Source code validation and plagiarism detection:             technology-rich course experiences                           ...
Who we are?              University of Zagreb (UniZG)              Faculty of Electrical Engineering                and Co...
What do we do?      Open systems         Web technologies   Software engineering   Enhancing education
 Open   Systems   Technologies   Standards   Culture   Licences
Motivation
Open Computing  50  - 100 students  3rd year    Undergraduate   study of Computing  Topics:    Open  systems, client-...
On a practical side...  6   course assignments     Quickhands-on experience     Loosely defined tasks        • Final re...
On a practical side...          Open technologies used      1.     HTML, CSS      2.     XML, XSL, DTD/XSD      3.     PH...
The challenges     Students                          Staff       Lack of student                   Answering beginners...
ORVViS
ORVViS - implementation   Assignment validation system   Web application in PHP     Validation core & plugins     Plag...
Validators used     HTML:               PHP:         HTML Tidy           internal     CSS:                JavaScript...
ORVViS use case    Setup         Validation   Plagiarism
Results & experiences
Plagiarism detection   2006/07     Pilot   period for system testing   2007/08     113 students enrolled     Informed...
Plagiarism detection   1st   assignment    1    pair of similar solutions – almost the same   3rd   assignment    1   ...
Plagiarism detection   4th   assignment – Java    6    cases altogether – 17 students    Steps taken    Later years:...
Plagiarism detection - experiences   Inform    students in advance     it   is somehow “fair”   Show     the technology...
Offtopic: Structure validation   2007/08     52% - incorrectly named archives     10% - packaged as RAR instead of ZIP ...
Assignment validation   2009/10     70   students   2010/11     53   students   Comparison    of     number   of sub...
Total/final submission instances     submitting  the solution multiple times allowed     similarity between years
Submission instances   First   2 assignments     high    number of submissions:          • ~5 per student   3rd   assig...
Validationresults   2009/10   2010/11
Validation results   Relates    to the Submissions     first   3 assignments:       • fully correct submissions increase...
ORVViS experiences  Easier   to analyze the assignments    validation   chart + error logs  Detailed   report on each s...
ORVViS experiences  Integrated    validators in LMS    easier   to use, due to a number of technologies  Indirect   hel...
Future - ORVViS   Full   LMS integration       no   need for external administration             2.x APIs   Plugins fo...
www.fer.hr/predmet/or                        ivana . bosnic @ fer . hr
CSEDU 2012: Source code validation and plagiarism detection: technology-rich course experiences
CSEDU 2012: Source code validation and plagiarism detection: technology-rich course experiences
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

CSEDU 2012: Source code validation and plagiarism detection: technology-rich course experiences

1,374 views

Published on

The presentation about our experiences with source code validation and plagiarism detection in the Open Computing course.

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,374
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

CSEDU 2012: Source code validation and plagiarism detection: technology-rich course experiences

  1. 1. Source code validation and plagiarism detection: technology-rich course experiences Ivana Bosnić Branko Mihaljević Marin Orlić Mario Žagar University of Zagreb, Croatia
  2. 2. Who we are? University of Zagreb (UniZG) Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing (FER) Computer Systems and Processes Group (RASIP)
  3. 3. What do we do? Open systems Web technologies Software engineering Enhancing education
  4. 4.  Open  Systems  Technologies  Standards  Culture  Licences
  5. 5. Motivation
  6. 6. Open Computing  50 - 100 students  3rd year  Undergraduate study of Computing  Topics:  Open systems, client-side technologies  Server-side (open) technologies  Integration
  7. 7. On a practical side... 6 course assignments  Quickhands-on experience  Loosely defined tasks • Final result: web application with search capabilites  Versions: • DVD store, library, phone book...  Various open technologies • Integration!
  8. 8. On a practical side...  Open technologies used 1. HTML, CSS 2. XML, XSL, DTD/XSD 3. PHP, DOM 4. Java, XML 5. Java Servlets 6. JavaScript, AJAX  Upload & discuss...
  9. 9. The challenges  Students  Staff  Lack of student  Answering beginners’ experience in OOP questions  Fast-changing  Preventing invalid technologies submission files • information dispersion  Ensuring solution  Detailed configuration structure and standard instructions missing  Reducing plagiarism  Unexperienced: not enough time
  10. 10. ORVViS
  11. 11. ORVViS - implementation  Assignment validation system  Web application in PHP  Validation core & plugins  Plagiarism detection – Sherlock, BOSS  Integration with Moodle LMS
  12. 12. Validators used  HTML:  PHP:  HTML Tidy  internal  CSS:  JavaScript:  Cssutils  JavaScript Lint  XML, DTD, XSL:  Java:  DOM, Matra  PMD
  13. 13. ORVViS use case Setup Validation Plagiarism
  14. 14. Results & experiences
  15. 15. Plagiarism detection  2006/07  Pilot period for system testing  2007/08  113 students enrolled  Informed students about our intentions 
  16. 16. Plagiarism detection  1st assignment 1 pair of similar solutions – almost the same  3rd assignment 1 pair of similar solutions – 80% similarity 0% 80%
  17. 17. Plagiarism detection  4th assignment – Java 6 cases altogether – 17 students   Steps taken   Later years:  No significant similarities
  18. 18. Plagiarism detection - experiences  Inform students in advance  it is somehow “fair”  Show the technology and results  to show you’re serious  Perservere in analysis and decisions  as some iterations are needed
  19. 19. Offtopic: Structure validation  2007/08  52% - incorrectly named archives  10% - packaged as RAR instead of ZIP  25% - incorrect file structure  4% - incorrectly named files  Yes, the structure IS important
  20. 20. Assignment validation  2009/10  70 students  2010/11  53 students  Comparison of  number of submission instances  validation results
  21. 21. Total/final submission instances  submitting the solution multiple times allowed  similarity between years
  22. 22. Submission instances  First 2 assignments  high number of submissions: • ~5 per student  3rd assignment (PHP)  straightforward, one technology • ratio drops: ~2,4 per student  4th assignment (Java)  steeplearning curve  submsissions increase again
  23. 23. Validationresults  2009/10  2010/11
  24. 24. Validation results  Relates to the Submissions  first 3 assignments: • fully correct submissions increase • total number of submission decreases  4th and 5th assisgnments (Java, servlets) • fully correct submissions – big decrease  6th assingment • back to “normal”
  25. 25. ORVViS experiences  Easier to analyze the assignments  validation chart + error logs  Detailed report on each submission  before the discussions  Help to ensure the real code was submitted  no “pancake” recipes   Number of simple forum questions reduced  better focus on more serious stuff
  26. 26. ORVViS experiences  Integrated validators in LMS  easier to use, due to a number of technologies  Indirect help of validators  to configure the environmnent (XML)  Level of validator sensitivity  good hints with warnings, when using the different servers and environments
  27. 27. Future - ORVViS  Full LMS integration  no need for external administration  2.x APIs  Plugins for verifying semantic properties  Increase the students’ awareness on testing  Reflection-in-action
  28. 28. www.fer.hr/predmet/or ivana . bosnic @ fer . hr

×