Automated Grading System Improves Education

Chapter I
THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

AND STUDIES
Introduction:
Some schools right now, especially those with huge

numbers of students who are not yet using computerized
based grading system has difficulty/problems concerning the
records of grades of the students. The grades are the
important record to keep even for the longest time for the
referral and credentials of the student to enter their next
level of attaining their goals. It is the tract record that
recognizes of one student, this maybe use for analyzing of
your attitude and values. Manual computation is very prompt
to risk for any circumstances. It is time consuming in terms of
recording grades, computation using of calculator. If some
records are lost, they never retrieve it in case of unexpected
calamity. Accuracy and security is not been so defined.
Grading System is the most commonly used in

computing and analyzing the performance, talent and skills of
students. It is designed to provide incentive reward for
achievement and assist in identifying problems of the
student.
1|Page
Bachelor of Science in Information Technology
The Computerized Grading System will help both the
faculty staffs and the students to have easy access on the
records and past records, the easier way. The said system
will also lessen the staffs on consuming too much time
recording and effort locating records of the students. It will
also be connected to the schools’ website (if there is), for
the students, so they can check their grades online. The
staff in charge will do updating of grades.
The Computerized Grading System will also be a

convenience for the professors as well, because by this,
delayed passing of grade will be prevented and class cards,
certificate of grades, and transcript of records will be
processed in a speedy way. By this, students would not wait
for a long period just to get their papers processed. In case
that a student record is lost, we can easily retrieve it with the
help of modern technology. There would be no alternation of
grades once the records are inputted and finalized, so the
records are secure.
This system will served as a tool for easier accessibility

of grades, both for the convenience of the students and the
faculty staffs, as well as the professors.
Overview of Automated Grading Systems

Anonymous
2|Page
If bridges and buildings were made like we make
software, then we would have disasters happening daily. I
have heard this several times from many people. It is sad
but true. Buggy software is the bane of the software
industry. One of the ways of increasing software quality is by
proper education. Several professionals from the software
industry also attest to this. They believe that a greater
emphasis should be given to quality and testing in
university courses. But simply explaining the principles of
software quality is not sufficient. Students tend to forget
theoretical principles over time. Practical exposure and
experience is equally important. Students should be put in
an environment where they can appreciate the importance
of quality software and can experience the benefits of
processes that enhance quality. Many universities have a
period of internship for the students in which they work in a
software company and experience these factors first hand.
However because the internship usually is of a duration of 3-
6 months, it is not sufficient to instill the importance of
quality. Emphasis on code quality should be made a part of
the entire software curriculum for it to have proper impact.
Every assignment that the students submit should be
subjected to the same quality standards that an industrial
project would be subjected to.
Having university assignments adhere to industrial

standards will result in the faculty having to spend more
time grading the assignments. The faculty can no longer just
give an assignment, wait for the students to submit it, and
3|Page
grade them. The faculty must be more like a project
manager who constantly mentors the students and helps
them improve the quality of their work. Along with spending
a good amount of time mentoring students off class hours
another challenge is timely evaluation of student
assignments. Faculty members are already overloaded with
the task of teaching, designing projects, grading, and
research. Once we incorporate testing and quality into the
curricula, each assignment will have to be graded along
many more dimensions, such as quality of the tests,
coverage of the tests, etc. This can be very time consuming.
We need a mechanism which will automatically grade
student assignments to the best possible extent, so that
students are given a timely feedback, and faculty can focus
more on providing feedback on the style, design, and
documentation of the project. Such a system will also bring
consistency to the grading process and will eliminate
discrepancies due to instructors bias and lethargy.
A good automated grading system should be capable

of executing the test cases written by students as well as
the faculty on the project, determining the coverage of the
test cases, and compiling and executing the submitted
programs. It should be configurable so that faculty can
4|Page
determine the importance of various factors that make up
the final grade.
Several efforts have been made to design and

implement automated grading systems in universities. Some
existing systems are:
1. WEB-CAT
4. Praktomat
In this article, I will briefly explain two such automated

grading systems - WEB-CAT, and the Praktomat systems,
and propose a system that contains useful features from
them as well as some new features.
WEB-CAT
WEB-CAT was created at Virginia Tech University to

address the need for incorporating software testing as an
integral part of all programming courses. The creators
realized the need for software to automatically grade
student assignments to enable faster feedback to students
and to balance the working load of faculty members.
Since Test Driven Development (TDD) was to be used

