SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Niels Doorn

Publications and source records attributed to Niels Doorn.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Learning Critical Testing Literacy Through Puzzles: an Experience Report

In this paper, we report our experiences and takeaways from workshops using puzzles to learn CTL. Background: Software testing is important yet difficult to teach. We introduced a BoK of puzzle-based learning activities to teach CTL, based on a model of critical tester's cognition, leading to the pedagogical framework P4TEST. We conducted thirteen workshops with students, testers, teachers, and primary school pupils to assess puzzle-based teaching of critical testing literacy. Experience: Across eleven workshops, we used a semi-structured approach, varying puzzles, materials, and timing. In two additional workshops, we introduced workbooks and think-aloud sessions to gather more data on the learning experience. Observations: Participants consistently perceived themselves as experimenting while solving puzzles. Students tended to converge on solutions, while professionals continued exploring. Emotions were visible in behaviour but hard to surface through written reflection alone. Think-aloud sessions revealed immediate reasoning; written reflections elicited more meta-cognitive reflection. The theme Sensemaking / reflection-in-action captured how participants framed problems, navigated dead ends, and shifted strategies. Reflections: Puzzles are not the intervention: the entire sequence of solving, debriefing, and reflecting is. Designing that sequence more deliberately is the work ahead. We also developed an open-source web application with built-in analytics to customise workshops.

cs.SE

Teaching testing seriously in academia

As systems grow more complex and incorporate AI, testing becomes more critical. Yet testing education in academia remains misaligned with both professional practice and the empirical nature of testing. Current curricula predominantly adopt a rationalist paradigm, emphasizing prescriptive methods and confirmation of expected outcomes. This limits students' ability to reason critically under uncertainty. In this position paper, we argue that testing should instead be taught as an empirical, inquiry-driven professional skill. We propose an instructional design based on the Four-Component Instructional Design (4C/ID) model to support whole-task learning. We introduce P4TEST, a pedagogical framework that makes explicit the core competencies, epistemic moves, and habits of mind involved in testing, while avoiding prescriptive processes. The paper outlines how P4TEST can guide curriculum design, scaffolding, and assessment in software testing education.

cs.SE

How do students test software units?

We gained insight into ideas and beliefs on testing of students who finished an introductory course on programming without any formal education on testing. We asked students to fill in a small survey, to do four exercises and to fill in a second survey. We interviewed eleven of these students in semi-structured interviews, to obtain more in-depth insight. The main outcome is that students do not test systematically, while most of them think they do test systematically. One of the misconceptions we found is that most students can only think of test cases based on programming code. Even if no code was provided (black-box testing), students try to come up with code to base their test cases on.

cs.CY