Metaphor Is Not Mechanism: A Category Error in the Variable Debate
Fuente:
Zenodo
Salvato in:
| Autore principale: | |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Recurso digital |
| Lingua: | inglese |
| Pubblicazione: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1866901212636381184 |
|---|---|
| author | Sophia, Franny Philos |
| author_facet | Sophia, Franny Philos |
| contents | <p>The debate over whether a variable is best explained as a 'box' or a 'label' has<br>persisted in programming education for decades without resolution. We argue that the<br>debate is unresolvable in its current framing due to two conceptual confusions and<br>multiple uncontrolled methodological confounds. The first confusion is the failure to<br>specify language-semantic boundary conditions: the adequacy of any variable<br>metaphor depends on whether the target language uses value, reference, ownership,<br>or immutable semantics. The second confusion is a category error that conflates<br>metaphor (structural mapping) with causal model (mechanistic explanation of program<br>execution). Additionally, existing empirical work confounds metaphor effects with<br>instructional language, the mathematical interpretation of the = sign, and other<br>uncontrolled variables. We propose Six Diagnostic Questions as a framework for<br>evaluating and designing metaphor research in programming education, and apply<br>them retrospectively to the most influential existing study. The broader implication is a<br>reframing of variable pedagogy from 'which metaphor?' to 'how do learners construct<br>causal models of variable behavior in their specific language?'</p> |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_18907987 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | eng |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | Metaphor Is Not Mechanism: A Category Error in the Variable Debate Sophia, Franny Philos programming education variable metaphor notional machine conceptual metaphor causal model misconceptions research methodology <p>The debate over whether a variable is best explained as a 'box' or a 'label' has<br>persisted in programming education for decades without resolution. We argue that the<br>debate is unresolvable in its current framing due to two conceptual confusions and<br>multiple uncontrolled methodological confounds. The first confusion is the failure to<br>specify language-semantic boundary conditions: the adequacy of any variable<br>metaphor depends on whether the target language uses value, reference, ownership,<br>or immutable semantics. The second confusion is a category error that conflates<br>metaphor (structural mapping) with causal model (mechanistic explanation of program<br>execution). Additionally, existing empirical work confounds metaphor effects with<br>instructional language, the mathematical interpretation of the = sign, and other<br>uncontrolled variables. We propose Six Diagnostic Questions as a framework for<br>evaluating and designing metaphor research in programming education, and apply<br>them retrospectively to the most influential existing study. The broader implication is a<br>reframing of variable pedagogy from 'which metaphor?' to 'how do learners construct<br>causal models of variable behavior in their specific language?'</p> |
| title | Metaphor Is Not Mechanism: A Category Error in the Variable Debate |
| topic | programming education variable metaphor notional machine conceptual metaphor causal model misconceptions research methodology |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18907987 |