comprehensive object oriented learning doc

It has been a privilege to be allowed to develop his thoughts and ideas, and also to challenge them through new ways of thinking, Ir is a great pleasure for us to express our gratitude

Trang 2

Comprehensive Object- Oriented Learning:

The Learner’s Perspective

Trang 3

Comprehensive Object-Oriented Learning: The Learners

Perspective

All rights reserved Permission to make digital or paper copy of part ot all of these works for personal or classroom use is geanted without fee provided that the copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies 1) bear this notice in full and 2) give the fall citation on the fiest page It is permissible to abstract these works so long as credit is given To copy in all other cases or to republish or to post on a server or to redistribute to lists requires specific permission and payment of sa fee Contact publisher@ InformingScience.org to request redistribution permi

Proofreader: Chris Wright

Cover Designee: Romana Diinié

Published by

Informing Science Press

publishing arm of the Informing Science Institute:

Trang 4

This book is dedicated to the memory of Kristen Nygard

Trang 5

Acknowledgements

This book has been made possible by the creative and đedicated efforts

of many people, not only those of the authors Our first acknowledge-

‘ment must go to Kristen Nygaard, without whom we could not have compiled this book It has been a privilege to be allowed to develop his thoughts and ideas, and also to challenge them through new ways of thinking,

Ir is a great pleasure for us to express our gratitude to the Research Council of Norway, which supported this research, Many thanks to the main partners of the Comprehensive Object Oriented Learning (COOL) project: InterMedia at the University of Oslo, the Norwegian Computing Center, the Department of Informatics at the University of Oslo and Simult Research Laboratory We thank Kjell Bratbergsengen, Morten Dehlen, Lars Holden, Jaele Nygaard, Ole Lehmann-Madsen, Sten Ludvigsen, Knut Lundby, Gerhard Skagestein, Oddvar Sorisen and Aslak ‘Tveito for their diverse contsibutions to the COOL project All parts of this book have been blind-reviewed by two experts We want to thank the external reviewers for their efforts in the reviewing, process: David J Barnes, Edgar Bostrom, Svein Erik Bratsberg, Mic chael Caspersen, ‘Tore Hoel, Anders Kluge and Michael Kolling, We are grateful to the students and teachess who participated in our studies

We thank Chris Wright for proofreading the book and Gunnar J Cai lius for his technical assistance We are grateful to Romana DZin

designing the book cover,

Trang 6

A, Karahasanovié, A and Kaasboll, J (Eds), 2006),

‘Conprcensve bjectarintd learning The lars perspire

Santa Rots, Califoenia: Informing Scieace Pues,

Contents Annita Fjuke, Amela Karabasanovié and Jens Kaasboll

Chapter: The global mover

Chapter2: Contextualizing object-oriented learning

Annita Ejuk, Christian Holmboe, Cevile F Jabreie and

Part 2 Studies on object-oriented learning

Chapter 3: Children’s understanding of object-orientation

Roar Gamera, Jens Kaasboll, Richard Borge, Christian Holmboe and Ole Smordal “ Chapter 4: Challenges of learning object-oriented analysis

and design through a modeling-first approach Amela Karahasanavié and Christian Holmboe rune 49 Chapter5: Using Karel J collaboratively to facilitate object-

oriented learning Richard Borge, Annita Ejuk and Amne-Kristian Groven

or

Chapter 6: A study of objects-first with BlueJ ina non-

computer science context Hlavard Hegna and Arne-Kristion Grover Chapter 7: Revealing object-oriented comprehension by

feedback collection Amela Karabasanorié, Annita Ejuk, Dag LK Sjoberg

Trang 7

Comprehensive object-oriented leartngs The learner's porpetine

Chapter 8 Reuse of learning resources in object-oriented

learning Ola Berge and Annita Fk 131 Chapter 9: Collaborating on learning object-orientation in a

synchronous, net-based environment Jens Bennedsen 157 Chapter l0: BlueJExchanger~ an environment for shared

practices in object-oriented learning

Weigin Chen, Jan Dolonen and Lars Eirik Ronning 83

Part 3 Conclusions and implications

Chapter HH: Improvements of teaching and tools for learning

object-orientation Jens Kaasboll, Annita Fjuk, Amela Karahasanovié,

Trang 8

A, Karahasanovié, A and Kaasboll, J (Eds), 2006),

‘Conprcensve bjectarintd learning The lars perspire

Santa Rots, Califoenia: Informing Scieace Pues,

Preface

To program is 10 understand (Kristen Nygaard)

Why this book?

Nowadays, the object-oriented paradigm is increasingly being used through a variety of modeling and progeamming techniques Object- orientation is increasingly being taught in computer science courses, as well as being practised in industeial contexts A survey conducted by Dale (available at www-cs.ntexas.edu /users/ndale) shows that 65% of the participating institutions teach object orientation as a part of intro: duectory courses in computer science education, There exist a number

of studies within Computer Science Education (CSE) that focus on the challenges of teaching object orientation One of the reasons for writ ing this book, Comprehensive Object-Oriented Learning: The Learnee’s Perspective, was the fact that most of these studies pay little attention

to the learners’ perspective on this problem area

‘This collection of articles reports ftom the research conducted within the Comprehensive Object-Oriented Learning (COOL) project ‘The COOL project was initiated by Kristen Nygaaed, who, together with his colleague and friend Ole-Johan Dahl, invented the first object-oriented progeamming language Simula in the 1960s Based on many years of lecturing on the basic concepts of object orientation, Nygard expesi- enced a number of challenges that he wanted to explore through the COOL project Unfortunately, he passed away in August 2002, just before the project was due to start The authors of this book develop some of his thoughts and enrich them with new ones

This book offers readers an opportunity to be aware of the challenges

of learning the principles and concepts of object-oriented program ming It is concemed with relationships among a variety of elements: tools and programming environments; types of leamer; pedagogical approaches and teachings strategies; learning resources, and information and communication technologies (ICTS) The strength of the book

is thar it is sensitive to these pasticulas relations Eight scientific articles

Trang 9

in Part TL report findings from four case studies, two design experi ments and three controlled experiments with total 187 subjects The length of the studies varied from six hours to one semester The subjects ange from 11-year-old schoolchildren to professional progrim- mers

Questions about learning and teaching object-orientation for novices, ranging from fundamental issues on programming envisonments and tools through instructional design and scaffolding to epistemological and ontological issues on human development, are complex and inhec- ently interdisciplinary, Hence, itis essential that they be addressed from

4 variety of scientific perspectives and disciplines The conteibutors to the book have varied backgrounds, and together they provide sich and new insights into this complexity

How to read the book

‘The book is divided into three pacts Past I provides the background for this research, Part IT presents and discusses findings from a number

of case studies, design experiments and controlled experiments conducted Part IIT concludes the book and discusses the main findings of the studies presented in Pact IL

