This file was created with JabRef 2.2b2.
Encoding: UTF-8

@STRING{jaehe = {Journal of Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education}}

@STRING{jite = {Journal of Information Technology Education}}

@INBOOK{duboulay89,
  chapter = {Some Difficulties of Learning to Program},
  pages = {283--299},
  title = {Studying the Novice Programmer},
  publisher = {LEA Hillsdale, NJ},
  year = {1989},
  editor = {E. Soloway and J. Spohrer},
  author = {du Boulay, Benedict},
  annote = {Conceptual errors that new programmers make. Now looking a little
	dated, but a good basis for further reading.},
  crossref = {soloway88},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:34:18 +1100}
}

@INBOOK{feldt93,
  pages = {105--146},
  title = {Reliability},
  author = {Feldt, Leonard S. and Brennan, Robert L.},
  crossref = {linn93},
  date-added = {2005-11-14 10:11:40 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:40:05 +1100},
  keywords = {reliability}
}

@INBOOK{mayer88,
  chapter = {The Psychology of How Novices Learn Computer Programming},
  pages = {139--159},
  year = {1988},
  author = {Mayer, Richard E.},
  annote = {Comparison of techniques for teaching programming concepts.},
  crossref = {soloway88},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:41:23 +1100},
  keywords = {psychology of programming, cs1, introductory programming}
}

@INCOLLECTION{messick93,
  author = {Messick, Samuel},
  title = {Validity},
  booktitle = {Educational Measurement},
  publisher = {Oryx Press},
  year = {1993},
  editor = {Linn, Robert L.},
  series = {American Council on Education Series on Higher Education},
  chapter = {Validity},
  pages = {13--103},
  address = {Phoenix, Arizona},
  edition = {3rd},
  annote = {Validity is the degree to which test results support the inferences
	and actions that arise from them. This means that a test cannot be
	valid per se; rather, its validity depends on the uses to which the
	results are put. For example, in educational measurement a test may
	be used to determine whether to promote a student to a higher class.
	In this case, the test is valid to the extent that the students promoted
	are ready for such promotion and the students not promoted are unready.
	Validity is a matter of degree; no test can be said to be completely
	valid or invalid. Moreover, as time passes more evidence regarding
	the validity of the test will accrue (and the context of the test
	itself may change), so validation is an ongoing process rather than
	a stage that can be passed through.
	
	
	This paper gives an overview of qualitative and quantitative approaches
	to validation. In accordance with Messick's concept of validity as
	dependent on context, quantitative approaches are never allowed to
	dominate},
  crossref = {linn93},
  date-added = {2005-11-13 01:40:20 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:44:53 +1100},
  keywords = {validity}
}

@INBOOK{messick88,
  chapter = {The once and future issues of validity: Assessing the meaning and
	consequences of measurement},
  pages = {33--45},
  author = {Messick, Samuel},
  crossref = {wainer88},
  date-added = {2005-11-13 01:43:20 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:44:13 +1100},
  keywords = {validity}
}

@ARTICLE{acm91,
  author = {{ACM and IEEE CS Joint Curriculum Task Force}},
  title = {Computing {C}urricula 1991},
  journal = {Communications of the ACM},
  year = {1991},
  volume = {34},
  number = {6},
  month = jun,
  pages = {69 -- 84},
  annote = {Summary of the full report on the computing curriculum. Talks about
	recommended content of computing courses; light on pedagogy. Useful
	as a frame of reference -- when we talk about assessment, \emph{this}
	is what's being assessed. (p68-tucker.pdf)},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:07:31 +1100},
  keywords = {curriculum, acm},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/acm91.pdf},
  pdf = {acm91.pdf}
}

@BOOK{aera99,
  title = {Standards for educational and psychological testing},
  publisher = {American Educational Research Association},
  year = {1999},
  author = {AERA and APA and NCME},
  date-added = {2005-11-13 01:49:18 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-11-13 01:54:03 +1100},
  keywords = {validity, assessment, standards, testing}
}

@ARTICLE{alamutka05,
  author = {Ala-Mutka, Kirsti A.},
  title = {A survey of automated assessment approaches for programming assignments},
  journal = {Computer Science Education},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {15},
  number = {2},
  month = {June},
  pages = {83--102},
  keywords = {assessment, online, programming, programming skills, automation, cs1},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {alamutka05.pdf},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03}
}

@ARTICLE{allan97,
  author = {V.H. Allan and M. V. Kolesar},
  title = {Teaching Computer Science: a Problem Solving Approach that Works},
  journal = {SigCUE Outlook},
  year = {1997},
  volume = {25},
  number = {1-2},
  month = apr,
  pages = {2--10},
  annote = {Another approach to managing diversity of expectations and levels
	of ability and experience at introductory programming level. Evidence
	that even just application experience is significantly helpful with
	successful completion; evidently computer familiarization has a steeper
	learning curve than we usually like to pretend. Programming can be
	overwhelming to the unprepared, and they tend to drown in a welter
	of program syntax rather than coming to grips with analytical issues.
	Spreadsheets and puzzle-style problem-solving form the basis of a
	CS0 course, which seemed to induce definite improvement in student
	performance.},
  date-modified = {2005-10-23 15:28:48 +1000},
  keywords = {pedagogy, problem solving, cs1, programming},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/allan97.pdf},
  pdf = {allan97.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{allsopp02,
  author = {Allsopp, Louise},
  title = {Teaching and learning in first year seminars},
  journal = {Journal of Information Technology Education},
  year = {2002},
  volume = {1},
  pages = {1--10},
  keywords = {pedagogy, cs1, tutorials, learning styles, active learning, participation,
	student acceptance, teaching methods, IT, business},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {allsop02.pdf},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03},
  url = {http://jite.org/documents/Vol1/v1n1p001-010.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{aluisio2003,
  author = {Alu\'isio, Sandra Maria and de Aquino, Val\'eria Tomas and Pizzirani,
	Rafael and de Oliveira, Jr, Osvaldo Novaes},
  title = {Assessing high-order skills with partial knowledge evaluation: lessons
	learned from using a computer-based proficiency test of English for
	academic purposes},
  journal = {Journal of Information Technology Education},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {2},
  pages = {185--202},
  abstract = {English proficiency tests (EPT) are required from students enrolled
	in Master and PhD programs in many non-English speaking countries,
	as the students must demonstrate their ability to understand and
	produce technical literature that is predominantly in English. Some
	universities and funding agencies in Brazil require the student to
	pass a general-purpose exam, such as TOEFL or IELTS. However, these
	exams do not evaluate students' competence in terms of the demands
	of highly standardized research articles written in English, which
	will be needed for the student to review the literature of his/her
	research area. In order to overcome this limitation we implemented
	a web-based, fully automated system for English Proficiency tests,
	named CAPTEAP, which checks the students' ability in the use of English
	for academic purposes. In this paper, we describe how CAPTEAP assesses
	high-order skills of Bloom's taxonomy, where students are assessed
	in their reception and familiarity with the schematic structure of
	scientific papers. CAPTEAP employs the resources of a case-based
	reasoning tool to assist non-English speakers in producing scientific
	papers. It comprises 4 modules, through which students are evaluated
	with regard to their ability to: i) analyze the structure of a given
	section of a paper; ii) analyze relationships among clauses signalled
	by discourse markers; iii) recognize conventions and rhetorical functions
	in English from scientific texts; iv) identify writing strategies
	for each component of a section. CAPTEAP has been},
  annote = {Very interesting two-dimensional method for selecting between multiple
	choice options with different degrees of certainty.},
  keywords = {assessment, online, english, english proficiency, capteap, bloom's
	taxonomy, tools},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {aluisio03.pdf},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03}
}

@BOOK{aera85,
  title = {Standards for educational and psychological testing},
  publisher = {American Psychological Association},
  year = {1996},
  author = {{American Educational Research Association} and {American Psychological
	Association} and {National Council on Measurement in Education}},
  month = jul,
  keywords = {testing, psychology, assessment, validity, reliability, standards,aera}
}

@ARTICLE{andersson00,
  author = {Andersson, Roy and Roxa, Torgny},
  title = {Encouraging students in large classes},
  journal = {SIGCSE Bulletin},
  year = {2000},
  volume = {32},
  number = {1},
  month = mar,
  pages = {176--179},
  date-modified = {2005-10-23 15:30:13 +1000},
  keywords = {cs1, motivation, pedagogy, remediation, confidence},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/andersson00.pdf},
  pdf = {andersson00.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{andrade05,
  author = {Andrade, Heidi and Du, Ying},
  title = {Student perspectives on rubric-referenced assessment},
  journal = {Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {10},
  number = {3},
  month = {April},
  keywords = {rubrics, student acceptance, assessment, student work habits, validity,
	reliability, interrater reliability, formative assessment, self-assessment},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {andrade05.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.04.23},
  url = {http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=10&n=3}
}

@ARTICLE{andreae00,
  author = {Andreae, Peter and Biddle, Robert and Dobbie, Gill and Gale, Amy
	and Miller, Linton and Tempero, Ewan},
  title = {Experience teaching {CS}1 with {J}ava},
  journal = {Journal of Computer Science Education},
  year = {2000},
  volume = {14},
  number = {1},
  month = {April},
  note = {Also published as Technical Report CS-TR-99/3, Victoria University
	of Wellington},
  pages = {19--28},
  comment = {See also ``Surprises in teaching {CS1} with {J}ava'', Technical Report
	{CS}-{TR}-98/9, Victoria University of Wellington},
  keywords = {cs1, java, object-orientation, pedagogy, programming language, course
	library, tools, assessment, assignments, introductory programming,
	motivation, confidence},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {andreae00.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.04}
}

@TECHREPORT{andreae98,
  author = {Andreae, Peter and Biddle, Robert and Dobbie, Gill and Gale, Amy
	and Miller, Linton and Tempero, Ewan},
  title = {Surprises in teaching {CS}1 with {J}ava},
  institution = {Victoria University of Wellington},
  year = {1998},
  number = {CS-TR-98/9},
  date-added = {2005-10-02 16:43:17 +1000},
  date-modified = {2005-10-02 16:46:11 +1000},
  keywords = {Java, CS1, OOP, curriculum}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{applin01,
  author = {Anne Gates Applin},
  title = {Second language acquisition and {CS}1},
  booktitle = {SIGCSE '01: Proceedings of the thirty-second SIGCSE technical symposium
	on Computer Science Education},
  year = {2001},
  pages = {174--178},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/364447.364579},
  isbn = {1-58113-329-4},
  keywords = {natural language, code reading, pedagogy, cognitive psychology, teaching
	methodology, research methodology, predictive validity},
  location = {Charlotte, North Carolina, United States},
  pdf = {/applin01.pdf}
}

@BOOK{arter01,
  title = {Scoring rubrics in the classroom: using performance criteria for
	assessing and improving student performance},
  publisher = {Corwin Press},
  year = {2001},
  author = {Arter, Judith and McTighe, Jay},
  series = {Experts in Assessment},
  annote = {Developing marking schemes, with particular attention paid to criterion-referenced
	schemes. Nothing especially IT-oriented, but thorough coverage of
	general assessment.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:25:18 +1000}
}

@ARTICLE{ashworth97,
  author = {Ashworth, Peter and Bannister, Philip and Thorne, Pauline},
  title = {Guilty in whose eyes? {U}niversity students' perceptions of cheating
	and plagiarism in academic work and assessment},
  journal = {Studies in Higher Education},
  year = {1997},
  volume = {22},
  number = {2},
  pages = {187--203},
  annote = {The sociology of plagiarism. Gives a useful overview of social and
	psychological factors that influence students' attitudes to plagiarism.},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:29:31 +1100},
  keywords = {plagiarism},
  pdf = {/home/ram/papers/ashworth97.pdf},
  url = {http://www.metapress.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/content/x10546404q650ux5/?p=f385f13adeba4a29b3b47523fe5bafc1&pi=5}
}

@BOOK{astin91,
  title = {Assessment for excellence: {T}he philosophy and practice of assessment
	and evaluation in higher education},
  publisher = {Macmillan},
  year = {1991},
  author = {Astin, Alexander W.}
}

@BOOK{athanasou97,
  title = {Introduction to educational testing},
  publisher = {Social Science Press},
  year = {1997},
  author = {Athanasou, James A.}
}

@ARTICLE{barker03a,
  author = {Lecia J. Barker and Kathy Garvin-Doxas},
  title = {The effect of institutional characteristics on participation of women
	in computer science bachelors degree programs},
  journal = {SIGCSE Bulletin},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {35},
  number = {3},
  pages = {242--242},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/961290.961600},
  issn = {0097-8418},
  keywords = {gender, retention, minorities, institutional culture},
  pdf = {/barker03a.pdf},
  publisher = {ACM Press}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{barker03b,
  author = {Lecia J. Barker and Kathy Garvin-Doxas},
  title = {Why project courses sometimes widen the experience gap among students},
  booktitle = {ITiCSE '03: Proceedings of the 8th annual conference on Innovation
	and technology in computer science education},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {258--258},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/961511.961618},
  isbn = {1-58113-672-2},
  keywords = {group learning, collaborative learning, gender, cross-disciplinary
	courses, cs1},
  location = {Thessaloniki, Greece},
  pdf = {/barker03b.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{barker02,
  author = {Lecia Jane Barker and Kathy Garvin-Doxas and Michele Jackson},
  title = {Defensive climate in the computer science classroom},
  booktitle = {SIGCSE '02: Proceedings of the 33rd SIGCSE technical symposium on
	Computer science education},
  year = {2002},
  pages = {43--47},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/563340.563354},
  isbn = {1-58113-473-8},
  keywords = {learning environment, gender, retention, sociology},
  location = {Cincinnati, Kentucky},
  pdf = {/barker02.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{barrett05,
  author = {Barrett, Ruth and Cox, Anna L.},
  title = {`{A}t least they're learning something': the hazy line between collaboration
	and collusion},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {30},
  number = {2},
  pages = {107--122},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 23:16:16 +1000},
  keywords = {plagiarism, collusion, staff attitudes to plagiarism},
  pdf = {barrett05.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{barros03,
  author = {Jo{\~{a}}o Paulo Barros and Lu\'is Estevens and Rui Dias and Rui
	Pais and Elisabete Soeiro},
  title = {Using lab exams to ensure programming practice in an introductory
	programming course},
  booktitle = {ITiCSE '03: Proceedings of the 8th annual conference on Innovation
	and technology in computer science education},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {16--20},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/961511.961519},
  isbn = {1-58113-672-2},
  keywords = {lab exams, prac exams, cs1, assessment, motivation, pedagogy, retention,
	object-oriented programming, portugal, group assessment, assignments,
	exam, validity},
  location = {Thessaloniki, Greece},
  pdf = {/barros03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{baume04,
  author = {Baume, David and Yorke, Mantz and Coffey, Martin},
  title = {What is happening when we assess, and how can we use our understanding
	of this to improve assessment?},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {29},
  number = {4},
  month = aug,
  pages = {451--477},
  date-modified = {2005-10-23 15:31:42 +1000},
  keywords = {portfolios, reliability, assessment, interrater reliability, education,
	assessment methodology},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/baume04.pdf},
  pdf = {/baume04.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{beaubouef03,
  author = {Theresa Beaubouef},
  title = {Why computer science students need language},
  journal = {SIGCSE Bulletin},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {35},
  number = {4},
  pages = {51--54},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/960492.960525},
  issn = {0097-8418},
  keywords = {curriculum, language skills, communication skills},
  pdf = {beaubouef03.pdf},
  publisher = {ACM Press}
}

