Objectives and Object-Oriented Programming

Abstract

After decades of experience, the computer education community has settled upon a relatively standard way of teaching procedural programming. With the growing use of object-oriented languages, the question is whether new ways are required. Some in the community argue that object-oriented programming languages are an extension of the 3GL approach, and students should still be taught the 3GL way first, even if students are using an objectoriented language. On the other hand, the "objects early" proponents argue for radical change. As with most debates, the points raised by both sides contain implicit assumptions. Our real differences of opinion are at a more abstract level: our teaching objectives. This paper describes my experiences in trying to make teaching objectives more explicit, within the domain of object-oriented programming. First, I discuss PigWorld, a microworld for teaching programming that blends "objects-early" with a traditional emphasis on algorithms. Second, I describe my use of Bloom's taxonomy to make my assessment objectives more explicit. Finally, I look beyond introductory programming, to describe how an explicit acknowledgement of objectives clarifies the debate on whether the teaching of data structures needs to change if we teach "objects early".