Holistic approach to learning and teaching introductory object-oriented programming

Computer Science Education

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 103-127

  Thota, Neena ^a   Whitfield, Richard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SAINT JOSEPH   (Macao)

Author keywords

Action research; Constructive alignment; Object oriented programming; Variation theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959652725     PISSN: 08993408     EISSN: 17445175     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08993408.2010.486260     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Anderson, G.L., & Herr, K. (1999). The new paradigm wars: Is there room for rigorous practitioner knowledge in schools and universities? Educational Researcher, 28(5), 12-40.
2. Bednarik, R., Moreno, A., & Myller, N. (2006). Program visualization for programming education-Case of Jeliot 3. Association for Computing Machinery New Zealand Bulletin, 2. Retrieved March 6, 2007, from http://en.scientificcommons.org/16952695.
3. Ben-Ari, M. (1998). Constructivism in computer science education. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 30(1), 257-261.
4. Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347-364.
5. Biggs, J., & Collis, K.F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. New York, NY: Academic Press.
6. Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, D.Y.P. (2001). The revised two-factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 133-149.
7. Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does (3rd ed.). Maidenhead: SRHE & Open University Press.
8. Booth, S. (1997). On phenomenography, learning and teaching. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(2), 135-158.
9. Brabrand, C. (2007). Constructive alignment for teaching model-based design for concurrency. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Teaching Concurrency (TeaConc'2007) (pp. 1-17). Siedlce: Publishing House of University of Podlasie.
10. Bradley, C., & Boyle, T. (2004). The design, development, and use of multimedia learning objects. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13, 371-389. Retrieved from http://www.aace.org/pubs/jemh/
11. Bruce, C., McMahon, C., Buckingham, L., Hynd, J., Roggenkamp, M., & Stoodley, I. (2004). Ways of experiencing the act of learning to program: A phenomenographic study of introductory programming students at university. Journal of Information Technology Education, 3, 143-160.
12. Caspersen, M.E., & Bennedsen, J. (2007). Instructional design of a programming course: A learning theoretic approach. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Computing Education Research Workshop (ICER) (pp. 111-122). New York, NY: ACM Press.
13. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V.L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15. Eckerdal, A., & Berglund, A. (2005). What does it take to learn "programming thinking"? In R. Anderson, S.A. Fincher, & M. Guzdial (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2005 International Workshop on Computing Education Research (pp. 135-142). New York, NY: ACM Press.
16. Eckerdal, A., & Thuné, M. (2005). Novice Java programmers' conceptions of "object" and "class", and variation theory. In Proceedings of the 10th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE) (pp. 89-93). New York, NY: ACM Press
17. English, J. (2004). Automated assessment of GUI programs using JEWL. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 36(3), 137-141.
18. Felder, R., & Silverman, L. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education, 78(7), 674-681.
19. Fincher, S., Baker, B., Box, I., Cutts, Q., de Raadt, M., Haden, P., Tutty, J. (2005). Programmed to succeed?: A multi-national, multi-institutional study of introductory programming courses. Retrieved July 2, 2007, from Computing Laboratory, University of Kent Web site: http://www.cs.kent.ac.uk/pubs/2005/2157/content.pdf
20. Fraenkel, J.R., & Wallen, N.E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education (6 ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
21. Fuller, U., Johnson, C.G., Ahoniemi, T., Cukierman, D., Hernán-Losada, I., Jackova, J., Thompson, E. (2007). Developing a computer science-specific learning taxonomy. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 39(4), 152-170.
22. Fuller, U., & Keim, B. (2008). Assessing students' practice of professional values. In Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE) (pp. 88-92). New York, NY: ACM Press.
23. Gaines, B., & Shaw, M. (2005). RepGrid IV [Computer software]. Retrieved October 25, 2007, from http://repgrid.com/
24. Hadjerrouit, S. (1999). A constructivist approach to object-oriented design and programming. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 31(3), 171-174.
25. Hayes, A.F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(1), 77-89.
26. Honey, P. (1979). The repertory grid in action: How to use it to conduct an attitude survey. Industrial and Commercial Training, 11(11), 452-459.
27. Horstmann, C.S., & Pellegrin, A. (2009). Violet (Version 0.21.0) [Computer software]. Retrieved July 12, 2008, from http://alexdp.free.fr/violetumleditor
28. Jacobs, C. (2000). The evaluation of educational innovation. Evaluation, 6(3), 261-280.
29. Jankowicz, D. (2004). The easy guide to repertory grids. Chichester: Wiley.
30. Kelly, G.A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York, NY: Norton.
31. Kölling, M., Quig, B., Patterson, A., & Rosenberg, J. (2003). The BlueJ system and its pedagogy. Computer Science Education, 13(4), 249-268.
32. Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S., & Masia, B.B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook II: Affective domain. New York, NY: David McKay.
33. Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the effective use of educational technology (2nd ed.). London: Routledge Falmer Press.
34. Lister, R., Adams, E.S., Fitzgerald, S., Fone, W., Hamer, J., Lindholm, M., Thomas, L. (2004). A multi-national study of reading and tracing skills in novice programmers. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 36(4), 119-150.
35. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
36. Marton, F., Runesson, U., & Tsui, A. (2004). The space of learning. In F. Marton & A. Tsui (Eds.), Classroom discourse and the space of learning (pp. 3-40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
37. Marton, F., & Trigwell, K. (2000). Variatio est mater studiorum. Higher Education Research & Development, 19(3), 381-395.
38. Mayes, T., & de Freitas, S. (2004). Review of e-learning theories, frameworks and models: Stage 2 of the e-learning models desk study. Retrieved February 9, 2007, from JISC Web site: http://www.jisc.ac.uk
39. McCracken, M., Almstrum, V., Diaz, D., Guzdial, M., Hagan, D., Kolikant, Y.B.-D., Wilusz, T. (2001). A multi-national, multi-institutional study of assessment of programming skills of first-year CS students. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 33(4), 125-140.
40. McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2002). Action research: Principles and practice (2nd ed.). London: Routledge Falmer Press.
41. Miller, J. (2007). The holistic curriculum (2nd ed). Toronto: OISE Press.
42. Moritz, S.H., Wei, F., Parvez, S.M., & Blank, G.D. (2005). From objects-first to designfirst with multimedia and intelligent tutoring. In Proceedings of the 10th Annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE) (pp. 99-103). New York, NY: ACM Press.
43. Patterson, A., Kölling, M., & Rosenberg, J. (2003). Introducing unit testing with BlueJ. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 35(3), 11-15.
44. Ragonis, N., & Ben-Ari, M. (2005). A long-term investigation of the comprehension of OOP concepts by novices. Computer Science Education, 15(3), 203-221.
45. Ramsden, P. (2005). The context of learning in academic departments. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning (pp. 198-216). Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, Centre for Teaching, Learning and Assessment.
46. Robins, A., Rountree, J., & Rountree, N. (2003). Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion. Computer Science Education, 13(2), 137-172.
47. Rocco, T.S., Bliss, L.A., Gallagher, S., Perez-Prado, A., Alacaci, C., Dwyer, E.S., et al. (2003). The pragmatic and dialectical lenses: Two views of mixed methods use in education. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 595-615). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48. Rößling, G., & Kothe, A. (2009). Extending Moodle to better support computing education. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE) (pp. 146-150). New York, NY: ACM Press.
49. Rountree, N., Rountree, J., & Robins, A. (2002). Predictors of success and failure in a CS1 course. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 34(4), 121-124.
50. Runesson, U. (2006). What is it possible to learn? On variation as a necessary condition for learning. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 50(4), 397-410.
51. Sorva, J. (2007). Students' understandings of storing objects. In R. Lister & Simon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh Baltic Sea Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli Calling 2007), Koli, Finland (Vol. 88, pp. 127-135). Darlington: ACS.
52. Stamouli, I., & Huggard, M. (2006). Object oriented programming and program correctness: The students' perspective. In Proceedings of the Second International Computing Education Research Workshop (ICER) (pp. 109-118). New York, NY: ACM.
53. Suhonen, J., Thompson, E., Davies, J., & Kinshuk, K. (2007). Applications of variation theory in computing education. In R. Lister & Simon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh Baltic Sea Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli Calling 2007) (pp. 217-220). Darlington: ACS.
54. Tan, F.B., & Hunter, M.G. (2002). The repertory grid technique: A method for the study of cognition in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 26(1), 39-57.
55. Thompson, E. (2007). Holistic assessment criteria: Applying SOLO to programming projects. In S. Mann & Simon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth Australasian Computing Education Conference (ACE 2007) (Vol. 66, pp. 155-162). Darlington: ACS.
56. Thota, N., & Whitfield, R. (2009a). Constructive Alignment: How? In A. Pears & C. Schulte (Eds.), Ninth Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli Calling) (pp. 115-116). Koli, Finland.
57. Thota, N., & Whitfield, R. (2009b). Use of CALMS to enrich learning in introductory programming courses. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computers in Education, Hong Kong [CDROM].
58. Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (1991). Improving the quality of student learning: The influence of learning context and student approaches to learning on learning outcomes. Higher Education, 22(3), 251-266.
59. Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (1997). Towards an understanding of individual acts of teaching and learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(2), 241-252.
60. Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Ginns, P. (2005). Phenomenographic pedagogy and a revised Approaches to teaching inventory. Higher Education Research & Development, 24(4), 349-360.
61. Van Gorp, M.J., & Grissom, S. (2001). An empirical evaluation of using constructive classroom activities to teach introductory programming. Computer Science Education, 11(3), 247-260.
62. Whalley, J.L., & Robbins, P. (2007). Report on the fourth BRACELET workshop. Bulletin of Applied Computing and Information Technology, 5. Retrieved from http://www.naccq.ac.nz
63. Wiedenbeck, S. (2005). Factors affecting the success of non-majors in learning to program. In Proceedings of the First International Computing Education Research Workshop (ICER) (pp. 13-24). New York, NY: ACM Press.
64. Wulf, T. (2005). Constructivist approaches for teaching computer programming. In Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Information Technology Education (SIGITE) (pp 245-248). New York, NY: ACM Press.
65. Zuber-Skerritt, O. (1991). Eliciting personal constructs of research, teaching and/or professional development. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 4(4), 333-340.