@ARTICLE{beaubouef01,
  author = {Beaubouef, Theresa and Lucas, R. and Howatt, J.},
  title = {The {UNLOCK} system: {E}nhancing problem solving skills in {CS}1
	students},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {33},
  number = {2},
  pages = {43--46},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 15:14:25 +1100},
  keywords = {retention, problem solving, tool, formative assessment, online assessment},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/beauboeuf01.pdf},
  pdf = {/beaubouef01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{beaubouef05,
  author = {Beaubouef, Theresa and Mason, John},
  title = {Why the high attrition rate for computer science students: some thoughts
	and observations},
  journal = {Inroads -- the {SIGCSE} Bulletin},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {37},
  number = {2},
  month = {June},
  pages = {103--106},
  date-added = {2005-12-04 15:14:55 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 15:17:35 +1100},
  keywords = {attrition, retention, cs1, problem solving, assessment, pracs, math,
	formative assessment, tutor training, software engineering, project
	management, estimation, objects early},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/beaubouef05.pdf},
  pdf = {/beaubouef05.pdf},
  rating = {3},
  read = {Yes}
}

@ARTICLE{benari01,
  author = {Ben-Ari, Mordechai},
  title = {Constructivism in Computer Science Education},
  journal = {Jnl. of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {20},
  number = {1},
  pages = {45--73},
  annote = {constructivism.pdf -- A survey of attitudes to constructivism in
	the CS Ed literature. Includes comparative material on constructivism
	in the physical sciences and mathematics, where it is very popular
	and seems to be effective.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:57:56 +1000},
  keywords = {constructivism, psychology of programing, cognitive psychology, epistemology,
	modelling, pedagogy, pracs, exams, assessment},
  pdf = {/benari01.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{benari04,
  author = {Mordechai Ben-Ari and Jorma Sajaniemi},
  title = {Roles of variables as seen by CS educators},
  booktitle = {ITiCSE '04: Proceedings of the 9th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation
	and technology in computer science education},
  year = {2004},
  pages = {52--56},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1007996.1008013},
  isbn = {1-58113-836-9},
  keywords = {cs1, pedagogy, roles of variables, code reading, psychology of programming},
  location = {Leeds, United Kingdom},
  pdf = {/papers/benari04.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{bennett05,
  author = {Bennett, Roger},
  title = {Factors associated with student plagiarism in a post-1992 university},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {30},
  number = {2},
  month = apr,
  pages = {137--162},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:29:03 +1100},
  keywords = {plagiarism, staff attitudes, student attitudes, motivation},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/bennett05.pdf},
  pdf = {/bennett05.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{bergin06,
  author = {Bergin, Susan and Reilly, Ronan},
  title = {Predicting introductory programming performance: A multi-institutional
	multivariate study},
  journal = {Computer Science Education},
  year = {2006},
  volume = {16},
  number = {4},
  month = {dec},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/bergin06.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.31}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{beyer03,
  author = {Sylvia Beyer and Kristina Rynes and Julie Perrault and Kelly Hay
	and Susan Haller},
  title = {Gender differences in computer science students},
  booktitle = {SIGCSE '03: Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on
	Computer science education},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {49--53},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  abstract = {We examined gender differences and differences in Computer Science
	(CS) majors vs. non-majors in ability in quantitative areas, educational
	goals and interests, experience with computers, stereotypes and knowledge
	about CS, confidence, personality, support and encouragement, stress
	and financial issues, gender discrimination, and attitudes toward
	the academic environment in CS. What is unique to this investigation
	is its multivariate nature. While others have studied these variables
	in isolation, our study looks at them collectively to identify important
	interactions among variables. This will eventually allow us to identify
	a profile of women who pursue careers in CS. The findings are reported
	in detail below. Particularly noteworthy is that men had more confidence
	in using computers than did women even when statistically controlling
	quantitative ability. In fact, female CS majors had less computer
	confidence than did male non-majors!},
  annote = {An attempt to discern reasons for underrepresentation of women in
	computing courses by surveying CS-major and non-CS-major attitudes
	to computers and computing. Significant differences were found in
	computer confidence.},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/611892.611930},
  isbn = {1-58113-648-X},
  keywords = {gender, expectations, motivation, confidence},
  location = {Reno, Navada, USA},
  pdf = {/beyer03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{black98,
  author = {Black, Paul and Wiliam, Dylan},
  title = {Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment},
  journal = {Phi Delta Kappan},
  year = {1998},
  volume = {80},
  number = {2},
  pages = {139--},
  keywords = {assessment, primary education, secondary education, formative assessment,
	evaluative assessment},
  owner = {ram},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03},
  url = {http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/kbla9810.htm}
}

@ARTICLE{booth92,
  author = {Booth, S},
  title = {Learning to Program: a Phenomenographic Perspective},
  journal = {ACTA Univ. Gothenburg Studies in Educational Science},
  year = {1992},
  volume = {89},
  keywords = {cs1, functional programming, phenomenography, conceptions of programming,
	product orientation}
}

@BOOK{borich04,
  title = {Educational assessment for the elementary and middle school classroom},
  publisher = {Pearson Prentice Hall},
  year = {2004},
  author = {Borich, Gary D. and Tombari, Martin L.}
}

@ARTICLE{borsboom04,
  author = {Borsboom, Denny and Mellenbergh, Gideon J.},
  title = {The concept of validity},
  journal = {Psychological Review},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {111},
  number = {4},
  month = {validity, construct validity, reliability,},
  pages = {1061--1071},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:28:45 +1100},
  keywords = {validity, reliability, methodology, epistemology},
  pdf = {/borsboom04.pdf},
  url = {http://rhowell.ba.ttu.edu/borsboomValidity2004.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{boston02,
  author = {Boston, Carol},
  title = {The concept of formative assessment},
  journal = {Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation},
  year = {2002},
  volume = {8},
  keywords = {assessment, formative assessment, primary education, secondary education,
	tertiary education,},
  owner = {ram},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03},
  url = {http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=9}
}

@ARTICLE{boud99,
  author = {David Boud and Ruth Cohen and Jane Sampson},
  title = {Peer learning and assessment},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {1999},
  volume = {24},
  number = {4},
  pages = {413--426},
  keywords = {peer learning, peer assessment, student attitudes, motivation, reliability},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/boud99.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.29}
}

@ARTICLE{bourner01,
  author = {Jill Bourner and Mark Hughes and Tom Bourner},
  title = {First year undergraduate experiences of group project work},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {26},
  number = {1},
  pages = {19--39},
  keywords = {phenomenography, group assessment, peer assessment},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/bourner01.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.29}
}

@ARTICLE{bowden84,
  author = {Bowden, J.A.},
  title = {Students' approaches to learning: {I}nfluence of assessment in first
	year},
  journal = {University of Melbourne Gazette},
  year = {1984},
  volume = {40},
  number = {4},
  pages = {10},
  date-modified = {2005-10-23 15:32:25 +1000},
  keywords = {assessment, hidden curriculum, validity, deep learning},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/bowden94.pdf},
  pdf = {/bowden84.pdf}
}

@TECHREPORT{bowden87,
  author = {Bowden, John A. and Masters, Geofferey N. and Ramsden, Paul},
  title = {Influence of assessment demands on first year university students'
	approaches to learning},
  institution = {Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne},
  year = {1987},
  keywords = {assessment, deep learning, hidden curriculum, multidisciplinary}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{box04,
  author = {Ilona Box},
  title = {Object-oriented analysis, criterion referencing, and {B}loom},
  booktitle = {CRPIT '04: Proceedings of the sixth conference on Australian computing
	education},
  year = {2004},
  pages = {1--8},
  address = {Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia},
  publisher = {Australian Computer Society, Inc.},
  keywords = {assessment, prac exam, lab exam, multiple choice, exams, object oriented
	programming, criterion referencing, bloom's taxonomy},
  location = {Dunedin, New Zealand},
  pdf = {/box04.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{bridges99,
  author = {Paul Bridges and Bernard Bourdillon and Debbie Collymore and Angela
	Cooper and Wendy Fox and Chris Haines and David Turner and Harvey
	Woolf and Mantz Yorke},
  title = {Discipline-related Marking Behaviour Using Percentages: A Potential
	Cause of Inequity in Assessment},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {1999},
  volume = {24},
  number = {3},
  month = {September},
  pages = {285--300},
  annote = {Raw marks assigned by markers in disciplines where there is a lot
	of marker latitude have a differently-shaped distribution to those
	assigned by markers in disciplines where there is little latitude:
	paradigm examples being history versus mathematics.},
  date-modified = {2005-10-23 15:32:34 +1000},
  doi = {10.1080/0260293990240303},
  keywords = {marking, validity, reliability, disciplinary study, assessment, marker
	behaviour},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/bridges99.pdf},
  pdf = {/bridges99.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{brown97,
  author = {Judy Brown and Peter Andreae and Robert Biddle and Ewan Tempero},
  title = {Women in introductory computer science: experience at {V}ictoria
	{U}niversity of {W}ellington},
  booktitle = {SIGCSE '97: Proceedings of the twenty-eighth SIGCSE technical symposium
	on Computer science education},
  year = {1997},
  pages = {111--115},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  annote = {Describes measures taken at Victoria University, Wellington, to address
	high rates of attrition and poor results among female computer science
	students. Changes were made to many aspects of the program, but female
	success and attrition rates did not seem to be significantly affected.},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/268084.268128},
  isbn = {0-89791-889-4},
  keywords = {cs1, gender, attrition, formative assessment, streaming, pracs},
  location = {San Jose, California, United States},
  pdf = {/brown97.pdf}
}

@BOOK{brown99,
  title = {Assessment Matters in Higher Education: Choosing and Using Diverse
	Approaches},
  publisher = {Oxford University Press},
  year = {1999},
  author = {Sally Brown and Angela Glasner},
  annote = {Caulfield General collection 378.1662 B879A},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:54:42 +1000}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{bucci01,
  author = {Paolo Bucci and Timothy J. Long and Bruce W. Weide},
  title = {Do we really teach abstraction?},
  booktitle = {SIGCSE '01: Proceedings of the thirty-second SIGCSE technical symposium
	on Computer Science Education},
  year = {2001},
  pages = {26--30},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  month = feb,
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  annote = {Better pedagogy can improve students' abstract reasoning ability.},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/364447.364531},
  isbn = {1-58113-329-4},
  keywords = {cs1, cs2, abstraction, pedagogy, assessment},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/bucci01.pdf},
  location = {Charlotte, North Carolina, United States},
  pdf = {/bucci01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{burton03,
  author = {Burton, Philip J. and Bruhn, Russel E.},
  title = {Teaching programming in the {OOP} era},
  journal = {SIGCSE Bulletin},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {35},
  number = {2},
  date-modified = {2005-10-23 15:33:14 +1000},
  keywords = {cs1, object oriented programming, objects first, procedural first,
	procedural programming, mathematics, problem solving},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/burton03.pdf},
  pdf = {/burton03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{burton05,
  author = {Burton, Richard F.},
  title = {Multiple-choice and true/false tests: {M}yths and misapprehensions},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {30},
  number = {1},
  pages = {65--72},
  doi = {10.1080/0260293042003243904},
  keywords = {multiple choice, mcq, exams, assessment, validity, reliability, selected
	response assessment},
  pdf = {/burton05.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{burton01,
  author = {Richard F. Burton},
  title = {Quantifying the effects of chance iin multiple-choice and true/false
	tests: question selection and guessing of answers},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {26},
  number = {1},
  pages = {41--50},
  keywords = {mcq, selected response assessment, statistics, guessing, reliability,
	validity},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/burton01.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.29}
}

@ARTICLE{burton99,
  author = {Richard F. Burton and David J. Miller},
  title = {Statistical modelling of multiple-choice and true/false tests: ways
	of considering, and of reducing, the uncertainties attributable to
	guessing},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {1999},
  volume = {24},
  number = {4},
  pages = {399--411},
  keywords = {mcq, reliability, validity, guessing, statistics, selected response
	assessment},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/burton99.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.29}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{byrne01,
  author = {Pat Byrne and Gerry Lyons},
  title = {The Effect of Student Attributes on Success in Programming},
  booktitle = {ITiCSE '01: Proceedings of the 6th annual conference on Innovation
	and technology in computer science education},
  year = {2001},
  pages = {49--52},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  month = jun,
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  abstract = {This paper examines the relationship between student results in a
	first year programming course and predisposition factors of gender,
	prior computing experience, learning style and academic performance
	to date. While the study does not suggest that any dominant attributes
	are related to success in programming, there are some interesting
	outcomes which will have implications for teaching and learning.},
  annote = {Gender, prior experience, learning style and prior academic performance.
	No really strong conclusions could be drawn, although study did show
	evidence that people with one particular learning style seem drawn
	to study computing.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:38:51 +1000},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/377435.377467},
  isbn = {1-58113-330-8},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  keywords = {gender, learning style, cs1, introductory programming, student attributes,
	mathematics, learning style},
  location = {Canterbury, United Kingdom},
  pdf = {/byrne01.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{califf00,
  author = {Mary Elaine Califf and Mary Goodwin},
  title = {Testing skills and knowledge: introducing a laboratory exam in CS1},
  booktitle = {SIGCSE '02: Proceedings of the 33rd SIGCSE technical symposium on
	Computer science education},
  year = {2002},
  pages = {217--221},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  month = feb,
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/563340.563425},
  isbn = {1-58113-473-8},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2002},
  keywords = {validity, prac exam, lab exam, pracs, cs1, cs2, predictive validity,
	programming skills, C, C++, exams, assessment},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/califf02.pdf},
  location = {Cincinnati, Kentucky},
  pdf = {/califf02.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{carbone01,
  author = {Carbone, Angela and Hurst, John and Mitchell, Ian and Gunstone, Dick},
  title = {Characteristics of programming exercises that lead to poor learning
	tendencies: {P}art {II}},
  booktitle = {{ITiCSE '01}: Proceedings of the 6th annual conference on Innovation
	and technology in computer science education},
  year = {2001},
  pages = {93--96},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  month = jun,
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/377435.377494},
  isbn = {1-58113-330-8},
  journal = {ITiCSE 2001},
  keywords = {programming skills, assessment, pedagogy, learning styles, C, cs1,
	cs2, pracs, problem solving, assessment design},
  pdf = {/carbone01.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{carbone00,
  author = {Angela Carbone and John Hurst and Ian Mitchell and Dick Gunstone},
  title = {Principles for designing programming exercises to minimise poor learning
	behaviours in students},
  booktitle = {ACSE '00: Proceedings of the Australasian conference on Computing
	education},
  year = {2000},
  pages = {26--33},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/359369.359374},
  isbn = {1-58113-271-9},
  keywords = {educative assessment, pracs, strategies for learning, bad habits,
	cs1, c, mips},
  location = {Melbourne, Australia},
  pdf = {/carbone00.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{carbone98,
  author = {Angela J. Carbone and Jens J. Kaasb\o{}ll},
  title = {A Survey of Methods Used to Evaluate Computer Science Teaching},
  booktitle = {ITiCSE '98: Proceedings of the 6th annual conference on the teaching
	of computing and the 3rd annual conference on Integrating technology
	into computer science education},
  year = {1998},
  pages = {41--45},
  abstract = {A literature survey shows that the teacher's own impression of the
	teaching and the students is the most common way of evaluating novelties
	in teaching. However, also low cost methods with better validity
	and reliability were found. These included data from several sources,
	or they comprised of several learning cycles in an iterative development.},
  annote = {Overview of methods used to evaluate new teaching strategies. Useful
	bibliography. (p41-Carbone.pdf)},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 21:09:41 +1000},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/282991.283014},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  keywords = {survey, evaluation, computer science},
  pdf = {/carbone98.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{carter03,
  author = {Janet Carter and Kirsti Ala-Mutka and Ursula Fuller and Martin Dick
	and John English and William Fone and Judy Sheard},
  title = {How shall we assess this?},
  booktitle = {ITiCSE-WGR '03: Working group reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and
	technology in computer science education},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {107--123},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/960875.960539},
  keywords = {assessment, plagiarism, computer aided assessment},
  location = {Thessaloniki, Greece},
  pdf = {/carter03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{carter02,
  author = {Carter, Janet and Boyle, Roger},
  title = {Teaching delivery issues: lessons from computer science},
  journal = {Journal of Information Technology Education},
  year = {2002},
  volume = {1},
  number = {2},
  comment = {``We have seen students pass with entirely adequate grades as a result
	of handing in many pieces of satisfactory work, only to turn out
	to be inadequately skilled Programmers when things get `real'.''
	
