Object orientation in the literature and in education

References

1. Kernlehrplan für die Sekundarstufe II Gymnasium/Gesamtschule in Nordrhein-Westfalen: Informatik, 2014.Search in Google Scholar

2. ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Task Force on Computing Curricula. Computer Science Curricula 2013: Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in Computer Science, 2013.Search in Google Scholar

3. J. Adams and J. Frens. Object centered design for Java: Teaching OOD in CS-1. In Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 273–277, New York, 2003. ACM Press.10.1145/611892.611986Search in Google Scholar

4. D. J. Armstrong. The quarks of object-oriented development. COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, 49(2):123–128, 2006.10.1145/1113034.1113040Search in Google Scholar

5. Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Unterricht und Kultus. Lehrplan für das Gymnasium in Bayern: Informatik, 2004.Search in Google Scholar

6. J. Bennedsen, M. E. Caspersen, and M. Kölling. Reflections on the teaching of programming: Methods and implementations, volume 4821 of Lecture notes in computer science State-of-the-art survey. Springer, Berlin and New York, 2008.10.1007/978-3-540-77934-6Search in Google Scholar

7. M.-P. Berges. Object-Oriented Programming through the Lens of Computer Science Education. Dissertation, Technische Universität München, München, 2015.Search in Google Scholar

8. A. P. Black. Object-oriented programming: some history, and challenges for the next fifty years. Journal Information and Computation, 231:3–20, 2013.10.1016/j.ic.2013.08.002Search in Google Scholar

9. G. Blair. Object-oriented languages, systems and applications. Pitman, London, 1991.Search in Google Scholar

10. G. Booch, J. Rumbaugh, and I. Jacobson. The unified modeling language user guide. Addison-Wesley, Reading, 1999.Search in Google Scholar

11. T. Brinda, H. Puhlmann, and C. Schulte. Bridging ICT and CS: Educational Standards for Computer Science in Lower Secondary Education. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual SIGCSE Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, pages 288–292, New York, 2009. ACM Press.10.1145/1595496.1562965Search in Google Scholar

12. L. Cardelli and P. Wegner. On Understanding Types, Data Abstraction, and Polymorphism. ACM COMPUTING SURVEYS, 17(4):471–523, 1985.10.1145/6041.6042Search in Google Scholar

13. H. B. Christensen. Implications of perspective in teaching objects first and object design. In Proceedings of the 10th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, pages 94–98, New York, 2005. ACM Press.10.1145/1067445.1067474Search in Google Scholar

14. S. Cooper, W. Dann, and R. Pausch. Teaching objects-first in introductory computer science. In Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 191–195, New York, 2003. ACM Press.10.1145/611892.611966Search in Google Scholar

15. O.-J. Dahl and K. Nygaard. SIMULA: an ALGOL-based simulation language. COMMUNICATIONS OF THE ACM, 9(9):671–678, 1966.10.1145/365813.365819Search in Google Scholar

16. O.-J. Dahl and K. Nygaard. Class and subclass declarations. In J. N. Buxton, editor, Simulation Programming Languages, pages 158–174, Amsterdam, 1967.Search in Google Scholar

17. A. Decker. A tale of two paradigms. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 19(2):238–246, 2003.Search in Google Scholar

18. R. Decker and S. Hirshfield. The top 10 reasons why object-oriented programming can’t be taught in CS 1. In Proceedings of the 25th SIGCSE symposium on Computer science education, pages 51–55, New York, 1994. ACM Press.10.1145/191033.191054Search in Google Scholar

19. T. DeClue. Object-orientation and the principles of learning theory: a new look at problems and benefits. In Proceedings of the 27th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 232–236, New York, 1996. ACM Press.10.1145/236462.236546Search in Google Scholar

20. P. J. Deitel and H. M. Deitel. Java: How to program. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 9th edition, 2012.Search in Google Scholar

21. I. Diethelm. “Strictly models and objects first”: Unterrichtskonzept und -methodik für objektorientierte Modellierung im Informatikunterricht. Dissertationsschrift, Universität Kassel, Kassel, 2007.Search in Google Scholar

22. A. Eckerdal, R. McCartney, J. E. Moström, M. Ratcliffe, K. Sanders, and C. Zander. Putting threshold concepts into context in computer science education. In Proceedings of the 11th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, pages 103–107, New York, 2006. ACM Press.10.1145/1140124.1140154Search in Google Scholar

23. E. Frey, P. Hubwieser, and F. Winhard. Informatik 1: Objekte, Strukturen, Algorithmen. Klett, Stuttgart, 2004.Search in Google Scholar

24. D. Garcia, B. Harvey, and T. Barnes. The beauty and joy of computing. ACM Inroads, 6(4):71–79, 2015.10.1145/2835184Search in Google Scholar

25. Gesellschaft für Informatik (GI). Grundsätze und Standards für die Informatik in der Schule: Bildungsstandards Informatik für die Sekundarstufe I. LOGIN, 28(150/151), 2008.Search in Google Scholar

26. Gesellschaft für Informatik (GI). Bildungsstandards Informatik für die Sekundarstufe II. LOGIN, 36(183/184), 2016.Search in Google Scholar

