
| Performance Capability                    | CE   | CS   | IS   | IT   | SE   |
|-------------------------------------------|------|------|------|------|------|
| Prove theoretical results                 | 3    | 5    | 1    | 0    | 3    |
| Develop solutions to programming problems | 3    | 5    | 1    | 1    | 3    |
| Develop proof of concepts programs        | 3    | 5    | 3    | 1    | 3    |
| Determine if faster solution possible     | 3    | 5    | 1    | 1    | 3    |

aligned with a *funnel* strategy ([1]) which is probably more adequate than a *filter* strategy in case of existing different student orientations toward computing disciplines or when an orientation is not yet mature enough at this level5.

Table 1: Expected Performance Capabilities on Algorithms according to Discipline (Scale: 0=no expectation-5=highest expectation)

## 4.1.2 Multiple Paradigms

With respect to the theme of programming paradigms CC2001 proposes 6 different course models in the first year depending on the paradigm choice: the so-called procedural-first object-first, functions-first, bread-first, algorithms-first, hardware-first strategies. Among such a variety, a valid choice6is functions-first, where the standard suggests two courses, CS1 using functional programming (FP) to be followed by CS2 using object-oriented programming (OOP).

Such a transition is interesting, no special indications are given by CC2001. An e-Learning bridge FP → OOP appears interesting to implement in a CS1-CS2 context. We are aware that the associated problems have been extensively covered in the past as OOP became a widely-spread programming standard at the software industry. However, some new forces can be able to reactivate it. On the one hand, OOP industrial languages (**Java** and C\# mainly) have been adopting known FP features like generics (parameterized polymorphic typing) and lambda-expressions
(delegates, continuations) and in some cases interesting academic languages exist where patternmatching is naturally incorporated ([10]). As a result of these trends we can figure out e-Learning techniques helping with these multiparadigmatic trends matter, too.

## 4.2 On E-Learning Elements Notions

Based on [47], we see that e-Learning covers those forms of learning in which instructor, learning material and student might be separated by space or time where the gap between parts is bridged through the use of a wide spectrum of online technologies, mainly Web-based ones, and a planned and methodic teaching/learning experience. Then, e-Learning systems serve to complete or complement more traditional forms of learning in environments which are more appropriated to particular individual conditions, according to [36].

Precisely, this last work provides us with a rich contextual point of reference where, as a general motivation, we are interested in creating content for a CS1-like course and specifically