	``We have found an intermediate solution by breaking a large class
	(perhaps 300 students) into seminar groups of twenty or so, and requiring
	them to meet in a workshop mode once per week with a tutor, that
	brings the resources within reasonable bound. These workshops are
	held away from a computer laboratory, so all the work is verbal,
	or pen-and-paper or whiteboard.''},
  keywords = {IT, programming, expectations, assessment, tutes, pracs, exams, validity,
	pedagogy},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/carter02.pdf},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{carter99,
  author = {Janet Carter and Tony Jenkins},
  title = {Gender and Programming: What's Going On?},
  booktitle = {ITiCSE '99: Proceedings of the 4th annual SIGCSE/SIGCUE ITiCSE conference
	on Innovation and technology in computer science education},
  year = {1999},
  pages = {1--4},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  month = jun,
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  abstract = {The learning (and teaching) of programming in Higher Education is
	a perennial problem, and is the subject of much attention and innovation.One
	way in which the problem can be addressed is for instructors to investigate
	and thus better understand the ways in which students learn to program.We
	present the results of investigations carried out at the Universities
	of Kent and Leeds into the ways in which gender influences the learning
	approach of students in programming. The research shows that gender
	is a significant factor in determining the way in which students
	approach learning to program. A better understanding of the issues
	raised would lead to more effective teaching and thus better learning.},
  annote = {Gender differences in approaches to learning: extra, voluntary tutorial
	classes were offered, and women took them up to a much greater extent
	than did men, leading to a presumably erroneous perception that the
	teaching staff were more willing to help female students. Learning
	outcomes were ``creditable, if unspectacular''. Interesting for future
	study on psychological and sociological factors affecting uptake
	of extra tuition etc. Female students achieve results on a par with
	males but seem less confident.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:52:59 +1000},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/305786.305824},
  isbn = {1-58113-087-2},
  keywords = {gender, programming, cs1, stereotypes, expectations, attrition},
  location = {Cracow, Poland},
  pdf = {/carter99.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{chamillard00,
  author = {Chamillard, A.T. and Braun, Kim A.},
  title = {Evaluating programming ability in an introductory computer science
	course},
  booktitle = {SIGCSE '00: Proceedings of the thirty-first SIGCSE technical symposium
	on Computer science education},
  year = {2000},
  pages = {212--216},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/330908.331857},
  isbn = {1-58113-213-1},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2000},
  keywords = {prac exam, assessment, cs1, programming, collaborative learning, validity,
	pracs, lab exam, predictive validity, concurrent validity, correlation
	study},
  location = {Austin, Texas, United States},
  pdf = {/chamillard00.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{chamillard01,
  author = {A.T. Chamillard and Jay K. Joiner},
  title = {Using Lab Practica to Evaluate Programming Ability},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {2001},
  month = feb,
  pages = {159--163},
  annote = {Case study: how to run pracs while avoiding the usual pitfalls of
	cheating, the Friday effect etc. and ensuring statistical validity.
	These pracs are only run for 180 minutes per semester and are summative,
	and are therefore more like Monash's prac exams than Monash's pracs.
	(p159-Chamillard.pdf)},
  date-modified = {2005-10-23 15:33:37 +1000},
  keywords = {prac exam, cs1, assessment, pedagogy, validity},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/chamillard01.pdf},
  pdf = {/chamillard01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{chen92,
  author = {Chen, Natasha},
  title = {High school computing: the inside story},
  journal = {The Computing Teacher},
  year = {1992},
  volume = {19},
  number = {8},
  pages = {51--52},
  keywords = {scheme, k12, functional programming, procedural programming, learner
	experiences, abstraction},
  url = {http://www.trollope.org/scheme.html}
}

@ARTICLE{clancy01,
  author = {Clancy, Mike and Stasko, John and Guzdial, Mark and Fincher, Sally
	and Dale, Nell},
  title = {Models and areas for {CS} {E}ducation research},
  journal = {Computer Science Education},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {11},
  number = {4},
  pages = {323--341},
  date-added = {2005-10-02 16:36:59 +1000},
  date-modified = {2005-10-23 15:33:50 +1000},
  keywords = {education theory, algorithm animation, teaching aids, problem based
	learning, research methodology, misconceptions, recursion, naive
	programming, design bias, communities of practice, collaboration
	with education},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/chamillard01.pdf},
  pdf = {/clancy01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{clarke94,
  author = {Valerie A. Clarke and G. Joy Teague},
  title = {A Psychological Perspective on Gender Differences in Computing Participation},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {1994},
  pages = {258--262},
  annote = {Factors influencing gender bias in Australian students' decisions
	to study computer science and to persist with that study in post-secondary
	education. Male students are advantaged by open, solo, unstructured
	lab classes and multiple-choice testing; female students are advantaged
	by closed, structured, groupwork lab classes and extended written
	exam questions. Both genders are effectively disadvantaged by the
	inaccurate portrayal in the media of professional computing as a
	solitary activity, when in reality most jobs in IT are profoundly
	human-centred.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:37:29 +1000},
  keywords = {gender, programming, stereotyping, expectations, mathematics, pracs,
	collaborative learning, group learning, assessment, mentoring},
  pdf = {/clarke94.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{cohoon99,
  author = {Cohoon, J. McGrath},
  title = {Departmental Differences Can Point the Way to Improving Female Participation
	in Computer Science},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {1994},
  month = mar,
  pages = {198--202},
  annote = {CS departments at different universities have different female attrition
	rates, suggesting that institutional factors apply which we may be
	able to control. The reasons for this are not fully explored here,
	but could be enlightening if studied further.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 21:02:11 +1000},
  keywords = {gender, attrition, motivation, self-efficacy},
  pdf = {/cohoon99.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{Conradson2004,
  author = {Conradson, Stacey and Hern\'andez-Ramos},
  title = {Computers, the internet, and cheating among secondary-school students:
	some implications for educators},
  journal = {Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {9},
  abstract = {This article investigates in greater depth one particular aspect of
	cheating within secondary education and some implications for measuring
	academic achievement. More specifically, it examines how secondary
	students exploit the Internet for plagiarizing schoolwork, and looks
	at how a traditional method of educational assessment, namely paper-based
	report and essay writing, has been impacted by the growth of Internet
	usage and the proliferation of computer skills among secondary school
	students. One of the conclusions is that students' technology fluency
	is forcing educators to revisit conventional assessment methods.
	Different options for combating Internet plagiarism are presented,
	and some software tools as well as non-technology solutions are evaluated
	in the light of the problems brought about by ``cyberplagiarism''.},
  annote = {The bibliography is a good source of articles on plagiarism in the
	general secondary school environment, but the article doesn't add
	much to the discussion beyond a plea for alternative assessment methods
	such as storyboards, web portfolios, and digital videos.},
  keywords = {k12, plagiarism, internet, paper mills, academic honesty, cheater
	checkers, assessment},
  owner = {ram},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03},
  url = {http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=9}
}

@INCOLLECTION{cronbach71,
  author = {Cronbach, Lee J.},
  title = {Test {V}alidation},
  booktitle = {Educational {M}easurement},
  publisher = {American Council on Education},
  year = {1971},
  editor = {Thorndike},
  chapter = {14},
  pages = {443--507},
  edition = {Second},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:28:10 +1100},
  keywords = {validity}
}

@ARTICLE{cronbach04,
  author = {Cronbach, Lee J.},
  title = {My current thoughts on coefficient alpha and successor procedures},
  journal = {Educational and Psychological Measurement},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {64},
  number = {3},
  pages = {391--418},
  doi = {10.1177/0013164404266386},
  keywords = {coefficient alpha, reliability, internal consistency, variance components},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/cronbach04.pdf},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03}
}

@MISC{curtis82,
  author = {Curtis, Kent K.},
  title = {Computer Manpower: Is There a Crisis?},
  howpublished = {Web page, National Science Foundation},
  year = {1982},
  annote = {Understaffing in the academic computer science community, presumably
	due to aggressive cherry-picking and headhunting by industry. Note
	the date: episodes of perceived academic/industry recruitment imbalance
	seem to have recurred several times in the young history of computing.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:25:50 +1000},
  keywords = {staffing crisis, skills shortage, programming}
}

@ARTICLE{daly04,
  author = {Daly, Charlie and Waldron, John},
  title = {Assessing the assessment of programming ability},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2004},
  year = {2004},
  month = mar,
  pages = {210--213},
  date-modified = {2005-10-23 15:34:46 +1000},
  keywords = {validity, reliability, cs1, assessment, online assessment, prac exams,
	lab exams, plagiarism, predictive validity},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/daly04.pdf},
  pdf = {/daly04.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{daly02,
  author = {Daly, Charlie and Waldron, John},
  title = {Introductory programming, problem solving and computer assisted assessment},
  booktitle = {6th {A}nnual {I}nternational {CAA} {C}onference},
  year = {2002},
  pages = {95--107},
  abstract = {Constructing a mathematical proof is isomorphic with writing a computer
	program. Validating a proof is as difficult as validating a computer
	program. Yet there is a pragmatic approach to validating a computer
	program: simply testing it with sample input and checking the required
	output. This paper discusses the use of computer assisted assessment
	on an introductory programming course. It is formative assessment;
	the aim being to foster a problem solving approach to programming.
	We have discovered the following advantages with computer assisted
	assessment in our programming course: the students get plenty of
	practice in programming, they get fast feedback and can easily move
	onto more advanced problems as their skill develops.
	
	
	The paper looks at the issues involved in problem design, the importance
	of presentation of the assessment and feedback, and student impressions
	of the exercise. Results are compared with traditional paper based
	examinations.},
  annote = {Case study on the use of electronically-assessed prac exams for introductory
	programming. Includes a nice lucid explanation of the problems that
	appear to be endemic to introductory programming skills assessment
	-- evidence suggests that students are coming out with a good grasp
	of the syntax of their programming language, but without enough problem-solving
	or analytical skills to be able to design and construct solutions
	to specified problems.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 21:12:49 +1000},
  keywords = {assessment, formative assessment, testing, introductory programming,
	cs1, online assessment, prac exams, lab exams},
  pdf = {/daly02.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{dalziel98,
  author = {Dalziel, James},
  title = {Using Marks to Assess Student Performance: Some Problems and Alternatives},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {1998},
  volume = {23},
  number = {4},
  pages = {351--366},
  annote = {Problems with giving numeric marks for assessment. Some intriguing
	ideas about the process by which a qualitative assessment becomes
	a quantitative mark. Occasional excursion into philosophy and semantics
	of numerals versus numbers.(numericmarks.pdf)},
  date-modified = {2005-10-23 15:35:02 +1000},
  doi = {10.1080/0260293980230403},
  keywords = {assessment, marking, reliability, problems with assessment, epistemology},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/dalziel98.pdf},
  pdf = {/dalziel98.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{daniels04,
  author = {Daniels, Mats and Berglund, Anders and Pears, Arnold and Fincher,
	Sally},
  title = {Five myths of assessment},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {26},
  number = {5},
  pages = {57--61},
  booktitle = {Australasian {C}omputing {E}ducation 2004},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:37:57 +1100},
  editor = {Lister, Raymond and Young, Alison L.},
  keywords = {runestone, assessment, assessment criteria, student perceptions, staff
	perceptions, motivation},
  pdf = {/daniels04.pdf},
  series = {CRPIT}
}

@ARTICLE{decker94,
  author = {Decker, Rick and Hirshfield, Stuart},
  title = {The top 10 reasons why object-oriented programming can't be taught
	in {CS}1},
  journal = {SIGCSE 1994},
  year = {1994},
  month = mar,
  pages = {51--55},
  keywords = {C++, oop, cs1},
  pdf = {/decker94.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{dehnadi06,
  author = {Dehnadi, Saeed and Bornat, Richard},
  title = {The camel has two humps},
  journal = {PPIG},
  year = {2006},
  volume = {??},
  annote = {Their data matching procedures are very, very shaky and it is difficult
	to see how the psychological tendency they nominate -- refusing to
	change one's problem-solving strategy in the face of failure -- could
	possibly be a good predictor of programming ability. A cross-institutional
	study and followup with working programmers is indicated here.},
  keywords = {programming, aptitude test},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/dehnadi06.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.01.22}
}

@MISC{denning99,
  author = {Denning, Peter J.},
  title = {Our Seed Corn is Growing in the Commons},
  howpublished = {Information Impacts online magazine: http://www.cisp.org/imp/march\_99/denning/03\_99denning.html},
  month = mar,
  year = {1999},
  annote = {The tragedy of the commons as it applies to the supply of high-quality
	computer science graduates for research and higher education. When
	industry desperately needs qualified computing professionals, it
	skims the cream from computer science departments; this affects the
	supply of well-qualified and well-taught graduates in later years.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 21:05:54 +1000}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{dick02,
  author = {Martin Dick and Judy Sheard and Cathy Bareiss and Janet Carter and
	Donald Joyce and Trevor Harding and Cary Laxer},
  title = {Addressing student cheating: definitions and solutions},
  booktitle = {ITiCSE-WGR '02: Working group reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and
	technology in computer science education},
  year = {2002},
  pages = {172--184},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/960568.783000},
  location = {Aarhus, Denmark}
}