for all the assignments, the students had to be graded not
only on the quality of code, but also on the quality of their
test suite. WEB-CAT grades students on three criteria. It
gives each assignment a test validity score, a test
correctness score, and a code correctness score. Test
validity measures the accuracy of the students’ tests. It
5|Page
determines if the tests are consistent with the problem
statement. Test coverage determines how much of the
source code the tests cover. It determines if all paths and
conditionals are adequately covered. Code correctness
measures correctness of the actual code. All three criteria
are given a certain weight-age and a final score is
determined.
WEB-CAT’s graphical user interface is inspired by the

unit testing tool JUnit. Just like JUnit it uses a green bar to
show the test results. A text description containing details
such as the number of tests that were run, and the number
that passed is also provided.
Basic features provided by WEB-CAT are:

 Submission of student assignments using a web based
wizard interface
 Submission of test cases using a web based wizard
interface
 Setup of assignments by faculty
 Download of student scores by the faculty
 Automatic grading with immediate feedback for student

assignment
WEB-CAT follows a certain sequence of steps to assess

a project submission. A submission is assessed only if it
compiles successfully. If compilation fails, then a summary
6|Page
of errors is displayed to the user. If the program is compiled
successfully then WEB-CAT will assess the project on various
parameters. It first tests the correctness of the program by
running the student’s tests against the program. Since these
tests are submitted by the students, and it is expected that
100% of the tests will pass, because we do not expect
students to submit a program that fails their own tests. After
this the student’s test cases are validated by running them
against a reference implementation of the project created
by the instructor.
If a student’s test case fails on the reference

implementation then it is deemed to be invalid. Finally, the
coverage of the student’s test cases is evaluated. Once the
scores are obtained a cumulative score out of 100 is
calculated applying a certain formula on the scores from all
criteria. The results are displayed immediately to the
student on an HTML interface. It was observed that the
quality of student assignments increased significantly after
using WEB-CAT. It was found that the code developed using
WEB-CAT contained 45% fewer defects per 1000 (non
commented) lines of code.
Praktomat
Praktomat was created at Universitat Passau in

Germany. The purpose of creating Praktomat was to build an
environment which would help students enhance the quality
of their code. Along with automated grading it also has a
focus on peer reviews. The creators of Praktomat felt that
7|Page
reviewing others software and having one’s software
reviewed helps in producing better code. This is the reason
why Praktomat has a strong focus on peer review and allows
users to review as well as annotate code written by other
students. Students can resubmit their code any number of
times until the deadline. This way they can improve their
code by adopting things they learned by reviewing other
students code as well as lessons they learned by others
feedback of their own code.
Praktomat evaluates student assignments by running

them against a test suite provided by the faculty. The faculty
creates two test suites – a public suite and a secret suite.
The public suite is distributed to the students to help them
validate their project. The secret test suite is not made
available to the students, but they are aware of its
existence. An assignment is evaluated by automatically
running both the test suites against it, and also by manual
examination by the faculty. Praktomat was developed in
Python, and is hosted on SourceForge.
Observations
My contention that student project submissions should

be backed by a process to encourage best practices, and a
software to automate as well as facilitate the process, has
become stronger after reviewing WEB-CAT and Praktomat.
8|Page
What best practices should we incorporate in the
process? What are the features that an automated grading
software should contain? WEB-CAT, Praktomat, and several
other software give a good starting point. We can learn from
their successes and failures, and enhance the offering by
adding our own experience.
WEB-CAT and several other sources have shown us

that TDD is definitely a good practice. In a university
environment TDD will work best if it is complemented by
instant feedback to the students. We want to have a process
that will encourage students to improve the quality of their
code. They should be graded on the best code they can
submit till the deadline. Two things are needed for this –
instant feedback and the ability to resubmit assignments.
WEB-CAT achieves this by assessing submissions in

real time, and displaying the results to the students
immediately. WEB-CAT allows students to re-submit
assignments any number of time till the due date. Since
faculty members are already overloaded with work, the
software should take some of the faculties responsibilities.
WEB-CAT automatically evaluates and grades the student’s
assignments, leaving faculty with time for more meaningful
activities.
9|Page
Praktomat has shown us that there is a definite benefit
to peer review. When we review code written by others, we
can go beyond the paradigms set in our own mind. Having
our code reviewed by others can help us see our
shortcomings which we may have earlier overlooked.
Praktomat allows students to review code written by others.
However the review is hidden from the faculty, to ensure
that it does not impact grading.
Praktomat does not rely on 100% automatic

