Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
mt2012f:week5 [2012/09/24 10:39] Tim Korb |
mt2012f:week5 [2012/09/24 10:49] (current) |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
===== Objectives ===== | ===== Objectives ===== | ||
- | * Techniques for taking students the next step in object-oriented design and programming. | + | * Techniques for taking students the next step in object-oriented design and programming. (And further discussion about OOP first vs. procedural first.) |
===== Readings for Class Discussion ===== | ===== Readings for Class Discussion ===== | ||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Required Readings | Required Readings | ||
+ | * Burton, et al (2003). [[http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/782941.782993|Teaching Programming in the OOP Era]] | ||
* Holland, et al (1997). [[http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/268084.268132|Avoiding Object Misconceptions]] | * Holland, et al (1997). [[http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/268084.268132|Avoiding Object Misconceptions]] | ||
* Lieberman, et al (2011). [[http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1921607.1921611|Difficulties in Learning Inheritance and Polymorphism]] | * Lieberman, et al (2011). [[http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1921607.1921611|Difficulties in Learning Inheritance and Polymorphism]] | ||
Line 15: | Line 16: | ||
* [[http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/216922.216928|The top 10 reasons why OOP can't be taught in CS1]] | * [[http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/216922.216928|The top 10 reasons why OOP can't be taught in CS1]] | ||
- | * [[http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/782941.782993|Teaching programming in the OOP era]] | ||
* [[http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1709424.1709458|An Evaluation of Object Oriented Example Programs in Introductory Programming Textbooks]] | * [[http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1709424.1709458|An Evaluation of Object Oriented Example Programs in Introductory Programming Textbooks]] | ||