@ARTICLE{dick01,
  author = {Dick, Martin and Sheard, Judy and Markham, Selby},
  title = {Is it okay to cheat? -- {T}he views of postgraduate students},
  journal = {ITiCSE 2001},
  year = {2001},
  month = jun,
  pages = {61--64},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:27:43 +1100},
  keywords = {plagiarism, postgraduate, student attitudes},
  pdf = {/dick01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{downing03,
  author = {Downing, Steven M.},
  title = {Validity: on the meaningful interpretation of test data},
  journal = {Medical Education},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {37},
  pages = {830--837},
  date-added = {2005-11-13 22:01:31 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:27:31 +1100},
  keywords = {validity, medicine, assessment, construct validity, validation},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/downing03.pdf},
  pdf = {/downing03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{edwards04,
  author = {Edwards, Stephen H.},
  title = {Using software testing to move students from trial-and-error to reflection-in-action},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {2004},
  pages = {26--30},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:12:10 +1100},
  keywords = {testing, cs1, automated assessment, computer aided assessment, problem
	solving, reflection},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/edwards04.pdf},
  pdf = {/edwards04.pdf}
}

@UNPUBLISHED{eleyXX,
  author = {Eley, Malcolm G.},
  title = {The question of whether teachers' conceptions of teaching have a
	direct functional role in those teachers' making of specific planning
	decisions in teaching},
  note = {Probably written in 2003 or 2004 -- was "under editorial consideration"
	when Malcolm handed it to me. Malcolm passed away in June 2005 and
	was sole author; the paper may have been published under a different
	title but there is no easy way to check.},
  keywords = {planning, staff perceptions},
  owner = {ram},
  timestamp = {2007.04.23}
}

@CONFERENCE{eley03,
  author = {Eley, Malcolm G.},
  title = {Teacher thinking during detailed planning, and a possible need to
	re-define the role of higher level constructs like conceptions of
	teaching},
  booktitle = {10th biennial conference of the European Association for Research
	on Learning and Instruction},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {planning, staff perceptions},
  address = {Padova, Italy},
  owner = {ram},
  timestamp = {2007.04.23}
}

@ARTICLE{eley04,
  author = {Eley, Malcolm G. and Meyer, Jan H. F.},
  title = {Modelling the influences on learning outcomes of study processes
	in university mathematics},
  journal = {Higher Education},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {47},
  number = {4},
  month = {June},
  pages = {437--454},
  abstract = {The field trialling of inventory scales reflecting variation in students'
	mathematics study and learning processes is described.These scales
	predict learning outcomes (final marks), but with differentiated
	patterns of relationship to those outcomes. In combination,the scales
	also detect cohorts of students at risk of study failure. The work
	reported is in the broader context of developing an individual-differences-based
	model of student learning. Although this model is sited specifically
	within mathematics learning, the methodology of its development is
	transferable to other discipline contexts. The trialled scales complement
	others already developed that reflect affective variation in students'
	mathematics study.},
  keywords = {study habits, mathematics},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/home/ram/papers/eley04.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.04.23},
  url = {http://www.springerlink.com/content/uq848433x363814n/}
}

@ARTICLE{eley04a,
  author = {Eley, Malcolm G. and Norton, Pam},
  title = {The structuring of initial descriptions or demonstrations in the
	teaching of procedures},
  journal = {International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {35},
  number = {6},
  pages = {843--866},
  doi = {10.1080/00207390412331271276},
  keywords = {procedural learning},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/home/ram/papers/eley04a.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.04.23},
  url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207390412331271276}
}

@ARTICLE{english00,
  author = {English, John and Siviter, Phil},
  title = {Experience with an automatically assessed course},
  journal = {ITiCSE 2000},
  year = {2000},
  month = jul,
  pages = {168--171},
  keywords = {automated assessment, computer aided assessment, web programming},
  pdf = {/english00.pdf}
}

@UNPUBLISHED{entwistle94,
  author = {Entwistle, N and Tait, H and Speth, C},
  title = {Approaches to {S}tudying {I}nventory (revised)},
  note = {Centre for Research on Learning and Instruction, The University of
	Edinburgh},
  year = {1994}
}

@BOOK{everitt93,
  title = {Cluster analysis},
  publisher = {Edward Arnold},
  year = {1993},
  author = {Everitt, Brian S.},
  edition = {3},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:27:14 +1100},
  keywords = {statistics}
}

@ARTICLE{ewell98,
  author = {Ewell, Peter T.},
  title = {National trends in assessing student learning},
  journal = {Journal of Engineering Education},
  year = {1998},
  volume = {87},
  number = {2},
  month = {April},
  pages = {107--113},
  abstract = {The assessment provisions of ABET Engineering Criteria 2000 are part
	of a larger trend toward emphasizing student learning outcomes in
	higher education, undertaken both to demonstrate accountability and
	to improve instruction. This article examines specific national trends
	that are shaping the development of assessment programs in all disciplines,
	and briefly reviews major changes in assessment methods which have
	also occurred in the past two decades. Building on these discussions,
	the article condudes with a number of experience-based ``points of
	attack'' helpful to those charged with implementing assessment programs
	at the school or college level.},
  annote = {Makes the point that evaluation requires the application of the methodologies
	of scholarship to the investigation of teaching and learning activities,
	and as such should not be the unfamiliar bureaucratic territory that
	academics may fear it is.},
  keywords = {evaluation, assessment, engineering},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {ewell98.pdf},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03},
  url = {http://ezproxy-authcate.lib.monash.edu.au/cgi-bin/authcate.pl?url=http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/pqdweb?did=29330671&sid=1&Fmt=3&clientId=16397&RQT=309&VName=PQD}
}

@ARTICLE{fleury00,
  author = {Fleury, Ann E.},
  title = {Programming in {J}ava: student-constructed rules},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2000},
  year = {2000},
  month = mar,
  pages = {197--201},
  keywords = {java, misconceptions, cs1, oop, objects early},
  pdf = {/fleury00.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{ford03,
  author = {Ford, Marilyn and Morice, Jenny},
  title = {How fair are group assignments? A survey of students and faculty
	and a modest proposal},
  journal = {Journal of Information Technology Education},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {2},
  keywords = {group assessment, student perceptions, IT, fairness, reliability,
	marking, assessment},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/ford03.pdf},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03}
}

@ARTICLE{fox01,
  author = {Fox, Richard},
  title = {Constructivism examined},
  journal = {Oxford Review of Education},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {27},
  number = {1},
  pages = {23--35},
  annote = {A sceptical review of constructivism. Debunks radical constructivism
	and social constructivism, and finds the rest more enlightening than
	the most naive positivist models, but not much more.},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:26:52 +1100},
  keywords = {constructivism},
  pdf = {/fox01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{frary95,
  author = {Frary, Robert B.},
  title = {More multiple-choice writing do's and don'ts},
  journal = {Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation},
  year = {1995},
  volume = {4},
  number = {11},
  abstract = {Kehoe (1995) gave a few suggestions for item-writing, but only to
	a limited extent, due to its coverage of other aspects of test development.
	What follows here is a fairly comprehensive list of recommendations
	for writing multiple choice items. Some of these are backed up by
	psychometric research; i.e. it has been found that, generally, the
	resulting scores are more accurate indicators of each students' knowledge
	when the recommendations are followed than when they are violated.
	Other recommendations result from logical deduction.},
  annote = {A great article if you are writing (or critiquing) multiple choice
	items. To be read in conjunction with Lister's work on multiple choice
	testing.},
  keywords = {multiple choice, assessment, selected response assessment},
  owner = {ram},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03},
  url = {http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=4&n=11}
}

@BOOK{gagne93,
  title = {The Cognitive Psychology of School Learning},
  publisher = {HarperCollins},
  year = {1993},
  author = {Ellen D. Gagn\'e and C.W. Yekovich and F.R. Yekovich},
  edition = {2nd},
  annote = {Gippsland 370.152 GAG},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 21:09:06 +1000}
}

@ARTICLE{gatfield99,
  author = {Terry Gatfield},
  title = {Examining student satisfaction with group projects and peer assessment},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {1999},
  volume = {24},
  number = {4},
  pages = {365--377},
  keywords = {peer assessment, group assessment, student attitudes, reliability,
	validity},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/gatfield99.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.29}
}

@ARTICLE{gehringer01,
  author = {Gehringer, Edward F.},
  title = {Electronic peer-review and peer grading in computer science courses},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2001},
  year = {2001},
  month = feb,
  pages = {139--143},
  keywords = {peer assessment, computer aided assessment},
  pdf = {/gehringer01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{ginat04,
  author = {Ginat, David},
  title = {Do senior {CS} students capitalize on recursion?},
  journal = {ITiCSE 2004},
  year = {2004},
  month = jun,
  pages = {82--86},
  keywords = {recursion, student errors, student errors, misconceptions, algorithms,
	algorithmic reasoning},
  pdf = {/ginat04.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{ginat03,
  author = {Ginat, David},
  title = {The greedy trap and learning from mistakes},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2003},
  year = {2003},
  month = feb,
  pages = {11--15},
  annote = {Na{\"{i}}ve approaches to problem-solving and algorithm design lead
	to learners having misplaced confidence in the correctness of the
	greedy algorithm that they had proposed.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 21:14:28 +1000},
  keywords = {student errors, problem solving, program verification, cs1, cs2, algorithms},
  pdf = {/ginat03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{ginat03a,
  author = {Ginat, David},
  title = {The novice programmer's syndrome of design-by-keyword},
  journal = {ITiCSE 2003},
  year = {2003},
  keywords = {student errors, problem solving, interpretation of specification},
  pdf = {/ginat03a.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{ginat01,
  author = {Ginat, David},
  title = {Misleading Intuition in Algorithmic Problem Solving},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {2001},
  month = feb,
  pages = {21--25},
  annote = {Students have a tendency to leap intuitively to an erroneous conclusion
	based on a faulty analogy, and then selectively perceive evidence
	supporting their conclusion and disperceive or explain away evidence
	contradicting it. Difficulty in dispelling incorrect ideas if they
	have been enshrined in an internally-consistent construct.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:39:26 +1000},
  keywords = {problem solving, student errors, algorithms, problem solving strategy},
  pdf = {/ginat01.pdf}
}

@INBOOK{gold91,
  chapter = {8: Assessing students},
  title = {Teaching geography in higher education: {A} manual of good practice},
  publisher = {Blackwell},
  year = {1991},
  author = {Gold, John R. and Jenkins, Alan and Lee, Roger and Monk, Janice and
	Riley, Judith and Shepherd, Ifan and Unwin, David},
  keywords = {assessment, formative assessment, summative assessment, educative
	assessment, geography}
}

@ARTICLE{goldweber97,
  author = {Goldweber, Michael},
  title = {Historical Perspectives on the Computing Curriculum},
  journal = {ITiCSE '97 Working Groups and Supplemental Proceedings},
  year = {1997},
  pages = {94--111},
  annote = {ITiCSE Working Group on Historical Perspectives in Computing Education.
	Urges caution in following trends in computing curricula, as many
	do not stand the test of time. Discusses pedagogical approaches informed
	by the diverse intellectual background that computing brings together:
	mathematical, engineering/design, art, science. Sound basis in education
	theory.},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:26:29 +1100},
  keywords = {curriculum, curriculum change},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/goldweber97.pdf},
  pdf = {/goldweber97.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{goold00,
  author = {Goold, Annagret and Rimmer, Russell},
  title = {Factors affecting performance in first-year computing},
  journal = {SIGCSE Bulletin},
  year = {2000},
  volume = {32},
  number = {2},
  month = jun,
  pages = {39--43},
  keywords = {cs1, gender, learning style},
  pdf = {/goold00.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{greening00,
  author = {Greening, Tony},
  title = {Pedagogically sound responses to economic rationalism},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {2000},
  month = mar,
  pages = {149--156},
  keywords = {large classes, assessment, vocationalism},
  pdf = {/greening00.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{greer01,
  author = {Lesley Greer},
  title = {Does changing the method of assessment of a module improve the performance
	of a student?},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {26},
  number = {2},
  pages = {127--138},
  keywords = {mode of assessment, assessment, exams, educative assessment, student
	perceptions, staff perceptions},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/greer01.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.29}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{gregg03,
  author = {Gregg, David and Ficocelli, Libero},
  title = {A Java-based CS1 course: Not gentle enough!},
  booktitle = {Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education},
  year = {2003},
  date-added = {2005-10-02 16:39:11 +1000},
  date-modified = {2005-10-02 16:42:45 +1000},
  keywords = {java, cs1, cs2, OOP, curriculum, validity, predictive validity},
  url = {http://www.cs.ubc.ca/wccce/Program03/papers/Javanot/javanotgentile.htm}
}

@ARTICLE{gunn97,
  author = {Gunn, Freya and Macdonald, Ian},
  title = {Developing a culture of teaching at first year university level:
	{A} training course for postgraduate student tutors that made a difference},
  journal = {ASERA},
  year = {1997},
  keywords = {tutes, pracs, tutor training, pedagogy, teacher training}
}

@ARTICLE{gotschi03,
  author = {G{\"{o}}tschi, Tina and Sanders, Ian and Galpin, Vashti},
  title = {Mental models of recursion},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2003},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {346--350},
  keywords = {recursion, cognition, problem solving},
  pdf = {/gotschi03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{hagan96,
  author = {Diane Hagan and Judy Sheard},
  title = {The Value of Discussion Classes for Teaching Introductory Programming},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  year = {1996},
  pages = {108--111},
  annote = {Tutorial classes help marks in C++ programming. Caveat: tutor facilitates
	discussion among students (i.e. I'm not at all sure that the standard
	Clayton third-year chalk-and-talk is doing anywhere near as much
	good). Includes down-to-earth discussion of what to do in your tute
	class that is sadly inapplicable to Clayton tutors, as we've got
	way too much to write on the whiteboard to waste time getting the
	students to talk. And I'm probably going to have to rewrite this
	annotation before it goes live. <sigh> (p108-Hagan.pdf)},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:13:04 +1100},
  keywords = {tutes, pedagogy},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/hagan96.pdf},
  pdf = {/hagan96.pdf}
}

@BOOK{haines04,
  title = {Assessing students' written work},
  publisher = {Routledge/Falmer},
  year = {2004},
  author = {Haines, Catherine},
  keywords = {assessment, rubrics}
}

