Metonymy and reference-point errors in novice programming

References

• Anjaneyulu, K. S. R. (1994). Bug analysis of Pascal programs. SIGPLAN Notices, 29, 15–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bachle, M., & Kirchberg, P. (2007). Ruby on rails. IEEE Software, 24, 105–108.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonar, J., & Soloway, E. (1985). Preprogramming knowledge: A major source of misconceptions in novice programmers. Human–Computer Interaction, 1, 133–161.
   Google Scholar
• Clancy, M. (2004). Misconceptions and attitudes that interfere with learning to program. In S. Fincher & M. Petre (Eds.), Computer science education research (pp. 85–100). London: Taylor and Francis Group.
   Google Scholar
• Daly, C. (1999). Roboprof and an introductory computer programming course. SIGCSE Bulletin, 31, 155–158.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, J., & Rebelsky, S. A. (2007). Food-first computer science: Starting the first course right with PB &J. In SIGCSE ’07: Proceedings of the 38th SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 372–376). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 105–225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garner, S., Haden, P., & Robins, A. (2005). My program is correct but it doesn’t run: A preliminary investigation of novice programmers’ problems. Ace ’05. In Proceedings of the 7th australasian conference on computing education (pp. 173–180). Darlinghurst, Australia: Australian Computer Society Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Gibbs Jr., R. W. (1999). Speaking and thinking with metonymy. In K.-U. Panther, & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 61-76). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Goldberg, D. S., Grunwald, D., Lewis, C., Feld, J. A., & Hug, S. (2012). Engaging computer science in traditional education: The ECSITE project. In Proceedings of the 17th acm annual conference on innovation and technology in computer science education (pp. 351-356). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Guzdial, M. (2008). Education: Paving the way for computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 51, 25–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holland, S., Griffiths, R., & Woodman, M. (1997). Avoiding object misconceptions. SIGCSE Bulletin, 29, 131-134.
   Google Scholar
• Hristova, M., Misra, A., Rutter, M., & Mercuri, R. (2003). Identifying and correcting java programming errors for introductory computer science students. In SIGCSE ’03: Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 153-156). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75-86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Langacker, R. W. (1993). Reference-point constructions. Cognitive Linguistics, 4(1), 1–38.
   Google Scholar
• Lewandowski, G., & Morehead, A. (1998). Computer science through the eyes of dead monkeys: Learning styles and interaction in CS I. SIGCSE Bulletin, 30, 312–316.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, C. S. (2012). Metonymic errors in a web development course. In Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on information technology education (pp. 65–70). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, C. S., Perković, L., & Settle, A. (2010). File references, trees, and computational thinking. In Proceedings of the fifteenth annual conference on innovation and technology in computer science education (pp. 132–136). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, C. S., & Settle, A. (2011). When practice doesn’t make perfect: Effects of task goals on learning computing concepts. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 11, 22-1–22-16.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, L. A. (1981). Natural language programming: Styles, strategies, and contrasts. IBM Systems Journal, 20, 184–215.
   Google Scholar
• Noble, J., Biddle, R., & Tempero, E. (2002). Metaphor and metonymy in object-oriented design patterns. Australian Computer Science Communications, 24, 187–195.
   Google Scholar
• Panther, K.-U., & Radden, G. (1999). Introduction. In K.-U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 1–14). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Perković, L., Settle, A., Hwang, S., & Jones, J. (2010). A framework for computational thinking across the curriculum. In Proceedings of the fifteenth annual conference on innovation and technology in computer science education (pp. 123–127). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z. (1999). Towards a theory of metonymy. In K.-U. Panther, & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 17–60). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Robins, A., Rountree, J., & Rountree, N. (2003). Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion. Computer Science Education, 13, 137-172.
   Google Scholar
• Tew, A. E., & Guzdial, M. (2011). The FCS1: A language independent assessment of CS1 knowledge. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 111–116). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49, 33–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar