An introspective approach to marking graphical user interfaces

ABSTRACT

The increasing expectations of users for ever more functional and impressive Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) have instigated changes to the way in which programming languages are taught. The rise in popularity of the subject matter has caused problems for lecturers with regards to time and costs. The numbers of student solutions that need to be marked in short periods of time are barely feasible for one person alone or even a marking team to manage; this has been a major influence in the development of marking systems. No system exists for marking GUI programs, indeed few exist for marking any programs. This paper presents the concepts behind an introspective testing and marking tool for GUIs. The hierarchical relationship between interface components and the use of an introspective approach allows us to retrieve data from the GUI components themselves, rather than through relative estimations. This not only allows for dynamic testing of the student's solutions but also aesthetic testing measures.

REFERENCES

• 1: Arnow D., Barshey O., "WebToTeach: An Interactive Focused Programming Exercise System", 29th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Puerto Rico, November 1999
• 2: Benford S., Burke E., Foxley E., Courseware to support the teaching of Programming, Proceedings of the Conference on Developments in the Teaching of Computer Science, University of Kent, 6th-8th April 1992, pages 158--166
• 3: Benford S., Burke E., Foxley E., Gutteridge N and Zin A. M., The Design Document for Ceilidh version 2, LTR Report, Computer Science Department, The University of Nottingham, 1995
• 4: Tyng-Ruey Chuang , Y. S. Kuo , Chien-Min Wang, Non-intrusive object introspection in C++: architecture and application, Proceedings of the 20th international conference on Software engineering, p.312-321, April 19-25, 1998, Kyoto, Japan
• 5: Foxley E., Higgins C., Gibbon C., The Ceilidh System : A General Overview, LTR Report, Computer Science Department, The University of Nottingham, UK, 1996
• 6: Foxley E., Higgins C., Symeonidis P., Tsintsifas A. "The CourseMaster Automated Assessment System - a next generation Ceilidh". Workshop on Computer Assisted Assessment to support the ICS disciplines, University of Warwick, 5th - 6th April 2001.
• 7: Foxley E., Higgins C., Tsintsifas A., Symeonidis P., "The Ceilidh-CourseMaster System, An Introduction", 4th Java in the Curriculum Conference, South Bank University, UK, 24th Jan 2000.
• 8: Bernard J. Jansen, The graphical user interface, ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, v.30 n.2, p.22-26, April 1998 [doi>10.1145/279044.279051]
• 9: Joy M.S., Luck M., "The BOSS System for On-line Submission and Assessment", Monitor: Journal of the CTI Centre for Computing 10 pp.27--29, 1998.
• 10: Joy M.S., Luck M., "On-line Submission and Testing of Programming Assignments", Innovations in Computing Teaching , ed. Hart J., pp.97--103, SEDA, 1995
• 11: JUnit + JFCUnit testing frameworks, documentation available from http://www.junit.org and http://jfcunit.sourceforge.net/
• 12: Sheng Liang , Gilad Bracha, Dynamic class loading in the Java virtual machine, Proceedings of the 13th ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications, p.36-44, October 18-22, 1998, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
• 13: Atif Muhammed Memon , Mary Lou Soffa, A comprehensive framework for testing graphical user interfaces, 2001
• 14: Atif M. Memon , Martha E. Pollack , Mary Lou Soffa, Automated test oracles for GUIs, Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering: twenty-first century applications, p.30-39, November 06-10, 2000, San Diego, California, United States
• 15: Memon A.M., Pollack M. E., Soffa M. L., Plan Generation for GUI Testing, Artificial Intelligence Planning and Scheduling, Breckenridge, CO, USA, pp. 226--235, April 15-17, 2000
• 16: Atif M. Memon , Mary Lou Soffa , Martha E. Pollack, Coverage criteria for GUI testing, Proceedings of the 8th European software engineering conference held jointly with 9th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering, September 10-14, 2001, Vienna, Austria
• 17: Brad A. Myers, Why are Human-Computer interfaces Difficult to Design and Implement?, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 1993
• 18: Oaks S., "Javatm Security" O'Reilly, 1998, Chapter 1.2
• 19: qftestUI, The Java GUI Testtool, Quality First Software GmbH, Munich, Germany
• 20: Sun Microsystems Inc., Java Programming Language, documentation available from http://java.sun.com/docs
• 21: Tsintsifas A., A Framework for the Computer Based Assessment of Diagram Based Coursework, Ph.D. thesis, Computer Science Department, University of Nottingham, 2002

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.3 PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES
      D.3.3 Language Constructs and Features

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.2 User Interfaces (D.2.2, H.1.2, I.3.6)

General Terms:
Design, Measurement, Theory, Verification

Keywords:
GUI marking, GUI testing, automated assessment, computer based assessment, introspection