@ARTICLE{hansen99,
  author = {Hansen, Michael R. and Kristensen, Jens Thyge and Rischel, Hans},
  title = {A theory-based introductory programming course},
  journal = {Frontiers in education},
  year = {1999},
  volume = {1},
  pages = {11--25},
  keywords = {cs1, theory first, sml},
  pdf = {/hansen99.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{hawe03,
  author = {Hawe, Eleanor},
  title = {`{I}t's pretty difficult to fail': the reluctance of lecturers to
	award a failing grade},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {28},
  number = {4},
  pages = {371--382},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:13:32 +1100},
  keywords = {reliability, validity, marking, marker behaviour},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/hawe03.pdf},
  pdf = {/hawe03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{hazzan03,
  author = {Hazzan, Orit},
  title = {Computer science students' conception of the relationship between
	reward (grade) and cooperation},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {178--182},
  keywords = {marking, group assessment},
  pdf = {/hazzan03.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{holmboe01,
  author = {Holmboe, Christian and McIver, Linda and George, Carlisle},
  title = {Research agenda for computer science education},
  booktitle = {Proc. {PPIG}},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {13},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:13:50 +1100},
  keywords = {research methodologies},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/holmboe01.pdf},
  pdf = {/holmboe01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{hopper98,
  author = {Hopper, Mary},
  title = {Assessment in {WWW}-based Learning Systems: Opportunities and Challenges},
  journal = {Journal of Universal Computer Science},
  year = {1998},
  volume = {4},
  number = {4},
  pages = {330--348},
  annote = {Technical requirements for online assessment. Open standards and
	flexible architectures are a must, as no single product will be able
	to cover a ll the potential requirements for future assessment activities.
	Beware ``checkli st evaluations'' in software evaluation just as
	in student assessment.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:21:54 +1000},
  keywords = {assessment, online assessment, cooperative learning, collaborative
	learning, distance education},
  pdf = {/hopper98.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{jackson00,
  author = {Jackson, David},
  title = {A semi-automated approach to online assessment},
  journal = {ITiCSE 2000},
  year = {2000},
  month = jul,
  pages = {164--167},
  keywords = {online assessment, automated assessment, computer assisted assessment},
  pdf = {/jackson00.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{jacobson00,
  author = {Jacobson, Norman},
  title = {Using on-computer exams to ensure beginning students' programming
	competency},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2000},
  year = {2000},
  volume = {32},
  number = {4},
  month = dec,
  pages = {53--56},
  keywords = {prac exams, cs1, c++},
  pdf = {/jacobson00.pdf}
}

@BOOK{johnson04,
  title = {Educational {R}esearch: {Q}uantitative, {Q}ualitative and {M}ixed
	{A}pproaches},
  publisher = {Pearson},
  year = {2004},
  author = {Johnson, Burke and Christensen, Larry},
  edition = {Second},
  note = {Excerpted in ``Embarking on Research: EDF6001 Reader Part 1'', Monash
	University, 2005},
  annote = {Excerpted in ``Embarking on Research: EDF6001 Reader Part 1'', Monash
	University, 2005},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 21:10:24 +1000},
  keywords = {research methodologies, statistical methods}
}

@ARTICLE{acm01,
  author = {{Joint Task Force on Computing Curricula} and {IEEE Computing Society}
	and {Association for Computing Machinery}},
  title = {Computing {C}urricula 2001},
  journal = {JERIC},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {1},
  number = {3},
  keywords = {curriculum},
  pdf = {/acm01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{jones03,
  author = {Jones, Edward L. and Allen, Clement S.},
  title = {Repositories for {CS} courses -- an evolutionary tale},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {119--123},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:14:16 +1100},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/jones03.pdf},
  pdf = {/jones03.pdf}
}

@BOOK{jordan53,
  title = {Measurement in {E}ducation: {A}n {I}ntroduction},
  publisher = {McGraw-Hill},
  year = {1953},
  author = {Jordan, A. M.},
  series = {McGraw-Hill Series in Education},
  keywords = {educational measurement, validity, reliability}
}

@ARTICLE{kane01,
  author = {Kane, Michael T.},
  title = {Current concerns in validity theory},
  journal = {Journal of Educational Measurement},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {38},
  number = {4},
  pages = {319--342},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:25:41 +1100},
  keywords = {validity},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/kane01.pdf},
  pdf = {/kane01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{kay98,
  author = {Kay, David G.},
  title = {Large Introductory Computer Science Courses: Strategies for Effective
	Course Management},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {1998},
  pages = {131--134},
  annote = {Challenges imposed by large enrolments and strategies for coping
	with them. Challenges include dissociation and hence attrition, and
	the potential for inequity in marking and teaching when the class
	has to be split up among different tutors. Strategies cover both
	in-class and out-of-class methods, and also methods for keeping up
	good communications with the other teaching staff (tutors/demonstrators)
	to ensure consistency of marking. (p131-Kay.pdf)},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:14:55 +1100},
  keywords = {large classes, cs1, group assessment, online assessment, computer
	assisted assessment},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/kay98.pdf},
  pdf = {/kay98.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{kay96,
  author = {Kay, David G.},
  title = {Bandwagons Considered Harmful, or {T}he Past as Prologue in Curriculum
	Change},
  journal = {SIGCSE Bulletin},
  year = {1996},
  volume = {28},
  number = {4},
  month = dec,
  pages = {55--58},
  annote = {A plea for moderate conservatism in the introductory programming
	curriculum. Trends for XYZ-Early can bring XYZ into the course before
	there is any pedagogical justification for doing so, possibly at
	the cost of having to sacrifice essential concepts that are not central
	to ideology. (kay-bandwagons.pdf)},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:15:12 +1100},
  keywords = {curriculum, curriculum change, pedagogy},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/kay96.pdf},
  pdf = {/kay96.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{kelleher05,
  author = {Kelleher, Caitlin and Pausch, Randy},
  title = {Lowering the barriers to programming: a taxonomy of programming environments
	and languages for novice programmers},
  journal = {ACM Computing Surveys},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {37},
  number = {2},
  month = {June},
  pages = {83--137},
  abstract = {Since the early 1960s, researchers have built a number of programming
	languages and environments with the intention of making programming
	accessible to a larger number of people. This article presents a
	taxonomy of languages and environments designed to make programming
	more accessible to novice programmers of all ages. The systems are
	organized by their primary goal, either to teach programming or to
	use programming to empower their users, and then by each system's
	authors' approach to making learning to program easier for novice
	programmers. The article explains all categories in the taxonomy,
	provides a brief description of the systems in each category, and
	suggests some avenues for future work in novice programming environments
	and languages.},
  annote = {An extensive (albeit not exhaustive) list of teaching languages,
	organized according to the designers' inferred pedagogical purpose.},
  doi = {10.1145/1089733.1089734},
  keywords = {languages for introductory programming, cs1},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {kelleher06.pdf},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03}
}

@ARTICLE{knox96,
  author = {Deborah Knox and Ursula Woltz},
  title = {Use of Laboratories in Computer Science Education: Guidelines for
	Good Practice. {R}eport of the {W}orking {G}roup on {C}omputing {L}aboratories},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  year = {1996},
  month = jun,
  pages = {167--181},
  annote = {How to design good prac materials. Includes material on pedagogy
	and a little on assessment. Important reading for anyone interested
	in lab-based assessment. (p167-Knox.pdf)},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:15:36 +1100},
  keywords = {labs, pracs, prac exams},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/knox96.pdf},
  pdf = {/knox96.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{korhonen00,
  author = {Korhonen, Ari and Malmi, Lauri},
  title = {Algorithm simulation with automatic assessment},
  journal = {ITiCSE 2000},
  year = {2000},
  month = jul,
  pages = {160--163},
  keywords = {automated assessment, online assesssment, computer assisted assessment},
  pdf = {/korhonen00.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{kuechler03,
  author = {Kuechler, William L. and Simkin, Mark G.},
  title = {How well do multiple choice tests evaluate student understanding
	in computer programming classes?},
  journal = {Journal of Information Systems Education},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {14},
  number = {4},
  pages = {389--399},
  keywords = {mcq, validity, gender, predictive validity, information systems, correlation
	study, statistical methods},
  pdf = {/kuechler03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{kushan94,
  author = {Kushan, Sister Barbara},
  title = {Preparing programming teachers},
  journal = {SIGCSE 1994},
  year = {1994},
  month = mar,
  pages = {248--252},
  keywords = {teacher training, k12},
  pdf = {/kushan94.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{lancaster01,
  author = {Thomas Lancaster and Fintan Culwin},
  title = {Towards an error free plagarism detection process},
  booktitle = {ITiCSE '01: Proceedings of the 6th annual conference on Innovation
	and technology in computer science education},
  year = {2001},
  pages = {57--60},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/377435.377473},
  isbn = {1-58113-330-8},
  keywords = {plagiarism, plagiarism detection},
  location = {Canterbury, United Kingdom},
  pdf = {/lancaster01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{li03,
  author = {Li, Heng},
  title = {The resolution of some paradoxes related to reliability and validity},
  journal = {Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {28},
  number = {2},
  pages = {89--95},
  keywords = {reliability, validity},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/li03.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.04.23}
}

@ARTICLE{lister01,
  author = {Lister, Raymond},
  title = {Objectives and Objective Assessment in {CS}1},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {2001},
  month = feb,
  pages = {292--},
  annote = {Begins with a plea for better understanding and explication of objectives
	prior to assessment, and then segues to a description of MCQs Done
	Right. Does not address the ``prior problem'', which is that a student
	who knows nothing at all can expect to get 25\% on a MCQ exam, leading
	to mark inflation. Interesting idea: CS1 cannot lead to proficient
	programmers and does not do so anywhere, so why make them write code
	at all?},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:16:03 +1100},
  keywords = {mcq, bloom's taxonomy, cs1, criterion referenced assessment},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/lister01.pdf},
  pdf = {/lister01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{lister04,
  author = {Lister, Raymond and Adams, Elizabeth S. and Fitzgerald, Sue and Fone,
	William and Hamer, John and Lindholm, Morten and McCartney, Robert
	and Mostr{\"o}m, Jan Erik and Sanders, Kate and Sepp{\"a}l{\"a},
	Otto and Simon, Beth and Thomas, Lynda},
  title = {A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers},
  journal = {SIGCSE Bulletin},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {36},
  number = {4},
  pages = {119--150},
  booktitle = {I{T}i{CSE} 2004 {W}orking {G}roup {R}eport},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:40:26 +1100},
  keywords = {code reading, cs1, code tracing, novice programmers, cs2},
  pdf = {/lister04.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{lister03,
  author = {Lister, Raymond and Leaney, John},
  title = {Introductory programming, criterion referencing, and {B}loom},
  booktitle = {Proc. {SIGCSE} '03},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {143--147},
  keywords = {cs1, introductory programming, prac exams, bloom's taxonomy, criterion
	referenced assessment},
  pdf = {/lister03.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{lopez05,
  author = {Antonio M. {Lopez, Jr}. and Lisa J. Schulte and Marguerite S. Giguette},
  title = {Climbing onto the shoulders of giants},
  booktitle = {SIGCSE '05: Proceedings of the 36th SIGCSE technical symposium on
	Computer science education},
  year = {2005},
  pages = {401--405},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  publisher = {ACM Press},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1047344.1047477},
  isbn = {1-58113-997-7},
  keywords = {gender, self-efficacy, stereotypes, validity threats},
  location = {St. Louis, Missouri, USA},
  pdf = {/lopez05.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{lorenzen81,
  author = {Lorenzen, Toby},
  title = {The case for in class programming tests},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {1981},
  volume = {13},
  number = {3},
  month = sep,
  pages = {35--37},
  annote = {A very early plea for class-marked pracs and prac exams to cut down
	on the practice of ``collaborative development'' of student assignments
	while still allowing the development of a cooperative spirit in labs.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:30:48 +1000},
  keywords = {plagiarism, cs1, prac exams, validity},
  pdf = {/lorenzen81.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{lui04,
  author = {Lui, Andrew K. and Kwan, Reggie and Poon, Maria and Cheung, Yannie
	H. Y.},
  title = {Saving weak programming students: applying constructivism in a first
	programming course},
  journal = {SIGCSE Bulletin},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {36},
  number = {2},
  month = jun,
  pages = {72--76},
  annote = {Using constructivist principles to design teaching strategies in
	order to lower attrition and build success in the Open University
	context, where students are not subject to rigorous entry requirements.
	Includes a fascinating analysis of the factors that make weak students
	weak. ``Analogy considered harmful'': because all analogies are imperfect,
	presentation of an analogy may lead some weak students to construct
	an inaccurate mental model, and weak students are not sufficiently
	emotionally or intellectually resilient to go through the process
	of model reconstruction or adaptation. Even technical terms should
	not be taught until after the relevant concept has been demonstrated
	enough times for the learner to have modelled it, as jargon can confuse
	through semantic collisions.},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:25:01 +1100},
  keywords = {constructivism, remediation, cs1},
  pdf = {/lui04.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{lynch03,
  author = {Lynch, Kathy and Markham, Selby},
  title = {The winds of change: {S}tudents' comfort level in different learning
	environments},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {70--73},
  keywords = {learning environments, motivation, student perceptions},
  pdf = {/lynch03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{macdonald97,
  author = {Macdonald, Ian and Gunn, Freya},
  title = {A model for change in tertiary teaching: {C}ombining education research,
	tutor training, and reflective practice to create {T}eaching {C}ommunities},
  journal = {ASERA},
  year = {1997},
  keywords = {edproj}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{macdonald96,
  author = {Macdonald, Ian and Mitchell, Ian and Gunn, Freya and Carbone, Angela},
  title = {Helpless, isolated and underpaid: {T}urning computer science demonstrators
	into teachers},
  booktitle = {Proc. {A}ustralasian {S}cience {E}ducation {R}esearch {A}ssociation},
  year = {1996},
  month = jun,
  keywords = {edproj, tutes, pracs, tutor training}
}

@ARTICLE{maclellan01,
  author = {Effie MacLellan},
  title = {Assesment for learning: the differing perceptions of tutors and students},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {26},
  number = {4},
  pages = {307--318},
  keywords = {assessment, formative assessment, summative assessment, mode of assessment,
	student perceptions},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/maclellan01.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.29}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{maheshwari97,
  author = {Maheshwari, Piyush},
  title = {Teaching programming paradigms and languages for qualitative learning},
  booktitle = {Proc. {S}econd {A}ustralasian {C}onference on {CS} {E}ducation},
  year = {1997},
  pages = {32--39},
  keywords = {student perceptions, cs2, student survey},
  pdf = {/maheshwari97.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{markus98,
  author = {Markus, Keith A.},
  title = {Science, measurement and validity: is completion of Samuel Messick's
	synthesis possible?},
  journal = {Social Indicators Research},
  year = {1998},
  volume = {45},
  pages = {7--34},
  date-added = {2005-11-13 22:10:51 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-11-13 22:11:56 +1100},
  keywords = {validity},
  pdf = {/markus98.pdf}
}

@TECHREPORT{marshall96,
  author = {Stephen J. Marshall and Liz Sonenberg},
  title = {Computer Science 100 and 200 Level Curriculum Evaluation One Year
	On, i.e. ``{I}s the curriculum working?''},
  institution = {University of Melbourne},
  year = {1996},
  number = {96/44},
  annote = {A review of the University of Melbourne introductory Computer Science
	curriculum, including student perceptions but not including success
	rates etc. Valuable data on the students' perception of what's going
	on in teaching -- which should never be confused with the staff's
	perception of what's going on. What actually \emph{is} going on is
	likely to be different again.},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:24:29 +1100},
  keywords = {curriculum, evaluation},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/marshall96.ps},
  pdf = {/marshall96.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{mason03,
  author = {Mason, John},
  title = {Comments considered harmful},
  journal = {SIGCSE Bulletin},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {35},
  number = {2},
  month = jun,
  keywords = {documentation, cs1, student perceptions},
  pdf = {/mason03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{mccracken01,
  author = {McCracken, Michael and Almstrum, Vicki and Diaz, Danny and Guzdial,
	Mark and Hagan, Dianne and Kolikant, Yifat Ben-David and Laxer, Cary
	and Thomas, Lynda and Utting, Ian and Wilusz, Tadeusz},
  title = {A multi-national, multi-institutional study of assessment of programming
	skills of first-year {CS} students.},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2002},
  year = {2001},
  pages = {125--140},
  keywords = {cs1, programming, introductory programming, validity, Is our children
	learning?},
  pdf = {/mccracken01.pdf}
}

