Learning Strategies for Programming-Heavy and Theory-Heavy Assessments: A Shared Role for Critical Thinking

Abstract

Assessments are a crucial, high-stakes part of the learning process, and students consolidate much of their learning during the considerable effort they make preparing for them. Computer science curricula typically include both theory-heavy and programming-heavy assessments. This study investigates which learning strategies final-year computer science students adopt when preparing for theory-heavy assessments compared to programming-heavy assessments. Using semi-structured interviews with three final-year Computer Science and Engineering students at TU Delft, transcripts were analysed through an inductive open-coding pass followed by deductive coding using an established framework of cognitive and metacognitive learning strategies. Results show that rehearsal and elaboration strategies—reviewing lecture slides, note-taking, and creating cheat sheets—were predominantly associated with preparation for theory-heavy assessments, while metacognitive self-regulation, through consulting assignment specifications, was predominantly associated with preparation for programming-heavy assessments. Critical thinking was the one strategy reported across both assessment types, expressed through the use of practice exams. These findings suggest that practice exams function as a strategy supporting critical thinking regardless of assessment type. The relevance and diversity of practice exam material may therefore be an important, underexplored lever for supporting effective learning in computer science education.