Journeys up the mountain: Different paths to learning object-oriented programming

Accounting, Management and Information Technologies

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 53-85

  Nelson, H James ^a   Irwin, Gretchen ^b   Monarchi, David E ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^c UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

Human factors; Learning; Object oriented languages; Qualitative methods; Training

Indexed keywords

EID: 84901191107     PISSN: 09598022     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0959-8022(96)00024-0     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Adelson, B. (1981). Problem solving and the development of abstract categories in programming languages. Memory and Cognition, 9, 422-433.
2. Adelson, B. & Soloway, E. (1985). The role of domain experience in software design. IEEE Transactions on So&we Engineering, II, 1351-1360.
3. Adler, P. A. & Adler, P. (1987). Membership roles in field research. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.
4. Andersen Consulting, I. (1991). Close-up; Brooklyn Union Gas (Technical Report 91.8454). Andersen Consulting.
5. Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6. Anderson, J. R. (1987). Skill acquisition: compilation of weak-method problem solutions. Psychological Review, 94, 192-210.
7. Anderson, J. R., Farell, R. & Sauers, R. (1984). Learning to program in LISP. Cognitive Science, 8, 87-129.
8. Anderson, J. R., Pirolli, P. & Farrell, R. (1988). Learning to program recursive functions. In M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser & M. J. Farr (Eds), The nature of expertise (pp. 153-183). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Asociates.
9. Carroll, J. M., Singer, J. A., Bellamy. R. K. E. & Alpert, S. R. (1990). A view matcher for learning Smalltalk. In J. C. Chew & J. Whiteside (Eds), Proceedings (f CHI '90: Conference on human factors in computing systems (Seattle, Washington, April l-5), pp. 431-437. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
10. Cohen, W. M. and Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152.
11. Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. (Eds) (1979). Quasi-experimentation: design and oncdy~is issrres for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.
12. Crowder, R. C. (1976). Principles of Learning und memo?. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Davies, S. P. (199 1). The role of notation and knowledge representation in the determination of programming strategy: a framework for integrating models of programming behavior. Cognitive Science, 15, 547-572.
14. Detienne, F. (1990). Difficulties in designing with an object-oriented language: an empirical study. In D. G. D. Diaper, G. Cockton & B. Shackel (Eds). INTERACT'90: Third IF/P Corzference on Humarl-Cornpurer Interaction. pp. 971-976. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
15. Durkin. H. E. (1937). Trial-and-error, gradual analysis. and sudden reorganization: an experimental study of problem solving. Archives of Psychology, 20, 5-85.
16. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Munngement Review, 14, 532-550.
17. Fowler. E J. & Mangione. T. W. (1990).Standardized survey interviweing; minimizing interview-related error: Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
18. Gallaugher, .I. M. & Ramanathan, S. C. (1996). Choosing a client/server architecture: a comparison of two-and three-tier systems. Information Systems Management. Spring. 7-13.
19. Gick, M. & Holyoak, K. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology 12, 306-355.
20. Gick, M. & Holyoak. K. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15. l-38.
21. Glaser. B. G. & Strauss. A. L. (1967).The discorvry of grounded rhron: sfrotr~~ie.s,~~o,-qucl/itcrril,ree .seurch. Hawthorne. NY: Aldine Publishing.
22. Guttman. M. K. & Matthews, J. (1992). Managing a large project: case study of a long-term project at NCR. Objetct Mogtr:irw, November-December, 75-8 1.
23. Kaplan. C. A. and Simon, H. A. (1990). In search of insight. Cogniti~ar P,~~c~ho/og?;2, 2, 374-419.
24. Kcane, M. T. (1988). Analogictrl problem .co/l?ng. Chichester. England: Ellis Horwood Limited.