@BOOKLET{mcinnis02,
  title = {Assessing learning in {A}ustralian universities},
  author = {McInnis, James R. and Devlin, M.},
  howpublished = {Centre for the Study of Higher Education, Melbourne University},
  year = {2002},
  annote = {Practical suggestions for assessment design in Australian tertiary
	education. Covers groupwork, plagiarism, international students,
	large class assessment, standards, and online assessment. See also
	http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/assessinglearning},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 13:38:54 +1100},
  keywords = {assessment, tertiary education}
}

@ARTICLE{mckenna04,
  author = {McKenna, Peter and Laycock, Ben},
  title = {Constructivist or instructivist: pedagogical concepts practically
	applied to a computer learning environment},
  journal = {ITiCSE 2004},
  year = {2004},
  month = jun,
  pages = {166--170},
  keywords = {constructivism, instructivism, teaching tools},
  pdf = {/mckenna04.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{mckeown99,
  author = {Jim McKeown and Tom Farrell},
  title = {Why We Need to Develop Success in Introductory Programming Courses},
  journal = {CCSC Central Plains Conference},
  year = {1999},
  month = apr,
  annote = {Community, industry and academic needs for skilled graduate programmers
	will not be met unless and until we start emphasising student development
	over testing: deemphasising the weeding-out of the unsuccessful students
	and reinforcing the idea that success is, and should be, attainable
	to anyone who is really willing to achieve it. (CPCCCSCpaper.htm)},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 21:07:04 +1000},
  keywords = {introductory programming, cs1, vocationalism},
  url = {http://www.homepages.dsu.edu/mckeownj/CPCCCSCpaper.html}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{mcnamara04,
  author = {McNamara, Robyn},
  title = {Evaluating assessment with competency mapping},
  booktitle = {Proc. {A}ustralasian {C}omputing {E}ducation 2004},
  year = {2004},
  editor = {Lister, Raymond and Young, Alison L.},
  volume = {30},
  series = {CRPIT},
  pages = {193--199}
}

@UNPUBLISHED{mcnamara02,
  author = {McNamara, Robyn},
  title = {Concept mapping for introductory programming},
  note = {Honours thesis.},
  month = nov,
  year = {2002},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:42:22 +1100},
  howpublished = {Honours thesis, Monash University}
}

@ARTICLE{meeden03,
  author = {Meeden, Lisa and Newhall, Tia and Blank, Doug and Kumar, Deepak},
  title = {Using departmental surveys to assess computing culture: {Q}uantifying
	gender differences in the classroom},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {188--192},
  keywords = {gender, culture, student expectations},
  pdf = {/meeden03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{messick98,
  author = {Messick, Samuel},
  title = {Test validity: a matter of consequence},
  journal = {Social Indicators Research},
  year = {1998},
  volume = {45},
  pages = {35--44},
  date-added = {2005-11-13 21:58:11 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-11-13 21:59:09 +1100},
  keywords = {validity},
  pdf = {/messick98.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{messick95,
  author = {Messick, Samuel},
  title = {Validity of psychological assessment: validation of inferences from
	persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score
	meaning},
  journal = {American Psychologist},
  year = {1995},
  volume = {50},
  number = {9},
  month = {September},
  pages = {741--749},
  date-added = {2005-11-13 21:59:45 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:16:59 +1100},
  keywords = {validity},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/messick95.pdf},
  pdf = {/messick95.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{moskal00,
  author = {Moskal, Barbara M. and Leydens, Jon A.},
  title = {Scoring rubric development: validity and reliability},
  journal = {Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation},
  year = {2000},
  volume = {7},
  number = {10},
  keywords = {validity, reliability, rubrics},
  url = {http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=10}
}

@ARTICLE{moss98,
  author = {Moss, Pamela A.},
  title = {Recovering a dialectical view of rationality},
  journal = {Social Indicators Research},
  year = {1998},
  volume = {45},
  pages = {55--67},
  date-added = {2005-11-13 21:56:45 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-11-13 21:57:56 +1100},
  keywords = {validity, reliability},
  pdf = {/moss98.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{moss94,
  author = {Moss, Pamela A.},
  title = {Can there be validity without reliability?},
  journal = {Educational Researcher},
  year = {1994},
  volume = {23},
  number = {2},
  month = {March},
  pages = {5--12},
  date-added = {2005-11-14 09:08:09 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:17:19 +1100},
  keywords = {validity, reliability},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/moss94.pdf},
  pdf = {/moss94.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{olds05,
  author = {Olds, Barbara M. and Moskal, Barbara M. and Miller, Ronald L.},
  title = {Assessment in engineering education: Evolution, approaches and future
	collaborations},
  journal = {Journal of Engineering Education},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {94},
  number = {1},
  month = {January},
  pages = {13--25},
  abstract = {This article examines the current state of assessment in engineering
	education in the United States as reflected in the Journal of Engineering
	Education. We begin with a brief review of recent developments in
	the assessment of engineering education and the events that have
	inspired change. Next, we explore assessment methodologies that have
	been used repeatedly in the evaluation of engineering courses, curricula,
	and research investigations as well as some methods that have not
	been used extensively but are likely to be informative. We conclude
	with a discussion of the importance of establishing collaborations
	between researchers in engineering education and educational research.
	Throughout this paper we highlight examples of sound and rigorous
	assessments in engineering education.},
  annote = {An overview of (program) assessment methodologies used in evaluating
	courses in Engineering in the US. Many of these methodologies have
	counterparts that are applicable to the evaluation of Computer Science
	courses. The overview of quantitative empirical approaches shows
	a generally more sophisticated approach than typically seen in studies
	of CS courses, perhaps because engineers tend to be more comfortable
	than computer scientists with applied mathematics, statistics and
	the mathematics of measurement. Randomized controlled trials are
	discussed, but only some of their logistical drawbacks are mentioned.
	Matching, baselining and longitudinal design are all mentioned, although
	only in a handful of paragraphs.},
  keywords = {assessment, validity, engineering},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/olds05.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.01.11}
}

@BOOK{oosterhof94,
  title = {Classroom applications of educational measurement},
  publisher = {Macmillan},
  year = {1994},
  author = {Oosterhof, Albert},
  keywords = {educational measurement, pedagogy, validity, reliability}
}

@ARTICLE{park03,
  author = {Park, Chris},
  title = {In other (people's) words: plagiarism by university students ---
	literature and lessons},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {28},
  number = {5},
  month = oct,
  pages = {471--488},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:23:07 +1100},
  keywords = {plagiarism, student attitudes},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/park03.pdf},
  pdf = {/park03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{pattis93,
  author = {Pattis, Richard E.},
  title = {The ``procedures early'' approach in CS1: A Heresy},
  journal = {SIGCSE '93},
  year = {1993},
  pages = {122--126},
  date-added = {2005-10-02 16:51:39 +1000},
  date-modified = {2005-10-02 16:54:34 +1000},
  keywords = {cs1, curriculum, subprograms, design},
  pdf = {/pattis93.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{paxton00,
  author = {Paxton, Moragh},
  title = {A Linguistic Perspective on Multiple Choice Questioning},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2000},
  volume = {25},
  number = {2},
  pages = {109--119},
  annote = {What price discourse in the community of practice? This paper makes
	the point that if multiple-choice testing is the sole means of assessment,
	then it will be possible for graduates to emerge fully-qualified
	without ever having engaged in the discourse of their discipline.
	The use of MCQs ameliorates some of the disadvantages experienced
	by non-native speakers of the language of instruction, but at the
	cost of introducing new ones. Furthermore, it is not clear that the
	knowledge gained in the study for a MCQ test transfers to real-world
	situations: correlations between performance on MCQ tests and essays
	are not as high as one would wish.},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:17:53 +1100},
  keywords = {mcq, language, validity, content validity},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/paxton00.pdf},
  pdf = {/paxton00.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{pears03,
  author = {Pears, Arnold N. and Daniels, Mats},
  title = {Structuring {CSE}d research studies: {C}onnecting the pieces},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {149--153},
  keywords = {research methodologies},
  pdf = {/pears03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{phillips97,
  author = {Phillips, D.C.},
  title = {Coming to grips with radical social constructivisms},
  journal = {Science \& Education},
  year = {1997},
  volume = {6},
  pages = {85--104},
  keywords = {constructivism, social constructivism, epistemology},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/phillips97.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.04.23}
}

@ARTICLE{postema02,
  author = {Postema, Margot and Markham, Selby},
  title = {Student satisfaction: a method for exploring quality factors within
	computing educations},
  journal = {The New Zealand Journal of Applied Computing and Educational Technology},
  year = {2002},
  volume = {6},
  number = {1},
  pages = {51--59},
  keywords = {student expectation, student surveys}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{powers99,
  author = {Kris Powers and Daniel T. Powers},
  title = {Making Sense of Teaching Methods in Computer Education},
  booktitle = {29th {ASEE}/{IEEE} {F}rontiers in {E}ducation {C}onference},
  year = {1999},
  month = nov,
  annote = {Constructivism and all that.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:28:09 +1000},
  keywords = {constructivism, pedagogy, discovery learning, problem based learning,
	cooperative learning, peer learning, teaching methods},
  pdf = {/powers99.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{delrio04,
  author = {del R\'{\i}o, Agust\'{\i}n Cernuda},
  title = {How \textit{not} to go about a programming assignment},
  journal = {SIGCSE Bulletin},
  year = {2004},
  month = jun,
  keywords = {poor programming practice, bad habits, assignments, pracs, debugging,
	student expectations},
  pdf = {/delrio04.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{deraadt04,
  author = {Michael de Raadt and Mark Toleman and Richard Watson},
  title = {Training strategic problem solvers},
  journal = {SIGCSE Bulletin},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {36},
  number = {2},
  pages = {48--51},
  address = {New York, NY, USA},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1024338.1024370},
  issn = {0097-8418},
  keywords = {problem solving, pedagogy},
  pdf = {/deraadt04.pdf},
  publisher = {ACM Press}
}

@ARTICLE{ramalingam04,
  author = {Ramalingam, Vennila and LaBelle, Deborah and Wiedenbeck, Susan},
  title = {Self-efficacy and mental models in learning to program},
  journal = {ITiCSE 2004},
  year = {2004},
  month = jun,
  pages = {171--175},
  keywords = {self-efficacy, cs1, mental models, introductory programming},
  pdf = {/ramalingam04.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{randall03,
  author = {Randall, Cynthia and Price, Barbara and Reichgelt, Han},
  title = {Women in computing programs: {D}oes the incredible shrinking pipeline
	apply to all computing programs?},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  year = {2003},
  keywords = {gender, IT, retention},
  pdf = {/randall03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{reges03,
  author = {Reges, Stuart},
  title = {Using undergraduates as teaching assistants at a {S}tate {U}niversity},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2003},
  year = {2003},
  month = feb,
  pages = {103--107},
  keywords = {tutor training, tutes, pracs, cs1},
  pdf = {/reges03.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{robins06,
  author = {Anthony Robins and Patricia Haden and Sandy Garner},
  title = {Problem distributions in a CS1 course},
  booktitle = {ACE '06: Proceedings of the 8th Austalian conference on Computing
	education},
  year = {2006},
  pages = {165--173},
  address = {Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia},
  publisher = {Australian Computer Society, Inc.},
  isbn = {1-920682-34-1},
  keywords = {student errors, cs1, tutes, pracs, assignments},
  location = {Hobart, Australia},
  pdf = {/robins06.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{roos05,
  author = {Roos, Bertil and Hamilton, David},
  title = {Formative assessment: a cybernetic viewpoint},
  journal = {Assessment in Education},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {12},
  number = {1},
  month = mar,
  pages = {7--20},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:18:09 +1100},
  keywords = {formative assessment, assessment, educative assessment, evaluative
	assessment},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/roos05.pdf},
  pdf = {/roos05.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{rowell03,
  author = {Rowell, Ginger Holmes and Perhac, Diane G. and Hankins, Judith A.
	and Parker, Brenda C. and Pettey, Chrisila C. and Iriarte-Gross,
	Judith M.},
  title = {Computer-related gender differences},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2003},
  year = {2003},
  month = feb,
  pages = {54--58},
  annote = {Gender-related differences in attitudes to computing and information
	technology among undergraduates at Middle Tennessee State University.
	Survey found more females enjoy using computers, although more males
	enjoyed programming; there were no significant differences in computer
	confidence or positivity of attitudes toward careers in computing,
	suggesting that differential gender attrition has wider causes than
	is generally believed.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 21:13:29 +1000},
  keywords = {gender, retention, programming, attitudes, stereotypes, confidence},
  pdf = {/rowell03.pdf}
}

@BOOK{rowntree87,
  title = {Assessing students: {H}ow shall we know them?},
  publisher = {London: Kogan Page},
  year = {1987},
  author = {Rowntree, Derek}
}

@ARTICLE{ruehr02,
  author = {Ruehr, Fritz and Orr, Genevieve},
  title = {Interactive program demonstration as a form of student program assessment},
  journal = {Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges},
  year = {2002},
  volume = {18},
  number = {2},
  pages = {65--78},
  annote = {"Of course the program should compile and run correctly, but clearly
	there is more at stake than just grammar (i.e., correct syntax) and
	logic (i.e., a program’s behavior). We can identify at least the
	following technical criteria which are specific to the computer science
	context:
	
	
	* program design, in the sense of modularity and choice of algorithms;
	
	* class hierarchy design (for those using object-oriented languages);
	
	* coding style, in the sense of layout, indentation and naming conventions;
	[...]
	
