Ask Slashdot: Should Coding Exams Be Given on Paper?

Slashdot reader Qbertino is pursuing a comp sci degree -- and got a surprise during the last exam: being asked to write code on paper. Not that I'd expect an IDE -- it's an exam after all -- but being able to use a screen and a keyboard with a very simple editor should be standard at universities these days... I find this patently absurd in 2018...

What do you think and what are your recent experiences with exams at universities? Is this still standard? What's the point besides annoying students? Did I miss something?
A similar question was asked on Slashdot 16 years ago -- but apparently nothing has changed since 2002.

Leave your best answers in the comments. Should coding exams be given on paper?

Comments

Comp Sci

[Anonymous Coward]

You are going for a computer science degree. You must be able to express your ideas on paper, a white board, napkin, back of your hand, ....anywhere.

The poster apparently needs to transfer to a code monkey program.

I hear DeGree Mill will take anyone with the $$$$ or student loans.

Re:Comp Sci

[ceoyoyo]

The ultimate CS test:

The student gets a paper notebook and a pencil, and is paired with a partner who knows nothing about programming. The student has to explain an algorithm to the partner. At the end of the exam the partner has to independently write down their understanding of the algorithm, with diagrams.

The best test of whether you understand something is how well you can teach someone else. And unless you're a code monkey, this is probably what you're going to spend half your life doing anyway, whether it's explaining to PHBs or grant review committees. My sister makes custom leather book coverings. She's going to make me one for the cheap notebook I keep in my bag at all times for this exact task.

Re:Comp Sci

[tomhath]

Two of my favorite interview questions back in the day. These are showing my age, I don't know if sorting algorithms are even taught anymore, and most IDE junkies don't know SQL at all:

1) Explain quicksort

2) What is a LEFT JOIN?

Re: Comp Sci

[epyT-R]

Lets take it from the top. TFS was asking about writing CODE on PAPER. Supposedly, the point of the exercise is to abstract the logic from the method. Code-on-paper is also a method, just like the same code typed in notepad.exe or expressed in flowcharts on a whiteboard. Hell, flowcharts are better suited for paper than code. Code-on-paper is fucking stupid.

Re:Comp Sci

[SvnLyrBrto]

Because one day, your fancy-pants IDE will be unavailable. You'll be trying to do or fix something with nothing more than an ssh link and vi. And if you're completely reliant on your IDE and it's crutches to write your code, and you don't know vi anyway; you're screwed.

That was torture

[Shados]

I graduated in early 2000s myself. The finals were all on paper. I had a lot of programming related classes. 3-4 of those 2+ hour tests back to back.

Writing small apps, quick sorts, manipulating data structures, you name it. As much as hundreds or even thousands of lines of code handwritten over the course of a few days, every year. My finger had a mark from the pen. And if you made a mistake, not all professors were ok with just drawing arrows to "insert" code, so there was a lot of starting over too.

The challenge in those exams was not figuring out the solution. It was writing it down. I still have nightmares from it to this day.

Re:That was torture

[Anonymous Coward]

Language syntax is not really computer science, its trivia.

There's a point to it

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know about the author's instructor or course, but there's generally a point to this.

* Can the student write a correct algorithm, bug-free without the crutch of running the code. Running code often leads to writing code by trial-and-error without much thinking.
* Does the student know the language well enough to write code without the suggestions of an IDE?
* Avoid all technology problems. My computer crashed. My battery's dead. I accidentally deleted the file. I have the wrong version installed.

As someone who has set exams...

[Anonymous Coward]

There are a lot of rules to make sure that exams are fair, auditable and so that it requires at least a modicum of effort to cheat. The University is likely set up so that all exams are paper so setting new rules for one or two classes is going to be an uphill fight at the best of times. Specific issues you will need to resolve:

1. How do you prevent people cheating (USB sticks, Bluetooth, getting access to the Internet, etc.)? Who's time is going to be used to set this up and enforce it?

2. What if someone's computer crashes? What happens if they accidentally knock the reset switch (I have seen this happen in a "practical exam" of this sort)? What if they "accidentally" knock the reset switch?