25. Keane. M. T. (1990). Analogy, metaphor, and transfer. In K. J. Gilhooly, M. T. Keane, R. H. Logic & G. Erdos (Eds), Line.5 of thirlki,lg: rrflrcfiorls on the p.y~ho/og,v of thought (pp. 201-203). Chichester. England: Ellis Horwood, Limited.
26. LaLonde, W. R. & Pugh, J. (1990). Smalltalk as the first programming language: the Carleton Experience. Journal of Objrc~t-Orirrrted Progrummirlg. 3(7), 60-65.
27. Larson-Freeman, D. & Long. M. H. (I 99 I ). At1 iafrodrrctiotl fo .seumd longutrgr ocquivition rewtrrch. New York: Longman
28. Lee. D. M. & Allen, T. J. (1982). lntegratin g new technical staff: implications for acquiring new technology. Momrgemeut Scirwe. 2X, 1405-1420.
29. Leidncr, D. E. & Jarvenpaa. S. L. (1993). The information age confronts education: Case studies on the electronic classroom. fr!f~wmutio,l Sy.stern.r Research, 4, 24-54.
30. Liu, C., Goetze. S. & Glynn, B. (1992). What contributes to ~ucceasful object-oriented learning? In A. Paepcke (Ed.), OOPSLA '92 (pp. 77-86). Vancouver. British Columbia: ACM Press.
31. Manna, M. L. & Nelson. H. J. (1996). Retraining procedure-oriented developers: an issue of skill transfer. Journal OJ Ol?lpct-0rierItetl Programming, 9(7). 6-10.
32. Marshall. C. & Rossman, G. B. ( 1989). Designing qualitative r-esrcrrch. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
33. Milts, M. B. (1983). Qualitative data as an attractive nuisance: the problem of analysis. In J. V. Maanen (Edc), Qrrulitati~v methodology (pp. 1 17-l 33). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
34. Monarchi, D. E. & Puhr, G. 1. (1992). A research typology for object-oriented analysis and design. Communicarions of rhe ACM, 35(9), 35-47.
35. Nelson, H. J. (1992) How natural is the objecr paradigm.2 Unpublished master's thesis. University of Colorado.
36. Nielsen, J. & Richards, J. T. (1989). The experience of learning and using Smalltalk. IEEE Soff~are, May, 73-77.
37. Odlin, T. (1989). Cro.rs linguistic iuence in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38. Pennington, N. (1987). Stimulus structures and mental representations in expert comprehension of computer programs. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 295-341.
39. Puhr, G. I., Nelson, H. J. & Monarchi. D. E. (1995) Teaching object-oriented systems development: challenges and recommendations. Object-Oriented Systems, 2, 135-154.
40. Rogers, E. M. (1983). LXj$usion of innovations. New York: Free Press.
41. Rosson, M. B. & Alpert, S. R. (1990). The cognitive consequences of object-oriented design. Human-Computer Interaction, 5, 345-379.
42. Rosson, M. B. & Carroll, J. M. (1990). Climbing the Smalltalk mountain. SIGCHI Bulletin, 21(3), 76-79.
43. Rosson, M. B., Carroll, J. M. & Bellamy, R. K. E. (1991). Smalltalk scaffolding: a case study in minimalist instruction. In J. C. Chew & J. Whiteside (Eds) Proceedings of CHI'90: Conference OFI Human Facrors in Computing Sysrc,ms (Seattle, Washington, April l-5) pp. 423-429. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
44. Scholtz, J. & Wiedenbeck, S. (1990). Learning second and subsequent programming languages: a problem of transfer. International Jourml of Human-Computer Interaction, 2(l), 51-72.
45. Shafer, D. (1993). Smalltuk programming for kndo\vs. Rocklin. California: Prima.
46. Shaffir, W. B./ & Stebbins, R. A. (1991). Experiencing,fieldwork. an inside view ofqualitative research. Newbury Park: Sage.
47. Soloway, E. & Ehrlich, K. (1984). Empirical studies of programming knowledge. IEEE Transncrions on Sofhn.urc Engineering, 10, 595-609.
48. Spradley, J. P. (I 980). Participant observation. Forth Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanich College Publishers,
49. Veasey, I. (I 989). Toward a theory of computer program bugs: an empirical test. Irlternationnl Journnl Man-Machine Studies, 30, 23-46.
50. Vessey, I. & Conger. S. (1994). Requirements specification: learning object. process. and data methodologies. Communiccrfions of the ACM, 37(5), 102-I 13.
51. Wasserman, A. I. (1991). Object oriented thinking. Object Mngtrzirte, I(3), 10-13.
52. Wiedenbeck, S.. Fix, V. & Scholtz, J. (1993). Characteristics of the mental representations of novice and expert programmers: an empirical study. Imernntionol Journrrl of Mail-Muchine Studiev. jY. 793-812.