evaluation of the assignments. Praktomat evaluates certain
aspects automatically and the rest are evaluated manually.
Factors like code quality, documentation, etc are reviewed
and evaluated manually by the faculty. There may be two
reasons for this. Software to support automatic evaluation of
these things may not have been available when Praktomat
was written, or the creators felt that certain things are best
evaluated by the faculty.
A proposed system for automated grading
Based on my observations from reviewing the above

software systems and from my own experience, I have
defined a process and the functional expectations of a
software system that supports TDD and automated grading.
The Process
o Every project should have a deadline, just like the real

world
10 | P a g e
o The project should be defined as a set of use cases and a
functional test suite. Both should be made available to
the students.
o Students should start developing their project using the
TDD philosophy.
o They should also be provided a source code repository
like CVS or VSS.
o Once the students have completed their project they
should tag the build and should upload the tag number to
a web based submission software.
o It must be clearly defined how the students should
submit their unit test suite.
o They should also provide one file which will trigger the
remaining unit tests.
o The software will pull the source from the repository, and
evaluate it.
o Failure is reported to the student if the project fails to

compile. Failure here does not mean that the student fails
in the assignment. Assignments can be corrected and
submitted any number of time till the deadline.
o Once the compilation succeeds, the software will run the
unit tests written by the student on their code.
o After collecting results from the unit tests, the test
coverage is measured.
o Then the functional tests created by the faculty are
executed against the software.
11 | P a g e
o The software is then run through a source code format
checker which evaluates it for adherence to coding
standards.
o The software is then run through a source code quality
checker which evaluates the quality of code based on
known best practices, and anti patterns.
o The software is finally channeled to the faculty who
evaluates it for design.
o Results from all the tests are given out of 100%.
o After collecting all the results a formula (provided by the
faculty) is applied to derive the final score.
The Software
 The software should provide an account with a username

and password to each student and faculty.
 The software should be web based so that it can be
accessed from anywhere using a standard web browser.
 After logging in students should be able to browse to the
homepage for a particular assignment and view the
details, such as specification, due dates, and any other
details posted by the faculty.
 When a student completes her assignment, she should
be able to upload the CVS tag number to the server.
12 | P a g e
 Once the tag number is uploaded the server should pull
the source code from a CVS repository and perform the
checks mentioned above.
 Results from each check is recorded in the database.
 The detailed result is then displayed to the student.
 Students should be able to resubmit an assignment any
number of times till the deadline.
 Student code should be available for peer review and
annotations if the faculty desires.
 The faculty should be able to create an assignment and
upload details and files.
 The faculty should be able to trigger the final evaluation
of all assignments either manually, or at a scheduled
time.
 An evaluation should take the latest tag numbers

provided by the student and perform tests on the
respective source code.
 Results should be made available to the faculty, and
students.
 The faculty should be able to add their own scores for
parts that were checked manually.
 The final result is computed by applying a formula
provided by the faculty.
 The final results should be downloadable as a csv text
file.
13 | P a g e
Several technologies such as Java, Python, PHP, .NET,
and Ruby can be used to implement such a system. Each has
their pros and cons. We will not cover the implementation
technology in this paper. Evaluation of these technologies
and a final choice based on the evaluation will be dealt with
in a separate paper.
Objectives of the Study
The general objective of the study entitled “A

Computerized Grading System” is to develop a system that
will replace the current Grading System in the state, which is
manual. It can also eliminate lag time between the
submissions of grades and will help to ease jobs of professors
and that student can rely on having an accurate grade.
Statement of the Problem
The study entitled “A Computerized Grading System”

is focused on making the old manual way be an improved one
by using a computerized grading system that would make it
easier to file records.
14 | P a g e
The study is sought to answer the following questions:
1. The problems encountered in the manual way of grading

system which are the following:
 Some records are lost.
 Incorrect inputting of grades.
 As to security, easy alteration of grades happens.
 Once they received their class cards, they only see

their final grade.
2. The following are solutions recommended to address the

problems identified above are the following:
 The manual grading system will be a computerized one.
 Once it is computerized, the grades inputted on the

said system will be automatically saved on a database.
 Once the grades are put in the said system, it cannot

be edited anymore.
 Students will know their grades from prelim to finals.
Significance of the Study
The study of “A Computerized Grading System” will be

beneficial to the following:
15 | P a g e
To the School. This study will give benefits to the school
because an automated grading system is feasible,
economically viable and as accurate as manually grading
system.
To the Students. It will help the students to get their

grades processed fast and on time. Through this grading
system, they could also help the students see the connection
between effort and grades that could helps them become
more accountable for their progress.
To the Instructors. This will serve as their guide for an

easy access on the students’ grades because grading is an
exercise in professional judgment on the part of teachers.
To the Researcher. This study will equip them with

knowledge about the grading system.
To the Future Researchers. It will serve as their reference

for their research activities and will help them to gain
knowledge to express their ideas in their chosen study.
Scope and Limitation
This study is focused and will only concentrate on the

grading system of the school because it is the important
record to keep even for the longest time for the referral and
credentials of the student to enter their next level of attaining
their goals. It is the tract record that recognizes of one
16 | P a g e
student, this maybe use for analyzing of your attitude and
values.
The said system is only for recording and keeping of

grades. It is not for enrolment and registration use.
Definition of Terms
The following are terms that the researcher used for
better understanding about the concepts in the study. The
terms are defined operationally, as how they are used in the
study.
Computer. In the study, it is the machine used by the

researcher in making the documentation of the study and
the developing the computerized system.
Programmer. As used in the study, this person creates and

designs the system.
Database. Is an organized collection of data for one or

more purposes and usually in digital form.
17 | P a g e
Grades. To allow the student’s have an access to their over
all grades taken from their prelim, midterm, pre-finals and
finals.
Chapter II
METHODS OF RESEARCH AND PROCEDURES
Research Design
The method of research we used in the study “A

Proposed Computerized Grading System” is the descriptive
type of method research, because this kind of research
describes the present system, which is the manual way of
grading system based on the impressions of the respondents.
We used this kind of research because it is appropriate in
knowing the extent to which the different conditions of the
present set up of the study is.
Methods of Research
The descriptive survey method was used to achieve

the purpose of the study. We made a survey regarding about
the old system of recording grades, which is the manual way.
18 | P a g e
By that, we had come up with the idea that the manual way
should really be change into an automated one.
Based on our research, Southdale International School

of Science, Arts and Technology is using a manual
computation of grades of each student, which is the
traditional use when technology is not yet developed.
Since we are used of using the manual way of

computing grades, why not, we try something new and
easier to make the job done fast.
This was deemed appropriate because the study sought

to identify all things happen at the present flow of grading
system.
Review of Related Literature and Studies

This part discusses the review of related literature and
studies of the study entitled “A Proposed Computerized
System”.
Foreign Literature and Study
The Trial at Curtin University of Technology
“During the first semester of 2001 a trial of an

automated essay grading system was conducted at Curtin
University of Technology in Perth, Western Australia. One
19 | P a g e
subject was chosen, a first year introduction to Information
Systems, where we had about 1,000 students available to
participate.
Unfortunately the semester had already started by the

time we were able to undertake this research. This meant
that all assessment had already been determined.
Once assessment has been published, the policy at

Curtin University is that it cannot be changed without the
consent of the majority of students. In order to gain that
consent and ensure a high rate of response to our trial, we
announced that an additional voluntary essay-type question
would be available for bonus marks. Needless to say, we,
had a high rate of response.
The system we were trialling was an American system

that required two hundred manually graded essays as input
to their grading system. Between the three researchers, we
graded about 70 papers each and sent the electronic copies
along with the marks to the US site. About another 330
ungraded essays were then forwarded to the site for
grading.
A number of interesting outcomes were noticed when

we analyzed all the grades and as a result, a grader “A” had
always considered himself a “hard” grader and considered
grader “B” rather soft.
20 | P a g e
However, the purpose was not to check our own
grading but to see how consistent the computer system
handled the assessment. We were delighted to have our
suspicions confirmed; the computer system had the same
mean and standard deviation of marks as the three of us.
We were satisfied that it worked.
There was an additional and quite unexpected result

from the test. The system picked up several cases of
plagiarism that we had failed to notice. In this case, the
plagiarism was really that of one student copying the work
of another student rather than from extracting text from
another source.
The Weaknesses of the System
There are two important weaknesses and one minor

weakness for our purposes in the system that we trialled.
The first weakness is that for a successful implementation,
one need to manually grade 200 essays and feed them into
the system. The computer will then accurately and
dependably grade as many more essays on that topic as is
required. In small classes of less than a few hundred
students, it becomes impractical.
The second weakness is the cost of using the system.