	* program performance, in terms of time and space usage, is an issue,
	at least in many classes;
	
	* program robustness, i.e., programs which are resilient in the face
	of changing data, expectations or requirements;
	
	* documentation which clarifies design choices, tricky coding, etc.;
	
	* and user interface design: these days, even in classes which are
	not directly concerned with the topic, most modern CS programs have
	migrated away from the command line."},
  pdf = {/ruehr02.pdf}
}

@BOOK{salvia95,
  title = {Assessment},
  publisher = {Houghton Mifflin},
  year = {1995},
  author = {Salvia, John and Ysseldyke, James E.},
  edition = {6th}
}

@ARTICLE{sambell98,
  author = {Ray Sambell and Liz McDowell},
  title = {The Construction of the Hidden Curriculum: Messages and Meanings
	in the Assessment of Student Learning},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {1998},
  volume = {23},
  number = {4},
  pages = {391--402},
  annote = {Case studies of hidden curriculum effects in ``innovative assessment''
	programs},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:18:28 +1100},
  keywords = {assessment, hidden curriculum, student expectations, staff expectations,
	motivation},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/sambell98.pdf},
  pdf = {/sambell98.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{sanders00,
  author = {Ian Sanders and Conrad Mueller},
  title = {A Fundamentals-Based Curriculum for First Year Computer Science},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {2000},
  month = mar,
  pages = {227--231},
  annote = {Curriculum design to overcome incorrect expectations of CS1 --- many
	students equate it with programming or even basic computing proficiency,
	and end up demotivating themselves and their peers. Approached by
	adding more theory at early stages of the course. Context of post-apartheid
	South Africa, so some racial equity considerations prevail as well
	(white students are usually more affluent and therefore more likely
	to have had some programming experience at home).},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:18:46 +1100},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/sanders00.pdf},
  pdf = {/sanders00.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{seppala06,
  author = {Sepp\"al\"a, Otto and Malmi, Lauri and Korhonen, Ari},
  title = {Observations on student misconceptions: A case study of the Build-Heap
	algorithm},
  journal = {Computer Science Education},
  year = {2006},
  volume = {15},
  number = {3},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/seppala06.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.31}
}

@ARTICLE{sheard03,
  author = {Sheard, Judy and Dick, Martin},
  title = {Influences on cheating practice of graduate students in {IT} courses:
	what are the factors?},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {45--49},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:22:30 +1100},
  keywords = {plagiarism},
  pdf = {/sheard03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{sheard02,
  author = {Sheard, Judy and Dick, Martin and Markham, Selby and Macdonald, Ian
	and Walsh, Meaghan},
  title = {Cheating and plagiarism: perceptions and practices of first year
	{IT} students},
  journal = {ITiCSE 2002},
  year = {2002},
  month = jun,
  pages = {183--187},
  annote = {An attempt to measure the incidence of cheating among IT undergraduates
	at Monash and Swinburne. Exam cheating is both frowned upon and rare,
	but less-serious breaches of plagiarism policy are very common (85.4\%
	of Monash students!) despite the students' knowledge of the code
	of conduct. Furthermore, few students would be willing to dob in
	a cheat if they spotted one.},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:22:10 +1100},
  keywords = {plagiarism},
  pdf = {/sheard02.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{sheil81,
  author = {Sheil, B.A.},
  title = {The psychological study of programming},
  journal = {Computing Surveys},
  year = {1981},
  volume = {13},
  number = {1},
  pages = {101--120}
}

@ARTICLE{shevlin00,
  author = {Mark Shevlin and Philip Banyard and Mark Davies and Mark Griffiths},
  title = {The validity of student evaluation of teaching in higher education:
	love me, love my lectures?},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2000},
  volume = {25},
  number = {4},
  pages = {397--405},
  keywords = {student evaluation, validity},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/shevlin00.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.29}
}

@ARTICLE{shiavi05,
  author = {Shiavi, Richard and Brodersen, Arthur},
  title = {Study of instructional modes for introductory computing},
  journal = {Journal of Engineering Education},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {94},
  number = {4},
  month = {Oct},
  pages = {355--362},
  abstract = {The School of Engineering at Vanderbilt University requires all engineering
	students in their first semester to take a course that introduces
	computers to engineering. Two questions arise: is the best setting
	in which to teach this material either a combination of lecture and
	laboratory or all-laboratory; and does a student-owned laptop computer
	contribute more to learning? For two years the course was organized
	with these two different modes of instruction. For a third year the
	students learned in the all-laboratory environment and 30% of the
	students used their own computer. At the end of the semester an in-depth
	questionnaire with quantitative ratings was given to the students
	to determine if there were differences in their learning preferences.
	Contingency tables were used to compare responses. There were several
	statistically significant differences in student responses favouring
	the all-laboratory mode and students using laptop computers. Several
	of them are: the students are much more comfortable with computers
	at the end of the semester; either laboratory or working by oneself
	were the preferred settings for learning; and lecture was not a preferred
	setting for learning any topic.},
  annote = {This is an introductory computing course covering HTML, VRML, Excel
	and Matlab for first-year Engineering students, not a programming
	course.},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/shiavi05.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.01.22}
}

@ARTICLE{simon03,
  author = {Simon, Christopher A. and Carr, Jim R. and McCullough, Sesi M. and
	Morgan, Sally J. and Oleson, Ted and Ressel, Margret},
  title = {The other side of academic dishonesty: the relationship between faculty
	scepticism, gender and strategies for managing student academic dishonesty
	cases},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {28},
  number = {2},
  pages = {193--207},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:19:04 +1100},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/simon03.pdf},
  pdf = {/simon03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{simon98,
  author = {Simon, Herbert A.},
  title = {What we know about learning},
  journal = {Journal of Engineering Education},
  year = {1998},
  volume = {87},
  number = {4},
  pages = {343--362},
  abstract = {Traditionally, engineering research and teaching have been approached
	in very different ways. To prepare for research we undergo years
	of rigorous training, both in scientific knowledge and in methods
	of gaining new knowledge through experimentation and analysis. To
	prepare for teaching, we acquire the same knowledge, but, except
	for a stint as a teaching assistant, we receive almost no training
	in how to impart it to students. Fortunately, there is now a well
	developed science of human learning which has strong implications
	for the ways in which out students should learn and we should teach.
	This paper comments on some of the things we know about human learning
	that can substantially improve out university instruction.},
  owner = {ram},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03},
  url = {http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3886/is_199810/ai_n8818803}
}

@ARTICLE{slack03,
  author = {Slack, Frances and Beer, Martin and Armitt, Gillian and Green, Sharon},
  title = {Assessment and learning outcomes: the evaluation of deep learning
	in an online course},
  journal = {Journal of Information Technology Education},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {2},
  abstract = {Using an on-line learning environment, students from four European
	countries collaborated and communicated to carry out problem-based
	learning in occupational therapy. The students never met each other
	face-to-face but carried out much of their communication through
	the medium of on-line synchronous tutorials. The aim of the synchronous
	group tutorials was to allow the students to complete two assignments.
	The first was a problem-based case study, using group discussions
	and investigation, to recommend high-level assistive technological
	solutions for clients who were physically and/or mentally impaired.
	The second was a reflective account of their learning through the
	Occupational Therapy Internet School pilot course.
	
	
	The effectiveness of this learning approach was evaluated by means
	of the final assessments and published learning outcomes. In particular,
	transcripts from peer-to-peer sessions of synchronous communication
	were analysed using the SOLO taxonomy to establish the extent to
	which deep learning had taken place. The development of deep learning
	was studied week by week through the transcripts of the synchronous
	tutorials. This allowed the quality of the course to be appraised
	and revealed, to a certain extent, the impact of this on-line international
	course on the learning strategies of the students.
	
	
	Results showed differences between the four tutorial groups in their
	approach to the `process' of doing the case study assignment and
	its `content'. Statements taken from the transcripts were categorised
	by the SOLO level displayed and it could be seen that the students
	were achieving the learning outcome as the course progressed. The
	conclusions of this analysis of learning outcomes and assessment
	indicate that synchronous communication and on-line meetings between
	course participants can support deep learning, although this does
	not happen spontaneously. More work needs to be done to establish
	an appropriate balance between the tutors' intervention and the students'
	autonomous and collaborative learning in an on-line course.},
  annote = {Possibly useful as an example of how to evaluate deep learning strategies,
	although the SOLO data in this case came from students who were engaged
	in problem solving whereas mine is post hoc reflection.},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/slack03.pdf},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03}
}

@ARTICLE{sly99,
  author = {Leith Sly},
  title = {Practice tests as formative assessment improve student performance
	on computer-managed learning assessments},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {1999},
  volume = {24},
  number = {3},
  pages = {339--343},
  keywords = {online assessment, computer assisted assessment, formative assessment,
	practice tests},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/sly99.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.29}
}

@BOOK{snyder73,
  title = {The Hidden Curriculum},
  publisher = {MIT Press},
  year = {1973},
  author = {Snyder, Benson R.},
  annote = {Institutional structure affects how students approach learning, often
	in unintended ways. Gippsland 378 SNY},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:35:05 +1000}
}

@INCOLLECTION{stanley71,
  author = {Stanley, Julian C.},
  title = {Reliability},
  booktitle = {Educational {M}easurement},
  publisher = {American Council on Education},
  year = {1971},
  editor = {Thorndike, R.},
  chapter = {13},
  pages = {456--442},
  edition = {Second}
}

@ARTICLE{stegink99,
  author = {Gordon Stegink and Jon Pater and Daron Vroon},
  title = {Computer Science and General Education: {J}ava, Graphics and the
	{W}eb},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {1999},
  month = mar,
  pages = {146--149},
  annote = {Case study: introductory programming with JaDE (Java Development
	Environment), web-based courseware instead of book. Students seem
	to enjoy the course and it attracts women to CS. No numbers, alas.
	(p146-Stegink.pdf)},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:19:24 +1100},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/stegink99.pdf},
  pdf = {/stegink99.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{stemler04,
  author = {Stemler, Steven E.},
  title = {A comparison of consensus, consistency, and measurement approaches
	to estimating interrater reliability},
  journal = {Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {9},
  owner = {ram},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03},
  url = {http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=4}
}

@ARTICLE{struyven05,
  author = {Struyven, Katrien and Dochy, Filip and Janssens, Steven},
  title = {Students' perceptions about evaluation and assessment in higher education:
	{A} review},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {30},
  number = {4},
  pages = {325--341},
  doi = {10.1080/02602930500099102},
  pdf = {/struyven05.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{tam00,
  author = {Tam, Maureen},
  title = {Constructivism, Instructional Design and Technology: Implications
	for Transforming Distance Learning},
  journal = {Educational Technology and Society},
  year = {2000},
  volume = {3},
  number = {2},
  pages = {50--60},
  annote = {A misconstrual of constructivism: I disagree that constructivist
	educational design is necessarily devoid of educational goals and
	objectives. Furthermore, you can be an educational constructivist
	without being an ontological relativist. Constructivism and objectivism
	are not mutually exclusive in my experience. After all, if you completely
	deny the ``object under study'', you're not really left with a basis
	on which to construct anything.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:09:08 +1000},
  url = {http://www.ifets.info/journals/3_2/tam.html}
}

@ARTICLE{thomas02,
  author = {Thomas, Lynda and Ratcliffe, Mark and Woodbury, John and Jarman,
	Emma},
  title = {Learning styles and performance in the introductory programming sequence},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2002},
  year = {2002},
  pages = {33--37},
  pdf = {/thomas02.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{thomas03,
  author = {Thomas, Pete},
  title = {The evaluation of electronic marking of examinations},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {50--54},
  pdf = {/thomas03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{thomson98,
  author = {Karen Thomson and Nancy Falchikov},
  title = {``{F}ull On Until The Sun Comes Out'': the Effects of Assessment
	on Student Approaches to Study},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {1998},
  volume = {23},
  number = {4},
  pages = {379--390},
  annote = {Tight deadlines mean shallow learning even if they are due to poor
	time management on the part of the students.},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:19:41 +1100},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/thomson98.pdf},
  pdf = {/thomson98.pdf}
}

@INPROCEEDINGS{thweatt94,
  author = {Thweatt, Mack},
  title = {C{S}1 closed lab vs. open lab experiment},
  booktitle = {Proc. {SIGCSE} '94},
  year = {1994},
  pages = {80--82},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  keywords = {cs1},
  pdf = {/thweatt94.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{trakhtenbrot03,
  author = {Trakhtenbrot, Mark},
  title = {Analysis of typical misconceptions in a theoretical {CS} course,
	and how to address them in e-learning},
  journal = {ITiCSE},
  year = {2003},
  pages = {241},
  pdf = {/trakhtenbrot03.pdf}
}

@MISC{trochim,
  author = {Trochim, William},
  title = {An Introduction to Concept Mapping for Planning and Evaluation},
  howpublished = {Web page}
}

@ARTICLE{valenti03,
  author = {Valenti, Salvatore},
  title = {Information technology for assessing student learning},
  journal = {Journal of Information Technology Education},
  year = {2003},
  volume = {2},
  pages = {181--184},
  annote = {Intro to JITE special series, useful as a pointer to other articles
	should I develop an interest in automated assessment.},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {valenti03.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.01.11},
  url = {http://jite.org/documents/Vol2/v2p181-184-20.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{walker01,
  author = {Douglas M. Walker and John S. Thompson},
  title = {A note on multiple choice exams, with respect to students' risk preference
	and confidence},
  journal = {AEHE},
  year = {2001},
  volume = {26},
  number = {3},
  pages = {261--267},
  keywords = {mcq, exams, student confidence},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {/walker01.pdf},
  timestamp = {2007.05.29}
}

@ARTICLE{waller94,
  author = {Waller, William A.},
  title = {A framework for {CS}1 and {CS}2 laboratories},
  journal = {SIGCSE 1994},
  year = {1994},
  pages = {198--202},
  keywords = {cs1},
  pdf = {/waller94.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{watson98,
  author = {Watson, John L.},
  title = {An analysis of the value of the {FE} examination for the assessment
	of student learning in engineering and science topics},
  journal = {Journal of Engineering Education},
  year = {1998},
  volume = {87},
  number = {3},
  month = {July},
  pages = {305--311},
  abstract = {This paper presents the results of a project, which investigated the
	potential of fully using previously unreleased data from the nationally
	normed Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination to assess learning
	in key engineering and science topics. In the past, very limited
	information was released by the National Council of Examiners for
	Engineers and Surveyors (NCEES) for the eight hour FE examination,
	which is composed of 150-200 questions in ten morning and five afternoon
	topics. For the purposes ofthis project the NCEES agreed to release
	information to the University of Missouri-Rolla (UMR) to permit the
	value of the FE data in describing UMR student learning in key engineering
	and science topics to be assessed. 
	
