940 TEACHING THE METHOD $29.3 The initial notations taught to students,so important to their future vision,must always be simple and clear,to allow in-depth understanding of the basic concepts.Even Pascal,the traditional choice of computing science departments for introductory teaching, is preferable in this respect to a hybrid language since it provides a solid,consistent basis, from which students can later move to another solid,consistent approach.It is of course even better,as noted,if the basis can be solid,consistent and O-O. Some hybrid languages are industrially important,but they should be taught later, when students have mastered the basic concepts.This is not a new idea:when computing science departments adopted Pascal in the nineteen-seventies,they also included service courses to teach Fortran,Cobol or PL/I as requested by industry then.Similarly,a modern object-based curriculum may include a C++or Java service course to satisfy downstream requirements and enable the students to include the required buzzwords on their resumes. Students will understand C++and Java better anyway after having been taught the principles of object technology using a pure O-O language.Introductory courses,which shape a student's mind forever,must use the best technical approach. Some teachers are tempted to use C hybrids because of perceived industry pressures. But this is inappropriate for several reasons: Industry demands are notoriously volatile.A few years ago,ads were all for things like RPG and Cobol.In late 1996 they were all for Java,but in 1995 no one had heard of Java.What will they list in 2010 or 2020?We do not know,but we must endow our students with capabilities that will still be marketable then.For this we must emphasize long-term design skills and intellectual principles. Starting with these skills and principles does not exclude teaching specific approaches later.In fact it helps,as already noted.A student who has been taught O-O concepts in depth,using an appropriate notation,will be a better C++or Java programmer than one whose first encounter with programming involved fighting with the language. The historical precedent of Pascal around 1975 shows that computing science teachers can succeed with their own choices.At that time,no one in industry requested Pascal;in fact,almost no one in industry had heard of Pascal.Industry,if anything,would have requested one of the Three Tenors of the moment:Fortran, Cobol and PL/I.The computing scientists chose to go with the best technical solution,corresponding to the state of the art in programming methodology (structured programming).The result proved them right,as they were able to teach students the abstract concepts and techniques of software development while preparing them for learning new languages and tools. 29.3 OTHER COURSES Beyond introductory courses,the object-oriented method can play a role at many stages of a software curriculum.Let us review the corresponding uses.940 TEACHING THE METHOD §29.3 The initial notations taught to students, so important to their future vision, must always be simple and clear, to allow in-depth understanding of the basic concepts. Even Pascal, the traditional choice of computing science departments for introductory teaching, is preferable in this respect to a hybrid language since it provides a solid, consistent basis, from which students can later move to another solid, consistent approach. It is of course even better, as noted, if the basis can be solid, consistent and O-O. Some hybrid languages are industrially important; but they should be taught later, when students have mastered the basic concepts. This is not a new idea: when computing science departments adopted Pascal in the nineteen-seventies, they also included service courses to teach Fortran, Cobol or PL/I as requested by industry then. Similarly, a modern object-based curriculum may include a C++ or Java service course to satisfy downstream requirements and enable the students to include the required buzzwords on their résumés. Students will understand C++ and Java better anyway after having been taught the principles of object technology using a pure O-O language. Introductory courses, which shape a student’s mind forever, must use the best technical approach. Some teachers are tempted to use C hybrids because of perceived industry pressures. But this is inappropriate for several reasons: • Industry demands are notoriously volatile. A few years ago, ads were all for things like RPG and Cobol. In late 1996 they were all for Java, but in 1995 no one had heard of Java. What will they list in 2010 or 2020? We do not know, but we must endow our students with capabilities that will still be marketable then. For this we must emphasize long-term design skills and intellectual principles. • Starting with these skills and principles does not exclude teaching specific approaches later. In fact it helps, as already noted. A student who has been taught O-O concepts in depth, using an appropriate notation, will be a better C++ or Java programmer than one whose first encounter with programming involved fighting with the language. • The historical precedent of Pascal around 1975 shows that computing science teachers can succeed with their own choices. At that time, no one in industry requested Pascal; in fact, almost no one in industry had heard of Pascal. Industry, if anything, would have requested one of the Three Tenors of the moment: Fortran, Cobol and PL/I. The computing scientists chose to go with the best technical solution, corresponding to the state of the art in programming methodology (structured programming). The result proved them right, as they were able to teach students the abstract concepts and techniques of software development while preparing them for learning new languages and tools. 29.3 OTHER COURSES Beyond introductory courses, the object-oriented method can play a role at many stages of a software curriculum. Let us review the corresponding uses