Current Practices of Dynamic-Structural Testing in Programming Assessments

Automatic Programming Assessment (or APA) has been known as an important method to automatically mark and grade students’ programming exercises. It has been gaining a lot of attention from many researchers either to emphasize on the aspect of static analysis or dynamic testing (functional and structural testing). To date, not many recent studies attempted to focus on the context of structural testing even though, it is key in the software testing industry. Hence it becomes one of the most critical aspects of testing to be considered. Besides that, current literatures also lack information on APA’s detailed practices. Thus, we conducted a preliminary study to investigate the test adequacy criteria that have been commonly employed in the current practices of programming assessments which are applicable only to dynamic-structural testing. Specifically, this refers to testing that needs a program execution and focuses on the logic coverage of the tested program. In this paper, we reveal the means of conducting the preliminary study and its analysis and findings. From the findings, it has been discovered that most educators are commonly adopting the identified structural code coverage in programming assessments and even have a great leaning towards allowing those criteria to be considered in implementing APA

[1]  U. Sekaran,et al.  Research Methods for Business : A Skill Building Approach (5th Edition) , 1992 .

[2]  Mohd. Ehmer Khan Different Approaches To Black box Testing Technique For Finding Errors , 2011 .

[3]  Jun Xu,et al.  The Recent Development of Automated Programming Assessment , 2009, 2009 International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Software Engineering.

[4]  J Hayhurst Kelly,et al.  A Practical Tutorial on Modified Condition/Decision Coverage , 2001 .

[5]  J. Collofello,et al.  An environment for training computer science students on software testing , 2005, Proceedings Frontiers in Education 35th Annual Conference.

[6]  Boris Beizer,et al.  Software Testing Techniques , 1983 .

[7]  Shahida Sulaiman,et al.  Designing a Test Set for Structural Testing in Automatic Programming Assessment , 2013, SOCO 2013.

[8]  John E. Dobson,et al.  FAST: a framework for automating statistics-based testing , 2004, Software Quality Journal.

[9]  Ian Sommerville,et al.  Software Engineering (7th Edition) , 2004 .

[10]  S. Mann Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach , 2013 .

[11]  Shahida Sulaiman,et al.  Current Practices of Programming Assessment at Higher Learning Institutions , 2011, ICSECS.

[13]  William E. Perry,et al.  Effective methods for software testing , 1995 .

[14]  Hong Zhu Axiomatic assessment of control flow-based software test adequacy criteria , 1995, Softw. Eng. J..

[15]  Pankaj Mudholkar,et al.  Software Testing , 2002, Computer.

[16]  Lucia Vacariu,et al.  Automatic Test Data Generation for Software Path Testing Using Evolutionary Algorithms , 2012, 2012 Third International Conference on Emerging Intelligent Data and Web Technologies.

[17]  Joachim Wegener,et al.  Evolutionary Testing Techniques , 2005, SAGA.

[18]  Daniel Jackson,et al.  A software system for grading student computer programs , 1996, Comput. Educ..