I agree that it depends on what is the purpose of the course. It also depends on
available course time. In practice, the objects-first approach requires lots of
training time and pays off only in the long run.
For example: global variables are bad style, but it is hard to get students
difference between a global variable and an object field. I often see students
fields to pass the result of an operation (method) to another operation.
If the students are absolute beginners, algorithms take precedence over
and design. I would give priority to teaching array processing over the
between a local variable and an object field. Of the languages you mention, this
points to C.
Unless you have a specific reason for considering it, my advice is: forget C++
My 2 cents (FYI, I'm about to leave on holiday, so I won't be able to keep
contributing to the discussion, sorry)
Miguel P. Monteiro | cell phone +351 96 700 35 45
Departamento de Informatica | Phone +351 21 294 8536 ext. 10708
Faculdade Ciencias e Tecnol.| Fax: +351 21 294 8541
Universidade Nova de Lisboa | URL: http://ctp.di.fct.unl.pt/~mpm
2829-516 Caparica, PORTUGAL | Skype: miguel.p.monteiro
Em Seg, Abril 6, 2009 10:57 am, Jan Erik MostrÃ¶m escreveu:
> On 09-04-06 at 11.10, Bennett Kankuzi <bfkank...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Searching through the web I note that the issue on the choice of an
>>introductory programming language to students is quite debatable. What
>>is your take PPIGers on this issue? What can you recommend for my
> Personally I would consider what the purpose of the course is,
> what do you expect the kids to learn. My opinion is that it's
> the problem solving part that's important and that's what they
> should learn ... the programming language is just a specific
> notation for their solution.
> So assuming that it's problem solving part that is of importance
> then you only have to give them an easy way of writing down
> their solution ... which pretty much rule out all three of these
> languages :-D
> Frankly I have difficulties in deciding which is "the least bad choice".
> Jan Erik MostrÃ¶m, http://mostrom.eu