A Survey on Feedback Types in Automated Programming Assessment Systems

With the recent rapid increase in digitization across all major industries, acquiring programming skills has increased the demand for introductory programming courses. This has further resulted in universities integrating programming courses into a wide range of curricula, including not only technical studies but also business and management fields of study. Consequently, additional resources are needed for teaching, grading, and tutoring students with diverse educational backgrounds and skills. As part of this, Automated Programming Assessment Systems (APASs) have emerged, providing scalable and high-quality assessment systems with efficient evaluation and instant feedback. Commonly, APASs heavily rely on predefined unit tests for generating feedback, which often limits the scope and level of detail of feedback that can be provided to students. With the rise of Large Language Models (LLMs) in recent years, new opportunities have emerged as these technologies can enhance feedback quality and personalization. To investigate how different feedback mechanisms in APASs are perceived by students, and how effective they are in supporting problem-solving, we have conducted a large-scale study with over 200 students from 2 different universities. Specifically, we compare baseline Compiler Feedback, standard Unit Test Feedback, and advanced LLM-based Feedback regarding perceived quality and impact on student performance. Results indicate that while students rate Unit Test Feedback as the most helpful, AI-generated feedback leads to significantly better performances. These findings suggest combining unit tests and AI-driven guidance to optimize automated feedback mechanisms and improve learning outcomes in programming education.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
ACM Transactions on Computing Education
Published
2025-10-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3773911
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Teaching and Learning Programming
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.69
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Survey on Feedback Types in Automated Programming Assessment Systems

Iris Groher, Michael Vierhauser, Vivien Wallner, Ruth Breu et al.
1 citations
ACM Transactions on Computing Education
Teaching and Learning Programming
1.69
article

A Survey on Feedback Types in Automated Programming Assessment Systems

Iris Groher, Michael Vierhauser, Vivien Wallner, Ruth Breu, Clemens Sauerwein, Reinhold Plösch, Tobias Antensteiner, Eduard Frankford
article en
1 citations

Abstract

With the recent rapid increase in digitization across all major industries, acquiring programming skills has increased the demand for introductory programming courses. This has further resulted in universities integrating programming courses into a wide range of curricula, including not only technical studies but also business and management fields of study. Consequently, additional resources are needed for teaching, grading, and tutoring students with diverse educational backgrounds and skills. As part of this, Automated Programming Assessment Systems (APASs) have emerged, providing scalable and high-quality assessment systems with efficient evaluation and instant feedback. Commonly, APASs heavily rely on predefined unit tests for generating feedback, which often limits the scope and level of detail of feedback that can be provided to students. With the rise of Large Language Models (LLMs) in recent years, new opportunities have emerged as these technologies can enhance feedback quality and personalization. To investigate how different feedback mechanisms in APASs are perceived by students, and how effective they are in supporting problem-solving, we have conducted a large-scale study with over 200 students from 2 different universities. Specifically, we compare baseline Compiler Feedback, standard Unit Test Feedback, and advanced LLM-based Feedback regarding perceived quality and impact on student performance. Results indicate that while students rate Unit Test Feedback as the most helpful, AI-generated feedback leads to significantly better performances. These findings suggest combining unit tests and AI-driven guidance to optimize automated feedback mechanisms and improve learning outcomes in programming education.

ACM Transactions on Computing EducationVol. 26(1)
Johannes Kepler University of Linz (AT), Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence (AT), University of Salzburg (AT), Universität Innsbruck (AT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Teaching and Learning Programming
1.69
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.