As the system was American we had to pay in $US. With the
exchange rate so poor, it cost about A$11,400 to grade a
few hundred essays. This is simply not cost effective. If we
21 | P a g e
were to use the same essay for several semesters then the
per-unit grading costs would reduce substantially.
However, it is highly unlikely that we would want to

use the same essay questions in consecutive semesters or
even twice ever.
There is a third factor. The system is run at a site in

the USA rather than on our own computer network at Curtin
University. There is some lack of control and potential
security risk in having the process run remotely.
Costing Considerations
Ideally, the system would be reasonably inexpensive,

and certainly far cheaper than hiring grading staff. The
grading system would be based on a single all-inclusive
model answer supplied by the lecturer. Obviously, the
system would need to assess with the same degree of
accuracy as a manual grader. Finally, the system should be
available to be run in-house on a PC or central server.
We currently pay exam graders at a rate of about

A$25 per hour. It should be possible to reduce the cost of
grading through an automated essay grading system by
90%. Our single experience with the American system as
described above was that it cost about A$33 per essay of up
to two pages in length.
22 | P a g e
Based on supplying 200 graded essays at a cost of
A$3 per essay, the initial cost before paying for the grading
service would be A$600. The grading service costs that we
experienced were another A$10,800, bringing the total to
A$11,400. In the ideal case, it would be beneficial for a
University to own the grading system so the costs could be
spread across many subjects and many departments. Even
if the initial cost were in the thousands of dollars, the cost
per essay or exam would become trivial.
There are economies of scale associated with the

system, in that up to 2000 essays could have been graded
for the A$11,400, but we did not have this number to grade,
and so did not gain these benefits. If we had 2,000 essays to
grade, the automated essay grading system would still have
cost A$5.70 per essay, almost double the cost of grading
manually.
Limitations to any Automated Grading System
To utilize any Automated Grading System the raw

data, essays or examination answers, would need to be in a
form that was computer readable. The most obvious form of
this would be electronic documents in Word format. This is
easily enough achieved where the student could write the
essay on a computer.
However, when students sit for examinations this is

normally done at desks with paper and pen. The resulting
examination script is not easily transferred to a computer
readable medium. On the other hand, we see that it is
23 | P a g e
possible to have students sit an exam in a computer
laboratory and submit their examination papers
electronically. It would be difficult to have large numbers sit
the exam simultaneously but it is not impractical to have
two groups of students where as soon as the first group
completes, the second group starts. In this way, with lab
facilities of 200 PC’s the same examination could be sat by
up to 400 students without compromising the examination
paper.
Another possibility would be to give the students a

take-home examination due within 24 hours. Any number of
students would then be able to sit the exam at the same
time and submit the exam papers electronically.
Another serious limitation to an essay grading system

is that it grades a students’ knowledge of a given set of
material. The model answer would contain only a set body of
knowledge and would grade the student on the part of that
knowledge the student was able to demonstrate. This may be
acceptable in the early years of a course but probably not in
more advanced studies.”
Local Literature and Studies
Automation of Grading System

Posted by Fr. Jerome Marquez, SVD
“The plan to automate the 2010 national election

reverberates clearer to school faculty and staff as SJCS begins
to automate its grading system starting this school year
24 | P a g e
2009-2010. This first quarter, faculty members of Preschool
and Grade School Departments have tested the customized
grading system in encoding the scholastic grades of their
students. The Registrar's Office, in coordination with the
Information Technology Office, printed and released recently
the first computerized report cards of the school.
The shift to automate the grading system, hopefully,

will increase efficiency of school staff and allow teachers to
focus more on teaching than clerical recording. Other
information and services may also be derived from this new
system. High School grading system will later follow.”
Automation of Grading System in San Sebastian College
“Automation has had a notable impact in a wide range

of industries beyond manufacturing (where it began).
Largely automated telephone switchboards and answering
machines have replaced once-ubiquitous telephone
operators. Medical processes such as primary screening
in electrocardiography or radiography and laboratory
analysis of human genes, sera, cells, and tissues are carried
out at much greater speed and accuracy by automated
systems. Applying automation to Grading systems wherein it
will also make a task easy and accurate.
25 | P a g e
Since San Sebastian College Recoletos began over 4
years ago, many things in this school have gone from
manual to automate. In addition, because a typical problem
in a starting school are Grading systems, I noticed that this
system does not exist in this school. We all know that
making an Automated Grading System means making the
task for professors in computing and calculating grades will
become easy and not only that the professors will have an
advantage but the students will also get a gain, because it
will also improve accuracy of calculations thus making the
what we call “Hula of Grades” will become non – existent in
the future of San Sebastian Recoletos.
San Sebastian College Recoletos – Canlubang lacks a

centralized grading system. It does not have a standalone
program that will accept input, compute grades and print
class cards all in a same program.”
Respondents of the Study
The respondents of the study will consist of a)