	
	The analysis ofthe FE data was undertaken in the period 19931996 for
	students in twelve engineering disciplines at UMR The overall conclusion
	of the project is that the enhanced level of data released from the
	FE by NCEES is of value to individual programs, schools and institutions
	in assessing student learning and in identifying areas of concern.
	However, the overall value of this information is compromised by
	variable student motivation and the confidentiality of the questions
	used in the exam. Other conclusions are that UMR student scores are
	below faculty expectations, that the FE exam is not equally applicable
	to all engineering disciplines, and that the academic level of the
	exam may be lower than faculty thought.},
  annote = {An example of quantitative assessment evaluation in Engineering.
	This is likely to be valuable to me when I am justifying my quantitative
	study. Scatterplots and correlation studies are used.},
  owner = {ram},
  pdf = {watson98.pdf},
  timestamp = {2006.07.03},
  url = {http://ezproxy-authcate.lib.monash.edu.au/cgi-bin/authcate.pl?url=http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/pqdweb?did=30772526&sid=1&Fmt=1&clientId=16397&RQT=309&VName=PQD}
}

@ARTICLE{werner05,
  author = {Werner, Linda L. and Hanks, Brian and McDowell, Charlie and Bullock,
	Heather and Fernald, Julian},
  title = {Want to increase retention of your female students?},
  journal = {Computing Research News},
  year = {2005},
  volume = {17},
  number = {2},
  month = mar,
  url = {http://www.cra.org/CRN/articles/march05/werner.html}
}

@ARTICLE{white03,
  author = {White, Garry},
  title = {Standardized mathematics scores as a prerequisite for a first programming
	course},
  journal = {Mathematics and Computer Education},
  year = {1993},
  volume = {37},
  number = {1},
  pages = {96--104}
}

@BOOK{wiggins98,
  title = {Educative assessment: designing assessments to inform and improve
	student performance},
  publisher = {Jossey-Bass},
  year = {1998},
  author = {Wiggins, Grant}
}

@ARTICLE{wilkins00,
  author = {Wilkins, Dawn E. and Lawhead, Pamela B.},
  title = {Evaluating individuals in team projects},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2000},
  year = {2000},
  month = mar,
  pages = {172--175},
  pdf = {/wilkins00.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{williams01,
  author = {Williams, Laurie and Upchurch, Richard L.},
  title = {In support of student pair-programming},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2001},
  year = {2001},
  month = feb,
  pages = {327--331},
  pdf = {/williams01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{wills97,
  author = {Craig E. Wills and Dorothy Deremer and Renee A. McCauley and Linda
	Null},
  title = {Studying the Use of Peer Learning in the Introductory Computer Science
	Curriculum},
  journal = {Computer Science Education},
  year = {1997},
  volume = {9},
  number = {2},
  pages = {71--88},
  annote = {Report on an intercampus project on introducing peer learning at
	first- and second-year level CS courses. Includes an overview of
	potential benefits and risks.},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:51:51 +1000},
  pdf = {/wills97.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{wilson01,
  author = {Brenda Cantwell Wilson and Sharon Shrock},
  title = {Contributing to Success in an Introductory Computer Science Course:
	A Study of Twelve Factors},
  journal = {SIGCSE},
  year = {2001},
  month = feb,
  pages = {184--188},
  annote = {A study of factors influencing final mark in CS1. Gender, previous
	programming experience, previous internet experience, previous computer
	gaming experience, previous productivity software experience, attribution
	of success to luck, self-efficacy, comfort level, encouragement from
	others, work style preference, mathematical background. Comfort level,
	mathematical background, and attribution to luck were found to be
	predictive. (p164-Wilson.pdf)},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:20:10 +1100},
  local-url = {file://localhost/Users/ram/papers/wilson01.pdf},
  pdf = {/wilson01.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{woit03,
  author = {Woit, Denise and Mason, David},
  title = {Effectiveness of online assessment},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2003},
  year = {2003},
  month = feb,
  pages = {137--141},
  annote = {Auto-marked prac exams as a means of ensuring programming competence
	in practical programming-oriented courses at CS2 level. Compares
	different combinations of marked and voluntary labs, with and without
	a mid-semester test. Attention needs to be paid to motivational factors
	when the weekly assignments are voluntary!},
  date-modified = {2005-09-28 20:27:19 +1000},
  pdf = {/woit03.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{woit00,
  author = {Woit, Denise and Mason, Dave},
  title = {Enhancing student learning through on-line quizzes},
  journal = {SIGCSE 2000},
  year = {2000},
  month = mar,
  pages = {367--371}
}

@ARTICLE{yokomoto95,
  author = {Yokomoto, Charles F.},
  title = {What pre-exam and post-exam quizzes can tell us about test construction},
  journal = {ASEE/IEEE Frontiers In Education},
  year = {1995},
  url = {http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie95/2c1/2c12/2c12.htm}
}

@ARTICLE{zachary94,
  author = {Zachary, Joseph L.},
  title = {Tutorial-based teaching of introductory programming courses},
  journal = {SIGCSE 1994},
  year = {1994},
  month = mar,
  pages = {136--140},
  pdf = {/zachary94.pdf}
}

@ARTICLE{zobel04,
  author = {Zobel, Justin},
  title = {``{U}ni {C}heats {R}acket'': {A} case study in plagiarism investigation},
  year = {2004},
  volume = {26},
  number = {5},
  month = jan,
  pages = {357--365},
  booktitle = {Proc. {S}ixth {A}ustralasian {C}omputing {E}ducation {C}onference},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:45:51 +1100},
  editor = {Lister, Raymond and Young, Alison L.},
  keywords = {plagiarism},
  pdf = {/zobel04.pdf},
  series = {Australian Computer Science Communications}
}

@BOOK{linn93,
  title = {Educational Measurement},
  publisher = {Oryx Press},
  year = {1993},
  editor = {Linn, Robert L.},
  volume = {1},
  series = {American Council on Education Series on Higher Education},
  edition = {4},
  date-added = {2005-12-04 01:38:15 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:46:38 +1100}
}

@BOOK{soloway88,
  title = {Studying the Novice Programmer},
  publisher = {Lawrence Erlbaum Associates},
  year = {1988},
  editor = {Elliot Soloway and James C. Spohrer},
  volume = {1},
  date-added = {2005-12-04 01:30:44 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:46:24 +1100}
}

@BOOK{wainer88,
  title = {Test Validity},
  publisher = {Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.},
  year = {1988},
  editor = {Wainer, Howard; Braun, Henry I.},
  volume = {1},
  date-added = {2005-12-04 01:42:44 +1100},
  date-modified = {2005-12-04 01:47:05 +1100}
}

@comment{jabref-meta: groupsversion:3;}

@comment{jabref-meta: groupstree:
0 AllEntriesGroup:;
1 ExplicitGroup:Automatically created groups\;2\;;
2 KeywordGroup:learning environment\;0\;keywords\;learning environment
\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:curriculum\;0\;keywords\;curriculum\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:interrater reliability\;0\;keywords\;interrater reliabi
lity\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:problem based learning\;0\;keywords\;problem based lear
ning\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:k12\;0\;keywords\;k12\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:group assessment\;0\;keywords\;group assessment\;0\;0\;
;
2 KeywordGroup:scheme\;0\;keywords\;scheme\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:procedural programming\;0\;keywords\;procedural program
ming\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:education\;0\;keywords\;education\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:math\;0\;keywords\;math\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:participation\;0\;keywords\;participation\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:student work habits\;0\;keywords\;student work habits\;
0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:education theory\;0\;keywords\;education theory\;0\;0\;
;
2 KeywordGroup:roles of variables\;0\;keywords\;roles of variables\;0\
;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:institutional culture\;0\;keywords\;institutional cultu
re\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:methodology\;0\;keywords\;methodology\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:coefficient alpha\;0\;keywords\;coefficient alpha\;0\;0
\;;
2 KeywordGroup:standards\;0\;keywords\;standards\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:skills shortage\;0\;keywords\;skills shortage\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:tool\;0\;keywords\;tool\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:communication skills\;0\;keywords\;communication skills
\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:natural language\;0\;keywords\;natural language\;0\;0\;
;
2 KeywordGroup:code reading\;0\;keywords\;code reading\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:pedagogy\;0\;keywords\;pedagogy\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:staff attitudes to plagiarism\;0\;keywords\;staff attit
udes to plagiarism\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:research methodology\;0\;keywords\;research methodology
\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:cross-disciplinary courses\;0\;keywords\;cross-discipli
nary courses\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:problem solving\;0\;keywords\;problem solving\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:evaluative assessment\;0\;keywords\;evaluative assessme
nt\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:motivation\;0\;keywords\;motivation\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:self-assessment\;0\;keywords\;self-assessment\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:psychology of programing\;0\;keywords\;psychology of pr
ograming\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:communities of practice\;0\;keywords\;communities of pr
actice\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:bloom's taxonomy\;0\;keywords\;bloom's taxonomy\;0\;0\;
;
2 KeywordGroup:tools\;0\;keywords\;tools\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:sociology\;0\;keywords\;sociology\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:prac exams\;0\;keywords\;prac exams\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:online\;0\;keywords\;online\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:constructivism\;0\;keywords\;constructivism\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:design bias\;0\;keywords\;design bias\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:recursion\;0\;keywords\;recursion\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:business\;0\;keywords\;business\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:stereotyping\;0\;keywords\;stereotyping\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:disciplinary study\;0\;keywords\;disciplinary study\;0\
;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:software engineering\;0\;keywords\;software engineering
\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:teaching methodology\;0\;keywords\;teaching methodology
\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:engineering\;0\;keywords\;engineering\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:psychology of programming\;0\;keywords\;psychology of p
rogramming\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:computer science\;0\;keywords\;computer science\;0\;0\;
;
2 KeywordGroup:exams\;0\;keywords\;exams\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:assessment\;0\;keywords\;assessment\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:subprograms\;0\;keywords\;subprograms\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:learner experiences\;0\;keywords\;learner experiences\;
0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:primary education\;0\;keywords\;primary education\;0\;0
\;;
2 KeywordGroup:project management\;0\;keywords\;project management\;0\
;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:deep learning\;0\;keywords\;deep learning\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:variance components\;0\;keywords\;variance components\;
0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:phenomenography\;0\;keywords\;phenomenography\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:streaming\;0\;keywords\;streaming\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:introductory programming\;0\;keywords\;introductory pro
gramming\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:marker behaviour\;0\;keywords\;marker behaviour\;0\;0\;
;
2 KeywordGroup:Java\;0\;keywords\;Java\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:assessment methodology\;0\;keywords\;assessment methodo
logy\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:C++\;0\;keywords\;C++\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:assessment design\;0\;keywords\;assessment design\;0\;0
\;;
2 KeywordGroup:survey\;0\;keywords\;survey\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:IT\;0\;keywords\;IT\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:C\;0\;keywords\;C\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:validity\;0\;keywords\;validity\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:group learning\;0\;keywords\;group learning\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:teaching aids\;0\;keywords\;teaching aids\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:object-orientation\;0\;keywords\;object-orientation\;0\
;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:paper mills\;0\;keywords\;paper mills\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:hidden curriculum\;0\;keywords\;hidden curriculum\;0\;0
\;;
2 KeywordGroup:java\;0\;keywords\;java\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:culture\;0\;keywords\;culture\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:correlation study\;0\;keywords\;correlation study\;0\;0
\;;
2 KeywordGroup:english\;0\;keywords\;english\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:mathematics\;0\;keywords\;mathematics\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:learning style\;0\;keywords\;learning style\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:rubrics\;0\;keywords\;rubrics\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:remediation\;0\;keywords\;remediation\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:self-efficacy\;0\;keywords\;self-efficacy\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:OOP\;0\;keywords\;OOP\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:programming\;0\;keywords\;programming\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:collaboration with education\;0\;keywords\;collaboratio
n with education\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:lab exam\;0\;keywords\;lab exam\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:formative assessment\;0\;keywords\;formative assessment
\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:modelling\;0\;keywords\;modelling\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:objects first\;0\;keywords\;objects first\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:programming skills\;0\;keywords\;programming skills\;0\
;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:exam\;0\;keywords\;exam\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:internet\;0\;keywords\;internet\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:object oriented programming\;0\;keywords\;object orient
ed programming\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:teaching methods\;0\;keywords\;teaching methods\;0\;0\;
;
2 KeywordGroup:secondary education\;0\;keywords\;secondary education\;
0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:programming language\;0\;keywords\;programming language
\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:staff attitudes\;0\;keywords\;staff attitudes\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:marking\;0\;keywords\;marking\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:plagiarism\;0\;keywords\;plagiarism\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:gender\;0\;keywords\;gender\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:collaborative learning\;0\;keywords\;collaborative lear
ning\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:conceptions of programming\;0\;keywords\;conceptions of
 programming\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:pracs\;0\;keywords\;pracs\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:tutor training\;0\;keywords\;tutor training\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:evaluation\;0\;keywords\;evaluation\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:expectations\;0\;keywords\;expectations\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:object-oriented programming\;0\;keywords\;object-orient
ed programming\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:language skills\;0\;keywords\;language skills\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:lab exams\;0\;keywords\;lab exams\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:portugal\;0\;keywords\;portugal\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:tertiary education\;0\;keywords\;tertiary education\;0\
;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:student acceptance\;0\;keywords\;student acceptance\;0\
;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:automation\;0\;keywords\;automation\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:confidence\;0\;keywords\;confidence\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:misconceptions\;0\;keywords\;misconceptions\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:collusion\;0\;keywords\;collusion\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:staffing crisis\;0\;keywords\;staffing crisis\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:student attitudes\;0\;keywords\;student attitudes\;0\;0
\;;
2 KeywordGroup:procedural first\;0\;keywords\;procedural first\;0\;0\;
;
2 KeywordGroup:portfolios\;0\;keywords\;portfolios\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:algorithm animation\;0\;keywords\;algorithm animation\;
0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:predictive validity\;0\;keywords\;predictive validity\;
0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:abstraction\;0\;keywords\;abstraction\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:acm\;0\;keywords\;acm\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:english proficiency\;0\;keywords\;english proficiency\;
0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:aera\;0\;keywords\;aera\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:product orientation\;0\;keywords\;product orientation\;
0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:reliability\;0\;keywords\;reliability\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:naive programming\;0\;keywords\;naive programming\;0\;0
\;;
2 KeywordGroup:student attributes\;0\;keywords\;student attributes\;0\
;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:learning styles\;0\;keywords\;learning styles\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:retention\;0\;keywords\;retention\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:assignments\;0\;keywords\;assignments\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:cs2\;0\;keywords\;cs2\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:attrition\;0\;keywords\;attrition\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:course library\;0\;keywords\;course library\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:criterion referencing\;0\;keywords\;criterion referenci
ng\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:tutorials\;0\;keywords\;tutorials\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:CS1\;0\;keywords\;CS1\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:minorities\;0\;keywords\;minorities\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:multiple choice\;0\;keywords\;multiple choice\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:functional programming\;0\;keywords\;functional program
ming\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:cs1\;0\;keywords\;cs1\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:active learning\;0\;keywords\;active learning\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:psychology\;0\;keywords\;psychology\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:stereotypes\;0\;keywords\;stereotypes\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:objects early\;0\;keywords\;objects early\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:testing\;0\;keywords\;testing\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:estimation\;0\;keywords\;estimation\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:online assessment\;0\;keywords\;online assessment\;0\;0
\;;
2 KeywordGroup:tutes\;0\;keywords\;tutes\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:concurrent validity\;0\;keywords\;concurrent validity\;
0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:cheater checkers\;0\;keywords\;cheater checkers\;0\;0\;
;
2 KeywordGroup:multidisciplinary\;0\;keywords\;multidisciplinary\;0\;0
\;;
2 KeywordGroup:academic honesty\;0\;keywords\;academic honesty\;0\;0\;
;
2 KeywordGroup:statistics\;0\;keywords\;statistics\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:internal consistency\;0\;keywords\;internal consistency
\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:mentoring\;0\;keywords\;mentoring\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:prac exam\;0\;keywords\;prac exam\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:capteap\;0\;keywords\;capteap\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:cognitive psychology\;0\;keywords\;cognitive psychology
\;0\;0\;;
2 KeywordGroup:epistemology\;0\;keywords\;epistemology\;0\;0\;;
}