E104 Competitive Programming as a Source for Problems and Tools for CS1 (Short paper) Analysis of the Author's Group (#3) Given voluntary participation, analysis focuses on group #3, taught by the first author. Student assignment to groups was pseudo-random, and the author had no influence over selection. The site was introduced as a supplementary resource, with problems integrated into lectures and released in sync with course topics. Near the end of the semester, a "secret" bonus code was offered after solving several problems, both to encourage participation and to identify users without affecting grading anonymity. Group #3 included 83 students; 79 took at least one exam. Of these, 55 created site accounts, 53 submitted at least one solution, and 51 solved at least one problem successfully. Figure 1 shows that site users outperformed the overall student population by 12.76 points in the first exam and 16.2 points in the second. Fig. 1. All students vs Site users in both exams Figure 2 compares users and non-users within group #3. Non-users averaged 52.04, while users averaged 86.69 - a difference of 34.65 points. This result is interpreted cautiously (see Limitations). Fig. 2. Users vs Non-users in group #3, count and average
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Mjk0MjAwOQ==