Turns Out Our Exams Were Pointless, So We Changed Our Assessment Strategy.

This research paper describes our analysis of how student exam scores in a large introductory programming course evaluate student learning in the context of other assessment mechanisms. Data from Academic Years 2018-2019 and 2020-2021 were used to compare the pre-pandemic individual assessment scheme with the revised scheme implemented in response to the shift to remote instruction. Our analysis focused on two key questions: 1) How well are individual assessments enabling students to demonstrate their learning? and 2) how equitable are the assessments with respect to grade outcomes for students with historically marginalized identities? Specifically, our aim was to reduce the onerous workload of exam preparation for the instructional team, while assessing student knowledge in a pedagogically effective and equitable way. Based on the results of this development and analysis, we implemented a four-assessment structure for Fall 2021. Preliminary analysis of these assessments indicate that the new assessments are more equitable and enable earlier identification of students who may be struggling with the course material. Additionally, the new assessment infrastructure requires significantly less instructor time to maintain and implement from term to term. In this paper, we will describe our motivation for this study, the analysis of past exam and course data, our thought process for the new assessments, and a preliminary analysis of the effectiveness and equity of the new assessments. We hope that others find our experiences and analysis useful when informing their own assessment decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]