27. B. Henderson-Sellers. A book of object-oriented knowledge – Object-oriented analysis, design, and implementation: a new approach to software engineering. Prentice Hall object-oriented series. Prentice Hall, New York, 1992.Search in Google Scholar

28. P. Hubwieser. Functions, objects and states: Teaching informatics in secondary schools. In R. Mittermeir, editor, Informatics Education – The Bridge between Using and Understanding Computers, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 104–116, Berlin, 2006. Springer.10.1007/11915355_10Search in Google Scholar

29. P. Hubwieser. Tabellenkalkulationssysteme, Datenbanken, volume 2 of Informatik. Klett, Stuttgart, 2007.Search in Google Scholar

30. P. Hubwieser. Algorithmen, objektorientierte Programmierung, Zustandsmodellierung, volume 3 of Informatik. Klett, Stuttgart, 2008.Search in Google Scholar

31. P. Hubwieser. Rekursive Datenstrukturen, Softwaretechnik, volume 4 of Informatik. Klett, Stuttgart, 2009.Search in Google Scholar

32. P. Hubwieser. Formale Sprachen, Kommunikation und Synchronisation von Prozessen, Funktionsweise eines Rechners, Grenzen der Berechenbarkeit, volume 5 of Informatik. Klett, Stuttgart, 2010.Search in Google Scholar

33. P. Hubwieser. Computer Science Education in Secondary Schools – The Introduction of a New Compulsory Subject. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 12(4):1–41, 2012.10.1145/2382564.2382568Search in Google Scholar

34. J. L. Knudsen and O. L. Madsen. Teaching Object-Oriented Programming Is More than Teaching Object-Oriented Programming Languages. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 21–40. Springer-Verlag, London, 1988.10.1007/3-540-45910-3_2Search in Google Scholar

35. M. Kölling, N. C. C. Brown, and A. Altadmri. Frame-Based Editing: Easing the Transition from Blocks to Text-Based Programming, 2015.10.1145/2818314.2818331Search in Google Scholar

36. M. Kölling and J. Rosenberg. An Object-Oriented Program Development Environment for the First Programming Course. In Proceedings of the 27th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 83–87, New York, 1996. ACM Press.10.1145/236462.236514Search in Google Scholar

37. J. Lewis. Myths about Object-Orientation and its Pedagogy. In Proceedings of the 31st SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 245–249, New York, 2000. ACM Press.10.1145/331795.331863Search in Google Scholar

38. B. Meyer. Reusability – The Case for Object-Oriented Design. IEEE SOFTWARE, 4(2):50–64, 1987.10.1109/MS.1987.230097Search in Google Scholar

39. B. Meyer. Applying ’design by contract’. Computer, 25(10):40–51, 1992.10.1109/2.161279Search in Google Scholar

40. B. Meyer. Object-oriented software construction. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2nd edition, 2009.Search in Google Scholar

41. A. Pears, S. Seidman, L. Malmi, L. Mannila, E. Adams, J. Bennedsen, M. Devlin, and J. Paterson. A survey of literature on the teaching of introductory programming. In Working group reports on ITiCSE on Innovation and technology in computer science education, Working Group Reports, pages 204–223, New York, 2007. ACM Press.10.1145/1345443.1345441Search in Google Scholar

42. K. Quibeldey-Cirkel. Das Objekt, Paradigma in der Informatik. Teubner, Stuttgart, 1994.10.1007/978-3-663-09545-3Search in Google Scholar

43. M. B. Rosson and S. R. Alpert. The cognitive consequences of object-oriented design. Human-Computer Interaction, 5(4):345–379, 1990.10.1207/s15327051hci0504_1Search in Google Scholar

44. M. Saeli, J. Perrenet, Wim M. G. Jochems, and B. Zwaneveld. Teaching programming in secondary school: A pedagogical content knowledge perspective. Informatics in Education, 10(1):73–88, 2011.10.15388/infedu.2011.06Search in Google Scholar

45. C. Schulte. Reflections on the Role of Programming in Primary and Secondary Computing Education. In Proceedings of the 8th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education, pages 17–24, New York, 2013. ACM.10.1145/2532748.2532754Search in Google Scholar

46. R. W. Sebesta, S. Mukherjee, and A. K. Bhattacharjee. Concepts of programming languages. Pearson, Boston, 10th edition, 2013.Search in Google Scholar

47. R. Sethi. Programming Languages: Concepts and Constructs. Addison-Wesley, Boston, 2nd edition, 2003.Search in Google Scholar

48. Ständige Kultuministerkonferenz. Einheitliche Prüfungsanforderungen Informatik, 2004.Search in Google Scholar

49. The CSTA Standards Task Force. CSTA K-12 Computer Science Standards.Search in Google Scholar

50. P. van Roy, J. Armstrong, M. Flatt, and B. Magnusson. The role of language paradigms in teaching programming. In Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, pages 269–270, New York, 2003. ACM Press.10.1145/611892.611908Search in Google Scholar

51. P. Wegner. Concepts and paradigms of object-oriented programming. SIGPLAN OOPS Messenger, 1(1):7–87, 1990.10.1145/382192.383004Search in Google Scholar

52. A. Wren. Relationships for object-oriented programming languages.Search in Google Scholar