Southdale International School students (130), b) faculty and
staff (20).
Data Gathering Procedures
26 | P a g e
First, we discussed about the current grading system
Southdale International School was using and we found out
that they are still using the old manual way of computing and
recording of grades which is really time consuming especially
when large numbers of assignments are submitted at once.
Teachers of the said institution find themselves bogged

down in their attempt to provide consistent evaluations and
high quality feedback to students within as short a timeframe
as is reasonable, usually a matter of days rather than weeks.
Educational administrators are also concerned with

quality and timely feedback, but in addition must manage the
cost of doing this work.
Clearly, an automated system would be a highly

desirable addition to the educational tool-kit, particularly if it
can provide less costly and more effective outcome.
After seeking the approval, we, the researchers,

prepared the questionnaires, for our survey and we have
them checked and approved by our researcher adviser Mr.
Carlo C. Clerigo and have those surveys answered by the
respondents, which are the students and the faculty and
staffs of the said institution.
We tally the responses according to the questions in

the statement of the problem. Then, the responses were put
into tables and graphs, and interpret and analyze them.
27 | P a g e
Data Gathering Instruments
This study, which is “A Proposed Computerized

Grading System” make use of the Questionnaire as its main
instrument in gathering data. It also makes use of interview
to support the data and information gathered from the
questionnaires and it is supplemented by observations and
documentary analysis.
Questionnaire. The researchers made use of this

instrument to get a feedback to the respondents.
Observation. The researchers made use of this to

differentiate the manual and computerized way of grading
system.
Internet Research. Used for searching additional

information.
Chapter III
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
28 | P a g e
Table 1
Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Respondents
Respondents Frequency Percentage

(f) (%)
Students 81 81%
Teachers 2 2%
Others 17 17%
Total 100 100%
The respondents of the survey we have conducted are

the students enrolled in the institution, the faculty members
and staff, and the “Others” consists of some people from
outside the school. Questionnaires were given to the
respondents to be answered accordingly, to be able to
achieve the necessary information needed.
Table 1 presents the frequency and percentage

distributions of the respondents were in all the respondents
accumulated a percentage which are: The Students with 81%,

The Teachers with 2% while Others 17%, gathering a total of
100 respondents.
Interpretation of Data
29 | P a g e
TOTAL
SOMETIM NEVE
YES NO PERCENTA
ES R
GE
1. Are you having trouble

getting the class cards
75% 8% 15% 2% 100%
when the professor is
gone in our school?
2. Have you ever

experienced receiving 10
75% 15% 0% 100%
your class cards, that only %
your final grade is shown?
3. Is it difficult to search 11
59 30% 0% 100%
previous grades? %
4. Have you experienced the

impact on your grade not
72% 7% 21% 0% 100%
knowing after finals if it is
passing or failed?
5. Is it hard to adjust the

12
grades of the students 60% 28% 0% 100%
%
with requirements?
1. Do you encounter mixed

class cards of each
courses and year level 64% 15% 21% 0% 100%
every time you get your
class card?
2. Have you experienced

that you have a grade on
your class card but in the 53% 30% 15% 2% 100%
admin office, you have no
recorded sets of grades?
30 | P a g e
Figure 1.1: Tally of Survey Question for Manual Grading System
It shows the assessment of the respondents regarding

the survey we made about the manual grading system.
Looking at the table above, it shows that majority of the
respondents are having problems with the usage of the
manual grading system.
TOTAL
SOMETIM NEVE
YES NO PERCENTA
ES R
GE
1. Does the computerized

grading system speed
91% 4% 5% 0% 100%
up the process of
grades?
2. Does the computerized

grading system produce 79% 3% 18% 0% 100%
an accurate output?
3. Can automatic tasking

of grades be done after 93% 3% 4% 0% 100%
exam?
31 | P a g e
4. Will the students benefit
on the service of the
88% 2% 10% 0% 100%
computerized grading
system?
5. Will the faculty benefit

on the service of the
95% 1% 4% 0% 100%
system?
6. Do you think the

92% 3% 5% 0% 100%
system will be user
friendly?
7. Do you think it will

lessen the time
94% 3% 3% 0% 100%
consumed during the
processing of grades?
8. Does proper allocation

