Identifying difficulties in learning UML

Information Systems Management

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 43-51

  Siau, Keng ^a   Loo, Poi Peng ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONCEPT MAPPING; LEARNING DIFFICULTIES; LEARNING PROCESS; OBJECT-ORIENTED MODELING LANGUAGES; SEMANTIC INCONSISTENCIES;

SEMANTICS;

UNIFIED MODELING LANGUAGE;

EID: 33745650527     PISSN: 10580530     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1201/1078.10580530/46108.23.3.20060601/93706.5     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Anderson, J. R. (1976). Language, Memory and Thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
2. Anderson, J. R. (1989). Practice, working memory, and the ACT* theory of skill acquisition: A Comment on Carlson, Sullivan, and Schneider. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 527-530.
3. Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the Mind. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
4. Anderson, J. R. (1996). ACT: A simple theory of complex cognition.American Psychologist, 51, 355-365.
5. Booch, G. (1999). UML in Action, Communications of the ACM, 42(10), 26-28.
6. Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J., and Jacobson, I. (2005). The Unified Modeling Language User Guide, Second Edition, Addison Wesley.
7. Dobing, B., and Parsons, J. (2000). Understanding the Role of Use Cases in UML: A Review and Research Agenda, Journal of Database Management, 11(4), 28-36.
8. Dori, D. (2002). Why Significant UML Change is Unlikely, Communications of the ACM, 45(11), 82-84.
9. Duddy, K. (2002). UML2 Must Enable A Family of Languages, Communications of the ACM, 45(11), 73-75.
10. DuÈ, R.T. (1993). Object-oriented technology: The economics of a new paradigm. Information Systems Management. 10(3), 69ñ73.
11. Langley, P., and Simon, H.A. (1981). The central role of learning in cognition. In J. R.Anderson (Ed.) Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition (pp. 361-380). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12. Long, H. B. (1990). Understanding Adult Learners. In M. W. Galbraitb, Adult Learning Methods: A Guide for Effective Instruction. Malabar, Florida: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company.
13. Miller, G.A. (1956).The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Revieu: 63, 81-97.
14. Pennington, N., Lee,A.Y., and Rehder, B. (1995). Cognitive activities and levels of abstraction in procedural and object-oriented design. Human-Computer Interaction, 10, 171-226.
15. Price, R.,Tryfona, N., and Jensen, C. (2000). Extended Spatiotemporal UML: Motivations, Requirements, and Constructs, Journal of Database Management, 11(4), 14-27.
16. Selic, B., Ramackers, G., and Kobryn, C. (2002). Evolution, Not Revolution, Communications of the ACM, 45(11), 70-72
17. Shuell, T. J., and Lee, C. Z. (1976). Learning and Instruction. Monterey, California: Brooks/Cole.
18. Siau, K. (1999). Information Modeling and Engineering: A Psychological Perspective, Journal of Database Management, 10(4), 44-50.
19. Siau, K., and Cao, Q. (2001). Unified Modeling Language - A Complexity Analysis, Journal of Database Management, 12(1), 26-34.
20. Siau, K., and Lee, L. (2004). Are Use Case and Class Diagrams Complementary in Requirements Analysis? - An Experimental Study on Use Case and Class Diagrams in UML, Requirements Engineering, 9(4), 229-237.
21. Siau, K., and Loo, P. (2002). Difficulties in Learning UML: A Concept Mapping Analysis, Seventh CAiSE/IFIP8.1 International Workshop on Evaluation of Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design (EMMSAD'02), Toronto, Canada, 102-108.
22. Siau, K., Erickson, J., and Lee, L. (2005).Theoretical versus Practical Complexity: The Case of UML, Journal of Database Management, 16(3), 40-57.
23. Simons, A. J. H. (1999). Use cases considered harmful. Proc. 29th Conf.Tech. Object-Oriented Programming Language and System, (TOOLS-29 Europe), eds. R Mitchell,A C Wills, J Bosch and B Meyer (Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society), 194-203.
24. Simons A. J. H., and Graham, I. (1999). 30 Things That Go Wrong In Object Modelling With UML 1.3 Chap. 16. In: Kilov H, Rumpe B and Simmonds I (ed.) Precise Behavioral Specification of Businesses and Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
25. Surveyer,J. (1999/2000, Winter). Java and UML [Online] Available: http://www.devx.com/upload/free/features/javapro/1999/10mid99/js1399/js1399.asp
26. Trochim,W. (1989a).An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12(1), 1-16.
27. Trochim,W. (1989b). Concept mapping: Soft science or hard art? Evaluation and Program Planning, 12(1), 87-110.
28. Tyson, K., and Frank, W (2002). Be Clear, Clean, Concise, Communications of the ACM, 45(11), 79-81.
29. Whittle, J. (2000). Formal Approaches to Systems Analysis Using UML: An Overview,Journal of Database Management, 11(4), 4-13.