Supplementary materials for 'How Computer Science Teachers Assess Open-ended Programming Assignments'

Abstract

Interview guideline, codebooks and coding report for our study on the assessment of open-ended programming assignments in Computer Science bachelors in the Netherlands. We investigated why instructors use open-ended assignments (RQ1); what they assess and what evidence they use (RQ2); how assessment guidelines are structured (RQ3) and used (RQ4); and how instructors experience the assessment process (RQ5). To answer these questions, we interviewed teachers and head teaching assistants responsible for 12 programming and software engineering courses at seven Dutch research universities and analysed the rubrics and assessment guidelines used in those courses. For analysis of the transcripts and assessment guidelines, we used the two-step flexible coding process by Deterding and Waters (2021), which is particularly suited for interviews in which different topics or aspects of a topic are discussed. The transcripts and guidelines were coded using minicoder (Rump, 2026). This supplement includes both the index and analytic codebooks in minicoder's .mcc (json) format and exported as markdown, alongside a coding report exported to .html files, which gives an overview of which codes applies to each case, linked to the supporting quotes given in the paper. Deterding, N. M., & Waters, M. C. (2021). Flexible Coding of In-depth Interviews: A Twenty-first-century Approach. Sociological Methods & Research, 50(2), 708–739. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124118799377Rump, A. (2026). minicoder: Simple in-browser qualitative data analysis tool for plain-text files (Version 1) [Computer software]. 4TU.ResearchData. https://doi.org/10.4121/93041A67-87DE-49CC-AD92-2F561EE66852.V1