A Reader's Guide To Teaching Beginners To Code
A Reader's Guide To Teaching Beginners To Code
teaching beginners to
code
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Pg 3,
Chapter 1
Pg 4, Object-Oriented Vs Component-Oriented
Programming
Chapter 2
Pg, Programming languages
Chapter 3
Pg, Teaching Top-Down Vs Bottom-Up
Dear Readers, Introduction
Throuou
fledgeling, and starter. These words will aid in the search for articles and books relating to my
topic. A preconception that I may have on this topic is I have already learned java and some C++
two languages that are very similar just with different syntax and I felt that they were both quite
easy to learn. A way I plan to address this is to focus on research for all languages and try not to
let what I have learned in the past influence what I read about each language.
Chapter 1
Object-Oriented Vs Component-Oriented Programming
coder different paths depending on which one they are taught through. This chapter
will explore the similarities and differences of these types of programming as well
as the most well known programming languages which branch off of each. For this
beginner may become frustrated and find it challenging. He goes over how
although learning to code with an object oriented language like java or C++ is
difficult, in the long run the person learning to code will be better off when they go
to learn their next language. By learning through object oriented programming the
user will have already met with some the most difficult issues they will face. Not
only this but he asks the reader if OOP is truly the more prevalent than component-
Assessing the dominance of OOP, we have to watch out for proxies. The
extensive use of languages that support OOP proves nothing, because
languages are chosen for a myriad of reasons, not necessarily for their
suitability for OOP, nor for the suitability of OOP itself. Similarly, the use of
a CASE tool that supports OOP is another proxy; these tools might just be
convenient and effective for expressing the software design of a system,
whether OOP is being used or not. Furthermore, many practices associated
with OOP, such as decomposing software into modules and separating the
interface from the implementation, are not limited to OOP; they are simply
good software practice and have been supported by modern programming
languages and systems for years. (Mordechai, 32)
In the quote above Mordechai discusses why he believes that OOP is commonly
considered the most common. He describes how many of the languages that branch
off of OOP are supported because of good software practice instead of the
programmer themself. By doing this he opens the reader up to question OOP and to
listen to his arguments about the matter. He believes that programming languages
are chosen for a multitude of reasons and that one should not write some off just
Later on in this
article Mordechai
OOP may be reused by the user this means that one will not need to spend
countless hours rewriting the same code to get the same output just with different
objects. He also discusses the drawbacks in reusing code with OOP he explains
how when one encapsulates everything in their code it becomes nearly impossible
Vale, Tassio, and Crnkovic, Almeida and Santana, Neto and Paulo Mota and
.NET. It also discusses how these languages give the infrastructure to connect
binary parts seamlessly. Finally, the article describes how the main difference
between the component-oriented languages is the ease in which they allow the user
combining pre-existing and new components, the writers use the example of how
this is much like how automobiles are built from other components. Software
contain definitions of types that expose both behavior and data. The writers discuss
through the concepts of properties, methods, events, and attributes thus, allowing
With this being said some may argue that it functions much like OOP just without
objects to throw the program off. The writers believe that if a beginner is taught