Despite the fact that digital technologies are more and more used in the learning and education process, there is still lack of professional evaluation tools capable of assessing the quality of used digital teaching aids in a comprehensive and objective manner. Construction of the Comprehensive Evaluation of Electronic Learning Tools and Educational Software (CEELTES) tool was preceded by several surveys and knowledge obtained in the course of creation of digital learning and teaching aids and implementation thereof in the teaching process. The evaluation tool as such consists of sets (catalogues) of criteria divided into four separately assessed areas - the area of technical, technological and user attributes; the area of criteria evaluating the content, operation, information structuring and processing; the area of criteria evaluating the information processing in terms of learning, recognition, and education needs; and, finally, the area of criteria evaluating the psychological and pedagogical aspects of a digital product. The specified areas are assessed independently, separately, by a specialist in the given science discipline. The final evaluation of the assessed digital product objectifies (quantifies) the overall rate of appropriateness of inclusion of a particular digital teaching aid in the teaching process.
The Lithuanian Informatics Olympiads (LitIO) is a problem solving programming contest for students in secondary education. The work of the student to be evaluated is an algorithm designed by the student and implemented as a working program. The current evaluation process involves both automated (for correctness and performance of programs with the given input data) and manual (for programming style, written motivation of an algorithm) grading. However, it is based on tradition and has not been scientifically discussed and motivated. To create an improved and motivated evaluation model, we put together a questionnaire and asked a group of foreign and Lithuanian experts having experience in various informatics contests to respond. We identified two basic directions in the suggested evaluation models and made a choice based on the goals of LitIO. While designing the model in the paper, we reflected on the suggestions and opinions of the experts as much as possible, even if they were not included into the proposed model. The paper presents the final outcome of this work, the proposed evaluation model for the Lithuanian Informatics Olympiads.
The International Olympiad in Informatics (IOI) aspires to be a science olympiad alongside such international olympiads in mathematics, physics, chemistry, and biology. Informatics as a discipline is well suited to a scientific approach and it offers numerous possibilities for competitions with a high scientific standing. We argue that, in its current form, the IOI fails to be scientific in the way it evaluates the work of the contestants.
In this paper, we describe the major ingredients of the IOI to guide further discussions. By presenting the results of an extensive analysis of two IOI competition tasks, we hope to create an awareness of the urgency to address the shortcomings. We offer some suggestions to raise the scientific quality of the IOI.
The International Olympiad in Informatics currently provides a model which is imitated by the majority of contests for secondary school students in Informatics or Computer Science. However, the IOI model can be criticized, and alternative contest models exist. To support the discussion about contests in Computer Science, several dimensions for characterizing and classifying contests are suggested.
Individuals vary across many dimensions due to the effects of gender-based, personality, and cultural differences. Consequently, programming contests with a limited and restrictive structure (e.g., scoring system, questioning style) are most favourable and attractive to a specific set of individuals with the characteristics that best match this structure. We suggest that a more inclusive and flexible structure will allow contests to be more appealing to a wider range of participants by being less biased towards specific traits. As well, by making contests more broadly appealing, they become better post secondary recruiting tools that can potentially be used to attract under-represented populations to the discipline of computer science. In this paper, we focus on gender-based differences and the effect of a competition's structure on female participants.