Trang 10

Prefie

In Chapter 2, Annita Fjuk, Christian Holmboe, Cecilie F Jahreie and Jens Bennedsen position the book within two major research fields Computer Science Education (CSE) and Computer Supported Collabo-

tative Learning (CSCL) The chapter describes related research within these two reseaech fields,

Part IL

In Chapter 3, Roar Granerud, Jens Kaasboll, Richard Borge, Christian Holmboe and Ole Smordal demonstrate the feasibility of the objects- first teaching approach when teaching 14-year-olds in a designed experiment The software tool used for teaching, Lejos, defines the classes

to be used, and objects of these classes have physical counterparts in the Lego Robolab components that execute the children’s programs, Lejos requires programming with exceptions, which was hidden by a shell that was constructed for the experiment A procedural, graphics programming package, Mindstorms, which was also to be used with Robolab, had flaws in interface design and mechanisms for structuring imperatives The results from the experiment show that these tools enhanced the childsen’s understanding of the basics of object-oriented progeamming

In Chapter 4, Amela Karahasanovié and Christian Holmboe describe challenges of learning object-oriented analysis and design through a modelling-first approach in a high school contest The study they conducted showed that the students had major problems in mapping the problem domain to the solution domain and in defining the scope of the system It also indicated that interaction with more experienced peers and the teacher helped students to overcome difficulties with class and structure design The students that actively used UML dia- grams seemed to achieve a better overall understanding of object oriented concepts

In Chapter 5, Richard Borge, Annita Fjuk and Ame-Keistian Groven present findings from an experiment on collaborative use of the graphical programming tool Karel J The aim of the experiment was to study the level of knowledge of chosen object-oriented concepts determined through collaborative problem solving, The experiment indicates that Karel J and pair collaboration fogether enhanced the learners’ acqui

of basic object-oriented concepts

In Chapter 6, Havard Hegna and Ame-Keistian Groven repost from a study of Blue} in an introductory course for learners without a back-

Trang 11

ground in computer science The purpose of the study was to gain experience of Blue}-based education and the objects-first approach Based con this study, the authors suggest that a minimal amount of imperative (procedural) programming should be presented before introducing, the objects-first theme

In Chapter 7, Amela Katahasanovié, Annita Fuk, Dag LK Sjoberg, Richard ‘Thomas first present a tool developed to collect written feedback from participants while they are programming, ‘They then present the results of a controlled experiment conducted to explore students? comprehension of object-oriented systems The students had problems with comprehending the structure of a medium-size object-oriented system Furthermore, the participants had difficulties with the inheritance of functionality, they mixed inheritance and associations, and they misunderstood the nature of packages The feedback collected provided information that is complementary t0 examinations and task solutions and provided valuable input for the pedagogical design of courses on object-oriented peogsamming

In Chapter 9, Jens Bennedsen raises awareness of the problem areas that students find it useful to solve collaboratively and those that they find it useful to solve individually, This was approached through a designed experiment where the students collaborated in a net-based environment The study indicates a division of work, in which abstract and iil-structured problems (such as creating class models for a given prob- Jem domain or creating object models) were solved collaboratively The actual programming was performed more efficiently by the individual student The results showed that the learnees acquired a deeper understanding of object orientation when collaborating

to acquise an understanding of object oriented modeling and

Trang 12

progeam-Prefie ming, Then, the authors present the design and implementation of an extension of BlueJ, which students can use asynchronously to share projects and learn from examples from peers and teachers This environment provides the opportunity for developing a culture that can foster a shared understanding of OO modeling and programming among, novice progeammers and help them to master the ast of pro: gramming,

Part I

In the single chapter contained therein, Jens Kaasboll, Anita Fjuk, Amela Karahasanovié and Ame-Ksistian Groven suggest implications for practice, derived from the research investigations presented in Part

IL

Annita Fjuk, Amela Kacthasanovié, Jens Kaasboll

Oslo, January 2006

Trang 14

A, Karahasanovié, A and Kaasboll, J (Eds) 2006),

‘Conprcensive bjetarintd learning The lores perspire

‘Santa Ross, California: Infoeming Scieuce Press, (pp 110)

Chapter 1 The global mover

Knut Lundby

Keisten Nygard was a global mover He initiated change He had big ideas, that encompassed the whole word and helped his visions to become reality When we planned the initial draft of the COOL project, Nygaaed asked: “How many people are living on the Globe? Six bil- lion How maay of them do object-oriented programming at a uni sity level? At least a million.” (Nygaaed, 2001) He was calculating the market of possible users of the combined book and multimedia learning material that he expected to be among the outcomes of this project

on Comprehensive Object-Oriented Learning (COOL) Where most others would start counting modestly from the bottom up, at & loc level, Kristen Nygaa’s starting point was the ambitious perspective of the entice world

However, Nygaard became more modest than he intended by focusing

on a better textbook and new multimedia learning material These were not realized as outcomes of COOL The results are more general, as well as concrete: The project has yielded much more knowledge about the variety of challenges in teaching and learning object-oriented progeamming in different settings and with vasious age groups This newly- acquired knowledge is reported in the present volume

Kristen ygaard's goal was to improve the teaching of programming globally and make his ideas on teaching and learning object-oriented progeamming available to the world, Many obstacles lay in his path, but this man did not take No” for an answer To him, a “No” wa

liminacy “Yes”, while he planned his next move a pre-

I myself was one of those who needed to be convinced With an academic background in sociology and media studies, I knew nothing about object-oriented progeamming However, being involved in re: seasch progeams on social and cultural aspects of information and communication technologies, T had great respect for Kristen Nygard’

Trang 15

work on the social consequences of information and communication technologies

Nygaard’s merits

In the 1960s, together with OleJohan Dahl, Kristen Nygard invented the first object-oriented languages (SIMULA T and SIMULA 67) ‘This would bring them intemational recognition, They changed the way people thought about programming, on a global scale ‘They helped to shape technologies of inherent and decisive importance to ‘the hyper- complex society’ (Qvortrup, 2003) The computer systems that form the foundation of the modern information society are among the most complex things humans have created Through his ground-breaking research Nygaard made it possible to manage that complexity (Sjoberg

et al, 2002) He shaped a paradigm on how to approach complex prob- Jem areas This complexity had, to Kristen Nygard, social as well as technical aspects (Holmevik, 1994) That is why his scientific thinking is

so challenging, even outside the ciscles of informatics

He saised ethical and political concems about the use and social implications of computer progeams and information systems In the 1970s, Nygaaed was the Norwegian representative for the OECD activities on information technology His esearch increasingly turned to the consequences and possibilities of these technologies for the labor movement

To this end, he worked with trade unions at workplaces This continued into the development of ‘the Scandinavian model of system development (Bjesknes, 1987) In 1990, the Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility awarded him the Norbert Wiener Prize for responsibility

in social and professional work

Kristen Nygaard became directly involved in other political, social and environmental issues He was the first Chairman of the Environment Protection Committee of the Norwegian Association for the Protection

