, given their ability to complete similar, yet more complicated, tasks in their own time. We classify these students as not yet being at the neo-Piagetian stage of concrete operational reasoning.