Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site harvard.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!whuxle!mit-eddie!genrad!wjh12!harvard!kevin
From: kevin@harvard.UUCP (Kevin Crowston)
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: Re: Object oriented languages
Message-ID: <268@harvard.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 12-Jun-84 14:24:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: harvard.268
Posted: Tue Jun 12 14:24:17 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 14-Jun-84 00:04:02 EDT
References: <1979@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab, Harvard
Lines: 20

Here at Harvard we tried teaching the introductory programming
course (AM110) in a higher level language: SCHEME.  (I was a
teaching assistant for the course.)  Unfortunately, the
implementation we had (which was written in T) was so slow and the machine
so crowded that most students spent about 50% (or more) of
their time waiting for the computer to do anything.  This year,
the course went back to a little assembly language, a lot of
C and some LISP, with better results.

I do not believe that the advantages of teaching SCHEME outweigh
the need for more resources or the fact that the other courses
here (and the jobs that the students want the experience for)
use more traditional languages (like C).  I think the couple
of weeks exposure the students now get is enough to at least
let them see that there are other ways of programming; the details
can wait for a higher level course.  I should probablly point out
that the opinions above are my own and in no way reflect the
opinions or policies of Harvard University or any of its faculty.

Kevin Crowston		harvard!kevin