Debating the OO debate: where is the problem?

Berglund, A; Lister, RF

Debating the OO debate: where is the problem?

Berglund, A Lister, RF

Permalink

Publisher:: Australian Computer Society
Publication Type:: Conference Proceeding
Citation:: Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology, Vol 68: Koli Calling Proceedings of the Seventh Baltic Sea Conference on Computing Education Research, 2008, pp. 171 - 174
Issue Date:: 2008-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download full textAdobe PDF (525.37 kB)

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Berglund, A	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Lister, RF https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5780-0445	en_US
dc.contributor.editor	Lister	en_US
dc.contributor.editor	R	en_US
dc.contributor.editor	Simon	en_US
dc.date	2007-11-15	en_US
dc.date.issued	2008-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology, Vol 68: Koli Calling Proceedings of the Seventh Baltic Sea Conference on Computing Education Research, 2008, pp. 171 - 174	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	1445-1336	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/10844
dc.description.abstract	Abstract: In this paper we discuss problems related to the teaching of object-oriented programming (OOP). We argue that more research on how the computer science teacher understands OOP would be beneficial. Our argument takes its point of departure in three sets of studies: (1) an ongoing study on how computer science teachers understand core concepts of OOP, (2) a study of how the teaching of OOP is discussed within the CS community, and (3) a set of studies that discuss the different ways in which CS teachers experience their teaching. This paper reports on an ongoing study of the different ways in which computing science teachers understand object- oriented programming, and what they mean when use the term objects first.. The phenomenographic research approach has been applied to the analysis of a discussion that occurred in the SIGCSE-members mailing list. Two understandings of objects first have been identified: (1) as an extension of imperative programming, and (2) as conceptually different from imperative programming. These two understandings are illustrated via the differing ways in which computing science teachers use the term polymorphism.	en_US
dc.publisher	Australian Computer Society	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology, Vol 68: Koli Calling Proceedings of the Seventh Baltic Sea Conference on Computing Education Research	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Baltic Sea Conference on Computing Education Research	en_US
dc.title	Debating the OO debate: where is the problem?	en_US
dc.type	Conference Proceeding
utslib.location	Australia	en_US
utslib.location.activity	Koli National Park, Finland	en_US
utslib.for	0803 Computer Software	en_US
dc.location.activity	Koli National Park, Finland	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology/School of Computer Science
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - HCTD - Human Centred Technology Design
utslib.copyright.status	open_access
pubs.consider-herdc	true	en_US
pubs.place-of-publication	Australia	en_US
pubs.start-date	2007-11-15	en_US

Abstract:

Abstract: In this paper we discuss problems related to the teaching of object-oriented programming (OOP). We argue that more research on how the computer science teacher understands OOP would be beneficial. Our argument takes its point of departure in three sets of studies: (1) an ongoing study on how computer science teachers understand core concepts of OOP, (2) a study of how the teaching of OOP is discussed within the CS community, and (3) a set of studies that discuss the different ways in which CS teachers experience their teaching. This paper reports on an ongoing study of the different ways in which computing science teachers understand object- oriented programming, and what they mean when use the term objects first.. The phenomenographic research approach has been applied to the analysis of a discussion that occurred in the SIGCSE-members mailing list. Two understandings of objects first have been identified: (1) as an extension of imperative programming, and (2) as conceptually different from imperative programming. These two understandings are illustrated via the differing ways in which computing science teachers use the term polymorphism.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/10844