86% 2% 12% 0% 100%
of grades be done?
Figure 1.2: Tally of Survey Question for Automated Grading System
It shows the assessment of the respondents regarding

the survey we made about the manual grading system.
Looking at the table above, majority of the respondents are in
favor of having an automated/computerized grading system
in the institution.
32 | P a g e
Chapter IV
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
Based on the study that the researchers made,

several problems can be encountered when using the manual
way of recording and computing of grades. One example of
that problem are unretrieve files or records of the students.
So, the researchers had determined first the viability

of the software by conducting a survey in a form of
questionnaires. After analyzing it, the researchers found that
majority of the respondents, which are the enrolled
students, the faculty and staffs and some people whom
answered the said questionnaires is in favor in an
automated grading system.
33 | P a g e
Through descriptive method, which describes data and
characteristics about the present condition of the system
being studied, we have come up with the idea that applying
automation to Grading systems will also make a task easy
and accurate
Conclusion
Based on the findings, the researcher came up with a

conclusion that a computerized/automated grading system
is a must-have in a school. It is a best way of storing and
computing grades of students that provides easy way in
getting the grades and to make the procedure faster and
efficient.
Recommendation
Based from the conclusion made, the researcher

highly recommends that the school must have an
automated/computerized grading system because
computerization is focused on retrieving and storing
information of students in a faster, more convenient way of
storing files of the student enrollees in a computerized
system that will lessen the effort of faculty staff in storing
files of each the students. This will also serve as information
for irregular students, transferees, and freshmen to get
34 | P a g e
course and subject schedule. The information can be viewed
in just a second without worrying that a single file is lost.
35 | P a g e

Automated Grading System Improves Education

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Automated Grading System Improves Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter I

THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Some schools right now, especially those with huge

Grading System is the most commonly used in

The Computerized Grading System will also be a

This system will served as a tool for easier accessibility

Overview of Automated Grading Systems

Having university assignments adhere to industrial

A good automated grading system should be capable

Several efforts have been made to design and

In this article, I will briefly explain two such automated

WEB-CAT was created at Virginia Tech University to

Since Test Driven Development (TDD) was to be used

WEB-CAT’s graphical user interface is inspired by the

Basic features provided by WEB-CAT are:

 Automatic grading with immediate feedback for student

WEB-CAT follows a certain sequence of steps to assess

If a student’s test case fails on the reference

Praktomat was created at Universitat Passau in

Praktomat evaluates student assignments by running

My contention that student project submissions should

WEB-CAT and several other sources have shown us

WEB-CAT achieves this by assessing submissions in

Praktomat does not rely on 100% automatic

A proposed system for automated grading

Based on my observations from reviewing the above

o Every project should have a deadline, just like the real

o Failure is reported to the student if the project fails to

 The software should provide an account with a username

 An evaluation should take the latest tag numbers

Objectives of the Study

The general objective of the study entitled “A

Statement of the Problem

The study entitled “A Computerized Grading System”

1. The problems encountered in the manual way of grading

 Some records are lost.

 Incorrect inputting of grades.

 As to security, easy alteration of grades happens.

 Once they received their class cards, they only see

2. The following are solutions recommended to address the

 The manual grading system will be a computerized one.

 Once it is computerized, the grades inputted on the

 Once the grades are put in the said system, it cannot

 Students will know their grades from prelim to finals.

Significance of the Study

The study of “A Computerized Grading System” will be

To the Students. It will help the students to get their

To the Instructors. This will serve as their guide for an

To the Researcher. This study will equip them with

To the Future Researchers. It will serve as their reference

Scope and Limitation

This study is focused and will only concentrate on the

The said system is only for recording and keeping of

Computer. In the study, it is the machine used by the

Programmer. As used in the study, this person creates and

Database. Is an organized collection of data for one or

METHODS OF RESEARCH AND PROCEDURES

The method of research we used in the study “A

The descriptive survey method was used to achieve

Based on our research, Southdale International School

Since we are used of using the manual way of

This was deemed appropriate because the study sought

Review of Related Literature and Studies