Trang 16

The haa marr

of Nature He was the chairman of the movement that in 1994 succes fully managed to oppose Nosway's membership in the European Un- ion One of his motivations was congruent with his object-oriented perspective; namely, the spreading and shasing, and not concentration,

of power and influence

Keisten Nygard received his Masters degree in Mathematics from the University of Oslo in 1956 He worked for the Norwegian Defense Research Establishment until 1960, pioneering initiatives in operational arch In 1960, he was hired by the Norwegian Computing

(NCO) He became its Director of Research in 1962 It was hese that he and Ole-Johan Dahl did the groundbreaking work on the SIMULA languages Nygard left NCC in 1984

on System Development, closely linked to the ficld of Participatory Design

Keisten Nygaard’s research at the end of the 1990s was related to distributed systems After his retirement from the Department of Infor- matics, he returned to the Norwegian Computing Center In January

2001, Simula Research Laboratory was established through a decision

of the Norwegian Parliament, bearing the name of the object-oriented language that he and Dahl created

Net-based learning

At the end of that same month, January 2001, the formal opening of a new center at the University of Oslo took place This new unit, Inter- Media, was to contribute to innovation through interdisciplinary studies

in new media and communication technology InteeMedia focused on

‘new media’ and ‘net-based learning’, To Kristen Nygaard, this sounded like a suitable arena for his current interests in didactical aspects of progeamming education, and the creation of a process-oriented concep: tual platform for informatics

TaterMedia was told by its statutes to be an initiator of activity, a “driv ing force”, at the university as well as in society This formulation obvi-

Trang 17

ously had appeal to Kristen Nygaard He let me know that laterMedia might be the right place to integrate his continued activities at the Nor-

‘wegian Computing Center, the Department of Informatics, as well as the Simula Research Laboratory, into the COOL project he was developing

InterMedia had a specific research focus on ICT in education, which he needed for a project on comprehensive object-oriented learning He wanted his perspectives in object-orientation to be tested across cul- tuses and national boundaries, by the application of information and communication technology It thus became crucial to understand the ching and learning of object-oriented programming in a net-based context He needed a socio-cultural frame of understanding, which is prominent in InterMedia’s research on ICT and learning ‘The center contributes to research on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 1), This focus on the interplay between mediating astifacts, social interaction and learning is actually quite close to Nyguard’s own pe spective on the social aspects of information and communication technologies

Nygard was invited as one of four speakers on a panel at the opening

of InterMedia, University of Oslo, of which I was the Director He called me up after the event, asking with intensity: “Age you burning, for net-based learning?” “Well”, I replied slowly, “InterMedia is going

to focus on net-based learning ” He cut me off: “Are you busning, or are you not burning?” There was no space for muances “I am burning”, I replied, Kristen Nygaard had managed to find an institutional base for his COOL initiative

Kristen Nygard was a man not given to brevity, Even to those of us not familie with informatics, he was willing to explain at length IF you happened to ask him “what actually is object-oriented programrning”,

as some of my colleagues from the social sciences did, you would get at least an hour's immediate lesson

As the moderator at the InterMedia opening I forced him to be brief

He fought back, saying, “Here comes a two-hour seminar condensed into 90 seconds.” He pointed out four main aspects of research, in general: First, the empirical study of phenomena, with theie identifica- tion, observed behavior, and properties Second, analysis: the comprehension and explanation of phenomena in terms of an underlying theory Thid, synthesis, construction and technology: this means knowl

Trang 18

The haa marr edge deployed to effect change and to manipulate reality Fourth, mult perspective reflection: by this he meant the consideration and examina- tion of concepts and phenomena from the perspectives of more than one science, or from more than one perspective within the same science This is the study of how changes introduced according to one viewpoint affect properties of the phenomena when regarded from another viewpoint (Nygard, 1986)

Establishing the COOL project

In informatics, Nygaaed pointed out, inducing change is the goal for the ongoing production of knowledge, while scientific observation and analysis is necessary to determine the correct point of departure In the social sciences, however, the aim is to understand and explain ceality in teems of a theory built on scientific observation, he claimed at the In- teeMedia opening Kristen Nygaard looked for the fourth aspect, that

of multi-perspective reflection, where consideration was combined with strong components of action-oriented research, in onder to initiate change This was what he wanted to accomplish with the encounter between informatics and socio-cultural learning science in the COOL project

‘The problem was to get funding for such a multi-perspectival, change- oriented project The Research Council of Nosway was the obvious source of funding However, the research council was by then organ- ized in scientific arear, and the interdisciplinary COOL proposal happened to be relevant to three of them Hence, COOL was prepared for all three areas: Science and ‘Technology, Social Science and Humanities, Industry and Energy (InterMedia, 2001),

Nygard knew from his own experience that the Research Council did not easily support such interdisciplinary projects, at least not with the amount and strength of the support he found necessary The Research Council may, of course, have had good reasons For their actions, but on important occasions Nygaard had large-scale proposals turned down, which later became successes Fence, when the two of us prepared the cover letter for the COOL application to the Research Council of Nonway, Nygaard’s politely disguised message was: You have twice refused to provide sufficient funding for my impostant, acclaimed projects How could the Council dase to do so againl?®

Trang 19

They did dare The COOL project did not get funding, Tt was caught in

a tangle between progeams and areas of the Research Council How- ever, Kristen Nygaaed took this “no” as a preliminary “yes”; an invita- tion to take up the gauntlet and fight He mobilized his forces His protest went straight to the top, to the Director-General and the Ex- ecutive Board of the Research Council Copies of the letters were sent

to the Minister of Research and the Government Research Poli Board of Norway

One of his former students, Dag Sjoberg, upon his death depicted Kis- ten Nygaacd’s fighting energy thus: “His optimism was also reflected in his vision regarding research questions that many dismissed as unrealis- tic Despite the fact that modem science is based on a large number of people building up steadily one block at a time, Kristen was open to totally new avenues of thinking and was not afraid of being seen as naive.”

Recognition of his work was given after all (Owe et al, 2004) While Kristen Nygaaed was struggling with the Research Council, in Novem- ber 2001 he was, together with Ole-Johan Dahl, awarded the John von Neumann Medal by IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engi neers) for the “introduction of the concepts underlying object-oriented progeamming through the design and implementation of SIMULA 67." Nygaard thought this would convince the Norwegian funding agencies; but it did not Not yet

When important matters were in process, Kristen Nygard could call you any time, anywhere, and argue at length, with no excuses Ï w

the car with my family, on my way back ftom a party early in the new

of 2002, when Kristen called enthusiastically: “Knut, now we have even got the second main prize for informatics.” In the winter of 2002, Ole-Johan Dahl and Kristen Nygaard ceceived the A M Turing Award

by the ACM (Association of Computing Machinery) for “ideas fundamental to the emergence of object oriented programming, through their design of the progeamming languages Simula I and Simula 67."

in how software systems are designed and programmed, resulting in

Trang 20

The haa marr reusable, reliable, scalable applications that have streamlined the pro ess of writing software code and facilitated software programming, Current object-oriented programming languages include C++ and Java

‘They ace both widely used in progeamming a wide range of applications from large-scale distributed systems to small, personal applications, including personal computers, home entertainment devices, and stand- alone arcade applications.” In the end, the Research Council of Norway was convinced and found a solution for the project The COOL application was handled at an overall level in the Research Council system

‘The COOL project got support and funding,

Nygaard’s networks

Meanwhile, Kristen Nygaard was working on the global network of researchers and test sites to be linked into the COOL project ‘The global mover had links in China, as well as California and Canada; to

‘mention just a few The John von Neumann Medal and the A M Tur- ing Award had reactivated his international reputation He had no problems getting letters of support and intentions of collaboration His own inclination and wish to travel to talk about COOL and the learning of object-orientation was almost without limit

To handle this kind global network activity was a challenge for any esearch buseauceacy and university system Although keeping the project leader, InterMedia had to give up the main administrative respons bility for the COOL project It became too complex for the public university structure ‘The private non-profit research foundation Nor- wegian Computing Center took over, with InterMedia, the Department

of Informatics, and Simul Research Laboratory as COOL participants and collaborators Kristen Nygaaed himself still looked for the be position from which to guide the project Before the designated date for the launch of COOL, he would assume a three-year full-time position at the Simula laboratory

be in the position to see how the ideas of object-oriented programming

Trang 21

could be comprehended by new groups of learners After all, that was what Nygaard wanted to accomplish with the COOL project

As Alan Kay said, “Kristen is a guy who is larger than life in almost any possible dimension.” (NRK, 2002) In his research, Kristen Nygard aimed for multi-perspectival reflection In his own life, he “never got as far as consolidation, at least not in the sense of inner seclusion” (Böszörményi and Podlipnig, 2004, p 76), reflecting quietly on his own life and accomplishments, In his last years, he was triggered by his frus- tration at the lack of quality in most teaching material on object- oriented progeumming and by his own wish to pass on his legacy in

Trang 22

The haa marr new media forms For this purpose, he learned to use the net-based multimedia composing software Dreamweaver, to be able to weave his own dreams and insights into multimedia format With COOL, Kristen Nygard wanted to move the didactics and pedagogy of object orientation on a global seat

“Nevertheless, he was a person who always had affection for reflection computer scientist who chooses topics like ‘simulation’ and later even

‘participatogy design’ is somebody who does not think in pusely technical and mathematical terms He always understood his technical work in

a very broad context”, Liszlo Bészésményi and Stefan Podlipnig writes

in theit retrospective view on Kristen Nygaard’s work (BosOrményi and Podlipnig, 2004, p, 76) Kristen Nygaard managed himself to pre- pare for the multi-perspectival reflection between informatics and social sciences, between object-oriented programming and studies of leaning, which characterizes the COOL project

Holmevik, J R (1994) Compiling Simula: A Historical Study of

‘Technological Genesis IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, 16(4), 25-37

InterMedia (2001) Letter with application from InterMedia to the Research Conneil of Norvay, June 15, 2001

NRK (2002) Interien with Nornegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) December 26, 2002

Nygaard, K, (1986) Program Development as a Social Activity In

‘Proceedings of the IFIP 10th World Computer Congres, INFORMATION

Trang 23

PROCESSING 86, Dublin: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., 189-198

Nygaard, K (2001) Personal note, planning meeting May 18, 2001

NYT (2002) New York Times (nytimes.com), August 14, 2002,

www.ifiatio.n0/in_memoriam_kristen/

Owe, O., Krogdahl, S and Lycke, T (2004) A Biogenphy of Ole-Johan Dahl Owe, ©., Krogdahl, S and Lyche, T (Eds), From Object Orientation to Formal Methods, vol 2635, Lectuse Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 1-7,

Qvortmup, L (2003) The Hyperomplex: Society New York: Peter Lang Sjoberg, D., Sorisen, O and Holden, L, (2002) Keisten Nygaasd, Obituay — Retsieved December 20, 295, from http:/ /www.simula.no /departments /engineering/publications/Sjo berg.2002.1

Trang 24

Ejuk, A„ Karhasanovie, A and Kaasboll,J (Eds) 2006)

‘Comprcensv objetrintedlarang The lores perpetie Santa Rosa, California: Infosming Science Peess (pp 1 6)

Chapter 2

Contextualizing object-oriented learning

Annita Fjuk, Christian Holmboe, Cecilie F Jahreie and

Jens Bennedsen

Introduction

‘The esearch reported in this book lies at the intersection between several research areas and disciplines Issues conceming learning and teaching object-orientation arguably range from programming environments and tools, through teaching approaches, to epistemological and ontological issues regarding human development As such, the problem area of learning and teaching object-orientation is complex and inherently interdisciplinary

‘The primary frame of seference is the object-oriented paradigm of ad: dressing computerized problem areas (e.g Madsen et al, 1993) When concerned with learning and teaching the basic concepts and underlying, philosophy of this paradigm, the research has its principal area of interests within the field of Computer Science Education (CSE) In this community of educators and researchers, the most important aims are

to study the teaching of computer science subjects through developing, implementing and evaluating computing programs and programming tools, curricula and courses, as well as syllabi and learning resources

(such as e.g: text books),

However, the research reported in Part II of this volume is based on the view that the process of leaning object-orientation is influenced by

a number of interconnected aspects (eg, Fjuk and Disckinck Holmfeld, 1997; Fjuk and Ludvigsen, 2001; Wasson and Ludvigsen, 2003):

* The specific characteristics of the particular subject matter (eg, object-orientation for novices),

i

Trang 25

‘the learning objective and expected outcome of the learning activity (eg undesstanding basic OO concepts, making Java code, per- forming better work),

the pedagogical approach (eg project-based leaming, problem- based learning),

« — the teaching techniques (e.g objects-first approaches, imperative- first approaches),

* who the learners ace (e.g childsen, youths, adults),

‘* a number of learning resources in terms of the functionalities of progeamming and modeling tools (eg, Karel J, Blue], JBuildes), content of textbooks, and the information and communication technologies (ICTS) used

cause of the interwoven nature of these aspects, it is sometime diff- cult to identify which of them are most critical for learning By using such a holistic interpretation of a learning situation, the unit of analysis goes beyond an exclusive focus on eg., tools or teaching approaches Rather, the focus is on what constellation of aspects are critical with respect to the learning acti such, Addressing questions about teaching through research focused on learners’ activity, the book provides valuable insights for teachers and training consultants of object- oriented programming and modeling This particular and fundamental way of addressing learning is found in many studies within the CSCL (Computer Support for Collaborative Learning) community

In what follows, we will fiest provide a brief overview of the CSE field and then present work and theories of learning that are increasingly positioned within CSCL

Computer Science Education

While computer science itself is a young research discipline, research in CSE is even younger and less established Even so, a large body of work has been published on topics related to CSE in different forms and places over the past three decades Further discussion of the history and scope of CSE as a research discipline can be found in Dé- tienne (2002), Finchee and Petre (2004), and Robins et al (2003) Most

of the work can be placed within one of two main categories:

2

Trang 26

Contesualicing jt Orintd Learning

‘These categories will be presented briefly below

Cognitive psychology and programming expertise

The first category of sesearch addressing issues relevant to CSE,

‘emenged within the area of cognitive psychology Within this paradigm, learning “becomes the process by which the problem solver acquises a proper representation on a problem space Instruction, then, consists oF activities designed to facilitate the acquisition of such representation by the learner” (Koschmann, 1996a, p 7) and the redemption of missing,

or incorrect knowledge The sole of technology in this view of learning

is generally that it supports instruction by, for example, posing problems and by providing feedback to the learner From the perspective of instruction in introductory progeamming courses, topics such as knowl edge representation, problem solving, working memory and the like constitute the major interests (Robins et al, 2003)

of describing the characteristics of experts in domains such as ches mathematical problem solving, and to an increasing extent, computer programming The book Pycholngy of Computer Pmgramming by Weinberg (1971) is considered by many to be the first major contribution to rec- ognize this field and to attempt to establish it as a research discipline of its own, «A later substantial contribution was made by Brooks (197), in which a psychologically based theory of progtamming behaviour is outlined, From the perspective of cognitive psychology, Brooks uses theories of long and short-term memory as a basis for analysing expert progeammer behaviouc into understanding, method finding and coding, Brooks’ work represents one of several noteworthy exceptions to the unfortunate pattern of a lick of, or misapplication of, theoretical feameworks within CSE research (Détienne, 2002; Fjuk et al,, 2004),

Ta the 1980s, substantial contributions were made to the study of progeamming expertise Some of the main findings from these studies are presented in Hoc et al (1990) An overall pattern for expert behaviour,

as documented in these studies, is the ability to handle information at

1

Trang 27

different levels in parallel (Petre, 1990) Détienne (2002) emphasises that designers “use knowledge from at least two different domains, the application (or problem) domain and the computing domain, between which they establish a mapping” (p 22) This notion has also been emphasised by others (eg du Boulay, 1989; Holmboe and Knain, 2005) and it agrees with parallel insights in science education, where being, able to express meaning across different semiotic systems is seen as essential “in learning science and learning how to think and act scien- tifically” (Wallace et al, 2004, p 43) In accordance with previous findings (eg Visser and Hoc, 1990; Détienne, 2002) furthermore describes the seemingly unsteuctused behaviour of experts as opportunistic design, with emphasis on the multidimensional nature of progeam design A further characteristic of experts is the application of progeamming plans (Soloway, 1985) or schemas (Détienne, 1990) in the problem-solving process of program design Plans have been defined as

“generic program fragments that represent stereotypic action sequences

in programming” (Soloway and Ehelich, 1984, p 595) \ brief overview

of studies describing the behaviour of expert programmers and designers can be found in Robins et al (2003)

Comprehension of object-oriented systems is an area addressed by researchers in both software engineering and psychology of progeamming communities, A number of studies have been conducted (Detience, 1997) that concesn an individual subject’s understanding of

“what a program does and how it does it in order to make functional modifications and extensions to a progtam without introducing errors” (Corritore and Wiedenbeck, 2001) Most of the research in this field is focused on programming schemas (eg Soloway and Ehrlich, 1984), This latter issue is closely related to Davies’ (1993) suggestions on going beyond attempts to simply characterize the strategies employed by different kinds of progeammers, and focusing on aly these strategies emerge

1

Trang 28

used the theories of expertise, as well as the alleged naturalness of object-osientation, as the foundation for discussing the appropsiateness of teaching object-oriented design and programming in introductory courses (¢.g Tegaeden and Sheetz, 2001; Détienne, 2002; Cooper et al, 2003; Holmboe, 2004)

Other topics that have been investigated extensively include the design

of graphical and automated programming environments for novices (Green and Petre, 1996; Guzdial, 2004), algorithm visualizations (e.g Navarro-Prieto and Cafias, 2001; Petre and Blackwell, 1999; Stasko et

al, 1998), and data modelling and system design (eg, Batra and Antony, 1994; McCracken, 2004; Holmboe, 2005b)

Practitioners’ and educators’ experiences

A second main strand of contributions to the problem area comes from the community of computer science educators and practitioners Ac demics worldwide have struggled with similar challenges, teying, to help their students to come to grips with the apparently difficult and complex activity of object-oriented progeamming, This struggle has ge ated a laege body of practitioners’ reports and a community for the sharing of experiences and helpful suggestions An important forum for these publications has been the annual North American-based conferences of the ACM special interest group for computer science education (SIGCSE) and the equivalent European conference on Innovation and Technology in CSE (ITICSE), also hosted by the ACM, as well as local conferences such as Koli Calling in Finland and Java and the Taternet in the Computing Curriculum in England In addition, there is

a long tradition of addressing challenges in teaching object-oriented progeamming in the workshop series in Object-oriented Teaching and Learning at the annual conferences OOPSLA (Object-Oriented Pro- gramming, Systems, Languages, and Applications) and ECOOP (Euro- pean Conference on Object-Oriented Progeamming) Admittedly, these conferences are gradually shifting towards a firmer emphasis on proper scientific research work; something that is applauded by many, but that has also generated some scepticism among practitioners who are afraid

of losing their valuable forum for the informal exchange of thoughts

HH

Trang 29

describe, “Patterns are designed to capture best practice in a specific domain Pedagogical patterns try to capture expert knowledge of the practice of teaching and learning, The intent is to capture the essence of the practice in a compact form that can be easily communicated to those who need the knowledge However, the project has never had the same impact on the teaching community that design patterns have had on the programming community One reason for this may be a lack

of explicit teaching values

in essence, claims that teachers should teach what they believe to be most important first The two terms are not strictly defined; as Lewis (2000) notices “No matter what your definition of objects first is, itis likely to he different fom the person nest to you.” (p 247)

We will not discuss the implications of one or the othe

but will provide a short introduction, so that the reader is

these terms and can understand thei place within CSE,

The imperativefirst approach

In computer science, imperative programming describes computation

in terms of a program state and statements that change the program state Imperative programs consist of a sequence of commands for the computer to perform ‘The hardwate implementation of almost all computers is imperative; nearly all computer hardware is designed to execute machine code, which is native to the computer, written in the imperative style, An imperative-first approach on teaching focuses on this by teaching the students to structure theie programs according to the flow of the program, thus making abstractions over statements (using, eg., procedures or functions)

1

Trang 30

Contesualicing jt Orintd Learning With an imperitive-first approach the progression of the course is normally defined by the imperative parts of the progeamming language

‘The first part of the course is devoted to the discussion of algorithms and progcamming statements used to express algorithms, ie assign- ment, iteration (for, while and do statement) and selection (if statements) Even if an object-oriented progcamming language like Java

is used, the students mainly see static methods, one way of using Java as

an imperative programming language

‘The objectssfrst approach

An object-oriented program is seen as communicating objects Accord- ing to Kristen Nygaard, an object-oriented program is defined as follows: A program execution is regarded as a physical model, simulating the behaviour of either a real or imaginary part of the world (eg Madsen et al, 1993) Therefore, many CSE teachers favour the notion that students who are being introduced to an object-oriented language should learn theory about classes and objects before learning the details

of code The argument is that an understanding of object-oriented progeamming should be established before semantics is approached in the couse

With an objects-first approach to programming, objects and classes are taught in the beginning of the course Classes ase taught as building blocks of a system, and not just (as the imperative-first approach) as containers for static methods The imperative aspects of the programming language are taught with a focus of implementing methods and only the necessary language elements are introduced,

Several tools have been designed to support the objects-first learning approach These tools support interactive learning and hide comple: and details that are present in more professional tools Some examples are Karel | (Bergin, 2000), Blue} (Kolling et al., 2003) and Greenfoot (Hensiksen and Kolling, 2004),

Computer Supported Collaborative Learning

‘The CSCI research Field has grown out of several traditions on ICT, learning and instruction (Dillenbourg et al, 1996; Koschmann, 1996b)

‘The differences between these traditions are found in their basic epistemological and ontological views on learning ‘They range jrom using behaviourist learning psinciples, known pasticulaely through the work

7

Trang 31

of, eg, Skinner (1968) through information processing theories (Simon, 1979) cognitive constructivist theories used in the well-known book Mindstorms of Simon Papert (1980) and collaborative Teaming, theories (g.Koschmann, 1996; Dillenbourg, 1999) Although studies on computer support for collaborative learning in the past traditions could be found, the studies in, e.g, cognitive psychology tended to focus on how individuals function in a geoup (Dillenbourg et al, 1996) The goal was

to establish whether, and under what circumstances, collaborative learning was more effective than learning on one’s own The context of social interaction was seen as a background for individual activity, rather than a focus of study in itself In contrast to the other traditions,

CSCL research has shifted so that the focus of analysis is the techno- logically-enhanced social interactions

al, 1989) and situated cognition (Lave and Wenger, 1991) Many of these approaches are motivated by aspects of the socio-cultural perspective on human development that has been developed on basis of the work of the Russian psychologist Lev S Vygotsky (1978; 1986) and his disciple A N Leontev (1978) Because of its particular Focus on artifacts and social interactions, the socio-cultural perspective is emerg-

in the CSCL field, but in other fields that study the cogai- tive aspects of individuals interacting with each other and/or with technology (sce eg, Kuutti, 1996; Nardi, 1996; Kaptelinin, 1996; Kapte- linen and Cole, 2002; Bertelsen and Godsk, 2004, Krange and Fjuk, 2004) Since ous basic view of research within CSCL is related to the

Irural perspective, we provide a brief introduction to its central

A socio-cultural perspective on human development

Learning theories and pedagogical approaches that are drawn from the work of Vygotsky, differentiate between infernal and external activities It

is emphasized that internal activities (such as reflection, thinking, interpretation and understanding), cannot be understood if they are analyzed separately from external activities (such as conversations, argumenta- tion and interpersonal reasoning e.g Amseth (2004) Knowledge is not is

Trang 32

Contesualicing jt Orintd Learning described in terms of mental models or individual understanding (a the case within the cognitive paradigm) In a socio-cultural perspectiv knowledge is understood as the ability of a community to perform social practices and the individual's ability to pasticipate in these culturally situated practices In this sense, individual learning can be seen as the appropriation, or transformation, of external activities into internal ones Knowledge is thus embedded in the social activities and actions performed, but is at the same time a product of this social activity The utterance becomes a knowledge product for others, to which they ca respond to by asking questions, rejecting or extending, It also becomes

a knowledge product for the individual subject who can consider her current understanding in externalized form, This actually refers to the saying “How do T know what I think until I hear what T say?” A prominent issue within the socio-cultural perspective is the emphasis on the role of artifacts in supporting and determining cognitive development

In the context of studying the learning of object-oriented progsamming, artifacts include physical or semi-physical objects like computers and software development tools such as Karel | and Blue] Furthermore, astifacts may also be mental or intellectual tools, such as human language or indeed scientific languages like the programming, languages C+# os Java

Obviously, a tool is a material object in which are crystallized methods and operations, and not actions or goals For example, a material object may be physically taken apart by means of various tools each of which determines the method of carrying, out the given action, (Leontev, 1978, p 65)

Actifacts, then, should be viewed as inseparable from every hu activity Artifacts are incorporated into human activity rather than cor sidered as ontologically equivalent to human activity (Nardi, 1996) Let

us consider the programming language Java for a moment: Java can be regarded as an artifact for operationalising an object-oriented approach

to program code It may serve as a means for thinking one’s way into this approach to programming, while at the same time it may provide a

1

Trang 33

language by which for communities of programmers may communicate Moreover, object-oriented programming languages may differ from,

eg procedural programming languages regarding fundamental principles, which entails that a comparable task will be performed completely differently by these two types of artifact Hence, the programming language Java is both an intellectual tool for problem solving, and at the same fime a communicative tool for collective representation and understanding Another example concerns the programming tools Blue} and Kaeel J These two tools have different qualities, facilitating and mediating different aspects of the object-oriented paradigm,

Related work

There is a growing amount of related work within computer science education that can be positioned within the CSCL banner Kolikant (2004) describes the challenge of creating learning environments as cultural encounters between the social practices of students, academics and computer science professionals Two studies have, in different ways, used student discourse as the focus for describing the cultural practices of the classroom and have thereby thrown light upon the conceptual understanding of the learners (Holmboe, 2005b; Levi and Lapidot, 2000) Louca et al (2003) investigated different progeamming, environments as modelling tools for collaborative science learning, and found different patteens of communication with the use of different environments Furthermore, Holmboe (20054) has used the socio- cultural perspective on human development to demonstrate how st dents in a collaborative learning environment tend to develop local scientific language games (Wittgenstein, 1958) inside a computer science classroom, Bennedsen et al (2005) shows how social interactions amongst students (under the teachers guidance) greatly influenced individual students’ knowledge of the differences between class di geams and object diagsams, as well as what tools enhanced these pro

Trang 34

account of various aspects of human cognition The focuses of research, ase, as such, selated 0 instsuctional competence and on the effects of the students’ learning outcome and a computer system’s performance,

Many studies in this book share the typical cognitive goal of exploring how and why learners think and act the way they do while planning and solving computerized problems A particular interest is in explosing the learners’ understanding of object-oriented concepts through insights into the prowsses by which they create object-oriented models and program codes and in learning the basic concepts Many studies enrich this

v with theoretical perspectives on leaming found within the socio- cultural tradition of human development Thus, the focus is on the meaning of various types of artifacts as well as on the effect that social interactions have on learning and human cognition

‘The primary focus of research is thus as follows: () how learning is reflected in discourse and in the negotiation of common understanding, (i) how cognitive processes interact with social factors in the leacning process and (ii) how ICTs and tools are actually used in these activities Furthermore, there is interest in understanding the learning proce: fom the viewpoint of the learners and how their undesstanding

pressed in their activities, The research presented in Part II of this vol- lume is in agreement with these fundamental perspectives ‘The main focus therein is to understand the situated and social practices of how the principles and practices of object-orientation are learned, from the learner's (and teacher's) viewpoint and experiences This involves context-sensitive methodological approaches where the actions of individual learners towards co-leatners, tutors, tasks and tools can be studied and explored This is approached through a number of laboratory experiments, design experiments and case studies,

Amseth, H C (2004) Discourse and artefacts in learning to argue Anabsing

‘the practical management of computer supported callaborative learning University of Oslo: Faculty of Education, PhD Thesis, No 32

Trang 35

Batra, D and Antony, S R (1994) Novice errors in conceptual database design Enzopean Journal of Information Systems, 3(1), 57-9 Bennedsen, J, Berge, O and Fjuk, A (2005) Examining social interaction patterns for online apprenticeship learning Object- oriented progeamming as the knowledge domain European Journal of Open and Distance Learning 2005 /

Bergin, J (2000) Introducing Objects with Karel | Robot Retrieved December 20, 2005, from

hp:/ /prog,vub.ac.be/~imichiel/ecoop2000/workshop/ace_papet shiml

Bertelsen, © W and Godsk, M (2004) WAW' an activity theory based tool for early website usability assessment, InfJournal Human Resources Development and Management, A(1), 3-93

Brooks, R (1977), Towards a theory of the cognitive processes in computer progeamming, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies,

9, 737-15

Cooper, S., Dann, W and Pausch, R (2003) Teaching Objects-fiest In Introductory Computer Science SIGCSE Buletin, 35(1), 191-195 Collins, A., Brown, J S and Newman (1989) Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics Resnick, L (Ed) Knowing, learning and instruction: essays in bonor of Robert Glaser Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Exlbaum, 453-494

Corsitore, C 1 and Wiedenbeck, S (2001) An exploratory study of progrim comprehension strategies of procedural and object- oriented progcammers International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54(0), 123

Davies S P (1993), Models and theories of progeamming strategy International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 39, 237-267

Détienne, F (1990) Expert Programming Knowledge: A Schema-based Approach Hoe, J-H., Green, T R G., Samurcay, R and Gilmore,

D J (Eds) Pachoingy of Programming, London: Academic Pres 205-223

Détienne, F (2002) Sofimare Design - Cognitire Aspects (P Bott, Trans.) London: Springer

Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M, Bltye, P, O'Malley, C (1996), The Evolution of Research on Collaborative Learning Reimann, P and

Trang 36

Contesualicing jt Orintd Learning Spada, H (Eds) Leaming in Humans and Machines: Towards an Interdisiplinary Learning Science Elsevier Science, 189-211

Dillenbourg, P (1999) What do you mean by collaborative learning? Dillenbousg, P Ed.) Collaborative larning: Cognitive and computational pproacles Amsterdam: Pergamon

du Boulay, B (1989) Some difficulties of learning to progeam Soloway, E- aad Spohrer, J (Eds) Studying the novice prgrannmer, Hillsdale, NX] Lawrence Exlbaum, 283-299

Eckstein, J., Manns, M L., Sharp, H and Sipos, M (2003) Teaching from Diferent Perspectives Bighth European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs, Irsee, Germany

Fincher, S and Petre, M (Eds) (2004) Computer Science Education Resear London: Taylor and Francis Group ple

Fjuk, A., Berge, O., Bennedsen, J and Caspersen, M, (2004), Learning Object-Orientation through ICT-mediated Apprenticeship Kinshuk, Looi, C-K, Sutinen, E., Sampson, D., Aedo, L,, Uden, L., Kabkonen, E (Eds) The 4ih IEEE International Conference on Adranced Leaming Techroleges, August 30 — September 1, Finland Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society, 380-384

A and Dinckinck-Holmfeld, L, (1997) Acticulation of Actions in istributed Collaborative Leaening Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 9(2), 3-24

Fjuk, A and Ludvigsen, S (2001) ‘The Complexity of Distributed Collaborative Learning: Unit of Analysis, Proceedings of First Enrapean conference on CSCL, 2001, Maasteicht, The Netherlands

Green, T R G and Petre, M (1996) Usability analysis of visual progeamming enviconments: a ‘cognitive dimensions’ framework Journal of Visnal Languages and Computing, 7, 131-174

Guadial, M (2004) Programming Environments for Novices S Finches, S and Petre, M (Eds) Computer Science Education Revere London: Taylor and Francis Group ple., 12

Henriksen, P and Köling, M (2004) Greenfoot: Combining Object Visualisation with Interaction, Companion to the 19th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Objectoriented programming systems, languages, and applications, ACM, 73-8

Hoc, J-M., Green, T R G., Samureay, R and Gilmore, D J (Eds), (1990) Ppclolug sf Programming, London: Academic Press,

Holmboe, C 2004) A Wittgensteinian? Approach to the Learning of

00 modelling, Computer Science Education, 14(4), 275 ~294

Trang 37

Holmboe, C (20054) Characterising individual and social concept development in collaborative computer science classcooms Journal

of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 24(1), 89-115,

Holmboe, C (2005b) Conceptualisation and Labelling as Linguistic Challenges for Students of Data Modelling, Computer Science Edducation, 15(2), 143 - 161

Holmboe, C and Knain, E (2005) A semiotic framework for learning, UML class diageams as technical discourse Accepted for publication in Systems, Signs and Actions

Kaptelinin, V, (1996) Computer-Mediated Activity: Punctional Organs

in Social and Developmental Contexts Naedi, B A (Ed): Context and Consciousness Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction, Cambridge‘The MIT Press, Cambridge, 45~68

Kaptelinin, V and Cole, M (2002) Individual and collective activities

in educational computer game playing Koschmann, T., Hall, R., Miyake, N (Eds) CSCL 2 Canying Formand the Conversation, NV Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, 303-316,

Kolikant, Y BD (2004) Leamning Concurrency as an Entry Point to the Community of CS Practitioners Joumal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 23(1), 21-46

