Research perspectives on the objects-early debate

In March 2004, SIGCSE members contributed to a mailing list discussion on the question of whether programming should be taught objects first or imperative first. We analyse that discussion, exploring how the CS community debates the issue and whether contributors' positions are supported by the research literature on novice programmers. We applied four distinct research methods to the discussion: cognitive science, rhetorical analysis in the critical tradition, phenomenography and biography. We identify the cognitive claims made in the email discussion and find there is not a consensus in the research literature as to whether the objects first approach or the imperative approach is harder to learn. From the rhetorical analysis, we find that the discussion was not so much a debate between OO-first versus imperative-first, but instead was more for and against OO-first. Our phenomenographic analysis identified and categorized the underlying complexity of the discussion. We also applied a biographical method to explore the extent to which the participants' views are shaped by their own prior experience. The paper concludes with some reflections upon paradigms, and the manner in which the CS discipline community defines itself.

[1]  Michael Thuné,et al.  Novice Java programmers' conceptions of "object" and "class", and variation theory , 2005, ITiCSE '05.

[2]  Michael Kölling,et al.  Requirements for a first year object-oriented teaching language , 1995, SIGCSE.

[3]  R. Weber.  Basic content analysis, 2nd ed. , 1990 .

[4]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Essential Tension , 1977 .

[5]  Adrienne Decker.  A tale of two paradigms , 2003 .

[6]  Martyn Clark.  Computer Science: A hard-applied discipline? , 2003 .

[7]  Elliot Soloway,et al.  Studying the Novice Programmer , 1988 .

[8]  Elliot Soloway,et al.  Papers presented at the first workshop on empirical studies of programmers on Empirical studies of programmers , 1986 .

[9]  Stuart Reges,et al.  Back to basics in CS1 and CS2 , 2006, SIGCSE '06.

[10]  D L WATSON,et al.  EFFECTS OF CERTAIN SOCIAL POWER STRUCTURES ON COMMUNICATION IN TASK-ORIENTED GROUPS. , 1965, Sociometry.

[11]  Kim B. Bruce,et al.  Resolved: objects early has failed , 2005 .

[12]  Françoise Détienne,et al.  Assessing the cognitive consequences of the object-oriented approach: A survey of empirical research on object-oriented , 1997, Interact. Comput..

[13]  K. Burke.  A Rhetoric of Motives , 1969 .

[14]  Rick Decker,et al.  The top 10 reasons why object-oriented programming can't be taught in CS 1 , 1994, SIGCSE '94.

[15]  Aristotle,et al.  On rhetoric : a theory of civic discourse , 1993 .

[16]  Shirley Booth,et al.  Learning to program : a phenomenographic perspective , 1992 .

[17]  E. Boyer.  Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate , 1990 .

[18]  Janet Rountree,et al.  Learning and Teaching Programming: A Review and Discussion , 2003, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[19]  Mark Guzdial,et al.  Impact of alternative introductory courses on programming concept understanding , 2005, ICER '05.

[20]  F. Marton,et al.  Learning and Awareness , 1997 .

[21]  George Campbell,et al.  The Philosophy of Rhetoric , 2013 .

[22]  Lawrence Buckingham,et al.  Ways of Experiencing the Act of Learning to Program: A Phenomenographic Study of Introductory Programming Students at University , 2004, J. Inf. Technol. Educ..

[23]  Briana B. Morrison,et al.  The dimensions of variation in the teaching of data structures , 2004, ITiCSE '04.

[24]  Robert B. Burns,et al.  Introduction to Research Methods , 2015, Research Methods for Political Science.

[25]  Tony Clear.  "Programming in the Large" and the need for professional discrimination , 2001, SGCS.

[26]  I. De Sola Pool,et al.  Trends in content analysis , 1960 .

[27]  Robert McCartney,et al.  A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers , 2004, ITiCSE-WGR '04.

[28]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[29]  Maurice Landry,et al.  Can the field of MIS be disciplined? , 1989, CACM.

[30]  Niklaus Wirth.  Good ideas, through the looking glass [computing history] , 2006, Computer.

[31]  Philip J. Burton,et al.  Teaching programming in the OOP era , 2003, SGCS.

[32]  Eliot Soloway,et al.  Workshop on empirical studies of programmers , 1986, SOEN.

[33]  David Perkins,et al.  Fragile knowledge and neglected strategies in novice programmers , 1985 .

[34]  Richard E. Pattis,et al.  Karel ++ A Gentle Introduction to the Art of Object-Oriented Programming , 1996 .

[35]  Anders Berglund,et al.  What does it take to learn 'programming thinking'? , 2005, ICER '05.

[36]  K. Trigwell,et al.  Qualitative differences in approaches to teaching first year university science , 1994 .

[37]  Lynn Andrea Stein.  What We've Swept Under the Rug: Radically Rethinking CS1 , 1998 .

[38]  Tracy Hall,et al.  Can Thomas Kuhn's paradigms help us understand software engineering? , 2004, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[39]  Mark Guzdial,et al.  A multi-national, multi-institutional study of assessment of programming skills of first-year CS students , 2001, ITiCSE-WGR '01.

[40]  Ference Marton,et al.  Phenomenography-a research approach to investigating different understandings of reality , 1986 .

[41]  Philip Taylor,et al.  A phenomenographic study of academics' conceptions of science learning and teaching , 1994 .

[42]  Tony Clear.  Research paradigms and the nature of meaning and truth , 2001, SGCS.

[43]  Mark Guzdial,et al.  Teaching the Nintendo generation to program , 2002, CACM.

[44]  Susan Wiedenbeck,et al.  An empirical study of novice program comprehension in the imperative and object-oriented styles , 1997, ESP '97.

[45]  Kim B. Bruce.  Controversy on how to teach CS 1: a discussion on the SIGCSE-members mailing list , 2004, ACM SIGCSE Bull..

[46]  Susan Wiedenbeck,et al.  A comparison of the comprehension of object-oriented and procedural programs by novice programmers , 1999, Interact. Comput..

[47]  O. Holsti.  Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities , 1969 .

[48]  Tracy L. Lewis,et al.  The computer science debate: it's a matter of perspective , 2005, SGCS.

[49]  Lynda Thomas,et al.  Scaffolding with object diagrams in first year programming classes: some unexpected results , 2004 .

[50]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .