No abstract

In March 2004, SIGCSE members contributed to a mailing list discussion on the question of whether programming should be taught objects first or imperative first. We analyse that discussion, exploring how the CS community debates the issue and whether contributors' positions are supported by the research literature on novice programmers. We applied four distinct research methods to the discussion: cognitive science, rhetorical analysis in the critical tradition, phenomenography and biography. We identify the cognitive claims made in the email discussion and find there is not a consensus in the research literature as to whether the objects first approach or the imperative approach is harder to learn. From the rhetorical analysis, we find that the discussion was not so much a debate between OO-first versus imperativefirst, but instead was more for and against OO-first. Our phenomenographic analysis identified and categorized the underlying complexity of the discussion. We also applied a biographical method to explore the extent to which the participants' views are shaped by their own prior experience. The paper concludes with some reflections upon paradigms, and the manner in which the CS discipline community defines itself.

In March 2004, SIGCSE members contributed to a mailing list discussion on the question of whether programming should be taught objects first or imperative first. We analyse that discussion, exploring how the CS community debates the issue and whether contributors' positions are supported by the research literature on novice programmers. We applied four distinct research methods to the discussion: cognitive science, rhetorical analysis in the critical tradition, phenomenography and biography. We identify the cognitive claims made in the email discussion and find there is not a consensus in the research literature as to whether the objects first approach or the imperative approach is harder to learn. From the rhetorical analysis, we find that the discussion was not so much a debate between OO-first versus imperativefirst, but instead was more for and against OO-first. Our phenomenographic analysis identified and categorized the underlying complexity of the discussion. We also applied a biographical method to explore the extent to which the participants' views are shaped by their own prior experience. The paper concludes with some reflections upon paradigms, and the manner in which the CS discipline community defines itself.

No abstract

through applied research and development. It is designed specifically for people who want to do research in an industrial setting.The DPS program provides an intellectually stimulating learning environment in which emerging computing and IT can be discussed and researched in an open forum. Students and faculty are encouraged to share their experiences and ideas with everyone in the program.While a Ph.D. advances knowledge in the discipline of study and a professional doctorate advances the practice, in computing there can be a fuzzy distinction between the two concepts. Successful professional doctoral students will demonstrate how they have affected the practice as well as effected deeper and broader understanding of the practice through research. Our students regularly have the opportunity to put their learning into practice. This is particularly true because they hold senior positions and are able to effect change in their organizations. There is value added by practicing computing and studying at the same time.The DPS in Computing admitted the first class of 20 students in the fall of 1999. To qualify for admission, stu- THE DOCTOR OF Professional Studies (DPS) inComputing at Pace University provides computing and information technology (IT) professionals a unique opportunity to pursue a doctoral degree while continuing to work full time. It supports interdisciplinary study among computing areas and applied research in one or more of them, and thereby provides a background highly valued by industry. It is an innovative post-master's doctoral program structured to meet the needs of the practicing computing professional. The DPS in Computing, while advanced in content and rigorous in its demands, is distinguished from the Ph.D. by focusing upon the advancement of the practice of computing key insights With diverse professional backgrounds, students tend to think about research in an interdisciplinary manner, stimulating their ability to bring to light new problems that no single discipline would recognize, often leading to fundamentally new ways of thinking about problems.We start close to the frontier of computing knowledge and practice and look back to understand how we got there. Because of the diversity in academic and professional experience, every student's distance to the frontier is different, and we depend on the teaching-learning community to provide some normalization.The program creates a new class of scholarly professionals, who, acting as stewards of the computing discipline, are capable of critically evaluating new ideas and transforming and interacting with interdisciplinary professionals.