Relationship of early programming language to novice generated design

Abstract

What measurable effect do the language and paradigm used in early programming classes have on novice programmers' ability to do design? This work investigates the question by using data collected from 136 "first competency" students as part of a multi-national, multi-institutional study of students' approach to and attitudes toward design. Analysis of a number of surface characteristics of their designs found strikingly few differences between designs produced by students at schools that teach using objects-early, imperative-early, and functional-early paradigms. A similar lack of difference was found between students at C++-first and Java-first schools. While statistically significant differences are found for three characteristic comparisons across language and paradigm, these results seem to have little meaning for teaching given the complexity of the null hypotheses tested in those three cases. In particular, for the following design characteristics no statistically significant differences across language or paradigm of early instruction were found: attempt to address requirements, type of design produced, number of parts in design, recognition of ambiguity in design, and connectedness of design.

References

1. Astrachan, O. L., Bruce, K. B., Koffman, E. B., Kolling, M., Reges, S. Resolved: objects early has failed. In Proceedings of SIGCSE. St. Louis, MO. March, 2005. 451--452.
2. Blaha, K., Monge, A. E., Sanders, D., Simon, B., VanDeGrift, T. Do students recognize ambiguity in software design? A multi-national, multi-institutional report. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). 2005. 615--616.
3. Bruegge, B., Dutoit, A. Object-Oriented Software Engineering. Prentice Hall. 2000.
4. Bursic, K. M., Atman, C. J. Information gathering: a critical step for quality in the design process. Quality Management Journal 4 (4). 1997. 60--75.
5. Chen, T.-Y., Cooper, S., McCartney, R., Schwartzman, L. The (relative) importance of software design criteria. In Proceedings of ITiCSE. Monte da Caparica, Portugal. June, 2005. 34--38.
6. Fincher, S., Petre, M., Tenenberg, J., Blaha, K., Bouvier, D., Chen, T.-Y., Chinn, D., Cooper, S., Eckerdal, A., Johnson, H., McCartney, R., Monge, A., Mostrom, J. E., Powers, K., Ratcliffe, M., Robins, A., Sanders, D., Schwartzman, L., Simon, B., Stoker, C., Tew, A. E., VanDeGrift, T. A multi-national, multi-institutional study of student-generated software designs. In Proceedings of Kolin Kolistelut -- Koli Calling. 2004.
7. Fix, V., Wiedenbeck, S., Scholtz, J. Mental representations of programs by novices and experts. In Proceedings of Interchi '93. April, 1993. 74--79.
8. Hadjerrouit, S. Java as first programming language: a critical evaluation. SIGCSE Bulletin 30 (2). June 1998. 43--47.
9. Hamilton, J. A., Murtagh, J. L., Zolier, R. G. Programming language impacts on learning. Ada Letters. September, 2000. 12--19.
10. Jeffries, R., Turner, A. A., Polson, P. G., Atwood, M. E. The processes involved in designing software. In Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition. Erlbaum. Hillsdale, NJ. 1981. 255--283.
11. Lahtinen, E., Ala-Mutka, K., Jarvinen, H.-M. A study of the difficulties of novice programmers. In Proceedings of ITiCSE'05. June, 2005. 14--18.
12. McCracken, W. M., Almstrum, V., Diaz, D., Guzdial, M., Hagan, D., Kolikant, Y. B.-D., Laxer, C., Thomas, L., Utting, I., Wilusz, T. A multi-national, multi-institutional study of assessment of programming skills of first-year CS students. SIGCSE Bulletin 33(4), 2001. 125--140.
13. McCracken, M., Newstetter, W., Chastine, J. Misconceptions of designing: A descriptive study. In Proceedings of ITiCSE. Cracow, Poland. June, 1999. 48--51.
14. Or-bach, R., Lavy, I. Cognitive activities of abstraction in object orientation: an empirical study. SIGCSE Bulletin 36 (2). June, 2004. 82--86.
15. Tenenberg, J., Fincher, S., Blaha, K., Bouvier, D., Chen, T.-Y., Chinn, D., Cooper, S., Eckerdal, A., Johnson, H., McCartney, R., Monge, A., Mostrom, J. E., Petre, M., Powers, K., Ratcliffe, M., Robins, A., Sanders, D., Schwartzman, L., Simon, B., Stoker, C., Tew, A. E., VanDeGrift, T. Students Designing Software: A Multi-National, Multi-Institutional Study. In Informatics in Education, 4(1). 2005. 143--162.
16. Vandenberg, S., Wollowski, M. Introducing computer science using a breadth-first approach and functional programming. In Proceedings of SIGCSE. Austin, TX. March, 2000. 180--184.
17. Weisert, C. Learning to program: it starts with procedural. Information Disciplines, Inc. June, 1997.

Index Terms

• Social and professional topics

  • Professional topics

    • Computing education

      • Computing education programs

        • Computer science education

        • Information science education

• Software and its engineering

  • Software creation and management

    • Designing software