3. How do you support students who use assisstive technology on computers (screen readers, specific high-visibility colour desktop designs, desktops in other languages, etc.)? How do you deal with students who sent skieing in the holiday before the exams and broke both arms (again, I have seen this -- and we sorted it out)?

4. Where do you draw the line on "reasonable" support? Text editor? IDE? IDE with documentation? IDE with documentation including code samples?

Critically : it depends on what you are trying to assess. I've had interviews where they want code written on the whiteboard -- how is this different?
 

No

[rsilvergun]

but it's sort of a moot point since a real computer science curriculum is mostly about math and math can be done on paper just fine.

I suppose if we still had programming vocational schools, but between the H1-Bs and the offshoring they're really just scams at this point. You can count the number of jobs available for that kind of code monkey on one hand of a retired shop teacher.

As a high school programming teacher, I donâ(

[FFCecil]

Hereâ(TM)s how Iâ(TM)ve adjuated my teaching practice for a world with smartphones: 1) All my tests are open book/note. In a world where you can lookup anything anytime, knowledge is no longer a valued commodity. However, using knowledge to solve problems is. So all my questions involve higher level thinking, with students able to use their notes. 2) My tests and exams are all done on computer through Google Classroom (when in a lab setting). So thereâ(TM)s always a keyboard and screen. 3) I have my students write code in their assignments with an IDE, not on tests. Writing code without and IDE has always pissed me off. So, my tests/exams involve things like analyzing code, eg: hereâ(TM)s some code, tell me what it does. Or, hereâ(TM)s some code with problems, what are they and/or how can they be fixed. Or, when would you use a while loop vs a do loop? Or a local variable vs a class variable? I must note that this form of teaching is entirely my own, after spending much time reflecting on how I think teaching and schooling must adjust for a world with instantaneous access to endless information. This is not endorsed by my government (Ontario, Canada) or school board, and even many of my colleagues disagree. However, something has to change in education which still uses methods developped over a century ago for chalk and slate! I do espouse these methods when possible, and continually strive to evolve my teaching for an ever evolving world, but I certainly donâ(TM)t think this is the final answer in education methodology. Any further ideas you have would be welcome! At some point I would like to evolve my tests/exams to be âoeopen Googleâ, but frankly have no idea how that would work. But thatâ(TM)s my thoughts on next steps from where I'm at currently.

Two issues: cheating and difficulty

[bradley13]

I've tried this all ways: on paper, computers allowed for help (use your IDE, why not, but answers on paper), and I have some quizzes that are purely on the computer. There are two issues to consider here:

- First, and most obviously: cheating. As soon as you allow student-owned electronics, you open the door to connectivity. If not WLAN, than via mobile phones or ad hoc networks or even bluetooth. This is very difficult to control, and is the primary reason that my school still officially prohibits electronics during exams.

- Second, if you're going to allow a computer, you had just as well allow an IDE and make it more "real world". The thing is, this makes exams more difficult for all but the best students. People who are not (yet) very good a programming might be able to show a believable (but uncompilable) concept on paper, and get reasonable partial credit. As soon as they have a computer, it is natural to expect a program to run. The poorer students will lose lots of time trying to get their program to actually work, and are therefore more likely to fail such an exam.

For the last point: I'm not sure this is bad. Personally, I think the world needs a lot fewer mediocre and lousy programmers. However, while that would improve overall software quality, it would mean less code written overall and make software even more expensive than it is.

Re:Yes/No

[Spazmania]

'97 CS grad. All the exams were on paper. I don't recall being asked to write syntactically correct programs on paper. That's what the programming projects were for. The point of the paper exams was to check if I understood the *concepts*.

Computer Science != Programming

[zerofoo]

I have a computer science degree - obtained circa 2001.

None of my exams during the pursuit of my degree used a computer - all exams were done on paper. Demonstrating understanding of data structures, algorithms, complexity analysis and other CS topics is not coding.

Coding is the implementation work of computer science, much like construction is the implementation work of Civil Engineering.

Would you test a Civil Engineering student by asking him/her to build you a bridge?

Real programmers

[jd]

Are taught to write their code away from a computer. It leads to better code. If you can't code away from the machine, you can't code on the machine.