Koschmann, T (1996a) Paradigm Shifts and Instructional ‘Technology

An Introduction Koschmana, T (Ed.) CSCL: Theory and practice of

an emerging paradigm, Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Exlbaum Associates, Publishers, 1~23

Koschmann, ‘T (1996b) CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm, Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Krange I and Fjuk, A (2004) Design and use of a networked 3D- learning environment: the situated conditions of awareness information, Int Journ! Human Resources Development and Management, 4(1), 5-21

Kuutti, K (1996) Activity Theory as a Potential Framework for Human-Computer Interaction Research Nardi, B A (Ed): Context and Consciousness Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction, Cambridge‘The MIT Press, 17-4

Kolling, M., Quig, B., Patterson, A and Rosenberg, J (2003) The Blue} System and its Pedagogy Computer Science Education, 13(4), 249-268 Lave, | and Wenger, E (1991) Situated kamning, Legitimate peripheral panteipation Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Leontev, A N (1978) Actcity, Consciousness, and Personality Englewood Clits, Prentice-Hall

Trang 38

Contesualicing jt Orintd Learning Lewis, | (2000) Myths about object-orientation and its pedagogy ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 32(1), 245-249

Louca, Li Druin, A3 Hammer, D3 Dreher, D (2003) Students’ collaborative use of computer-based programming tools in science Wasson, B., Ludvigsen, S., Hoppe, U (Eds) Designing for Change, Netherlands:Kluwer Academic Publishers, 109-118,

Levi, D and Lapidot, ‘T (2000) Recussively Speaking: Analyzing Students! Discourse of Recussive Phenomena, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 32(1), 315-319

Madsen, O L., Moller-Pedersen, B and Nygard, K, (1993) Objec- Oriented Programming in the BETA Programming Language New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co

MeCracken, W M 2004) Research on Learning to Design Software Fincher, S and Petre, M (Eds) Computer Science Education Research, London: Taylor and Francis Group ple., 155174

Navarto-Prieto, R and Cafias, J J (2001), Ace visual programming, languages better? The role of imagery in progeam comprehension International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54(6), 799-829,

Nardi, B A (1996) Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction Nardi, B.A (Ed): Context and Consciousness Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction, Camb sidge:The MIT Press, 7-16

Petre, M (1990) Expert Programmers and Programming Languages, Hoc, J-M, Green, T R G., Samurcay, R and Gilmore, D | (Eds), Ppclolop of Programming London: Academic Press, 103-116, Petre, M and Blackwell, A F (1999) Mental imagery in progeam design and visual programming International Journal of Human- Computer Studies, 51, 7~30

Robins, A., Rountree, J and Rountree, N (2003) Learning and

“Teaching Programming: A Review and Discussion Computer Science Education, 132), 137-172

Salomon, G (1992) What Does the Design of Effective CSCL Requice and How Do We Study Its Effects? SIGCUE Outiok, 21(3), ACM, 62-68

Seardamalia, M and Bereiter, C (1994) Computer support for knowledge-building communities Journal of the Learning Sciences, 33), 265-283

Shoval, P, and Shiran, S, (1997) Entity-rclationship and object-oriented data modeling - An experimental comparison of design quality Data and Knowledge Engineering, 21(3), 297-315

Trang 39

Simon, H (1979) Information processing models of cognition Anmual Review

Soloway, E, and Ehdlich, K (1984) Empirical Studies of Progeamming Knowledge IEEE Transactions on Software Engeneering, 10(), 595-6009,

Sorensen, E (2000) Intesaktion Og Lacing ¡ Vietuelle Rum Heilesen,

S (Ed.) At Undervise Med IKT Sam fundslitteratur, 2000, 235~256 Stasko, |-, Domingue, J., Brown, M and Price, B (Eds) (1998) Soffnare Visualisation: Programming as a Multimedia Experience Cambridge: The MIT Press

'Tegarden, D, P and Sheetz, S D (2001) Cognitive activities in OO development International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54(6), 719-798,

Visser, W and Hoc, JM (1990) Expest Softwase Design Strategies Hoc, J-M., Green, T R G., Samurcay, Rand Gilmore, D J (Eds) Ppychology of Prgramming, London: Academic Press, 235-250 Vygotsky, L S (1978) Mind én Society Cambridge: Harvard University Pres

Vygotsky, L- S (1986) Thonght and Language The MIT Press

Wallace, C S., Hand, B and Prain, V (2004) Writing and Learning in the Science Classroom Dortrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers

Wasson, B, and Ludvigsen, S (2003) Designing Jor Knowkdge Building ITU Report Series, University of Oslo

Weinberg, G (197) Ppcbsimg of Computer Programming, Silver Anniversary Edition

Wiedenbeck, S and Ramalingam, V (1999) Novice compechension of small progeams written in the procedural and object-oriented styles International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 51, 71-81,

Wittgenstein, L (1958) Philosophical Investigations (Anscombe, G.E.M.,Prans, 2nd ed) Oxford: Basil Blackwell

Trang 40

, A, Katahasamovig, A and Kaasboll, J (Eds) (2006)

Comprcensve bjectarintd learning The lane's perpeti Santa Rosa, Calfounia: Informing Science Pees (pp 27-47)

Chapter 3

Children’s understanding of object-

orientation

Roar Granerud, Jens Kaasball, Richard Borge, Christian

Holmboe and Ole Smardal

Abstract Previous studies have shown that adults can learn object-oriented programming through an objets-fst approach, The experiment reported in this paper demonstrates the feasibility of teaching objet-fist ta 14 year olds, The software ton! sed for teaching, Lajas, defines the clases to be used, and objects of these clases ave physical counterparts in the Lego Robolab components that execnte the chit dren's programs, Lejos required prngramming with exceptions, which was bidden by

«a shell that was constructed forthe experiment A procedural eraphic programming package, Mindstorms, alo to be used with Rabolab, bad flans in interface design

‘and the mechanisms for structuring imperatives

Introduction

A previous survey of the literature concluded that novices prefer a pro- cedusal structure of their analysis of a domain, which corresponds to imperative programming rather than the object-oriented approach (Dé- tiene, 1997) \ recent study of learning object-oriented programming within a simple domain where the objects were visualized has shown that novice adults can learn to create subclasses, objects and call methods after one day of training, even though they could not distinguish between references and objects at that stage (Chapter 5) A study of mid-term mastery in a beginners’ OO procedural first course revealed that the students were able to use basic OO concepts and syntax, but also that they struggled with program design and tended to code directly without sketching models (Kaasboll et al., 2004), These studies indicate that adults are able to learn programming concepts in the sequence that they are taught The general message from previous research is that learness struggle with translating problems into the formal

z

Tiêu đề	Comprehensive Object Oriented Learning Doc
Trường học	Vietnam National University, Hanoi
Chuyên ngành	Object Oriented Programming
Thể loại	Thức các kiến thức lập trình Đối tượng
Thành phố	Hanoi

Định dạng
Số trang	239
Dung lượng	20,53 MB