Manipulation of flowcharting was crossed with in-class computer access to examine flowcharting effects in the traditional lecture/laboratory setting and in a classroom setting where online time was replaced with manual simulation. Seventy-two high school students (24 male and 48 female) enrolled in a computer literacy course served as subjects. None had received any programming instruction. Four treatment groups were arranged by crossing the computer access variable (unlimited vs. limited) with flowcharting (required vs. not required), and five instructional units dealing with introductory concepts in the BASIC programming language were presented in eighteen 50-minute class periods. Results showed that group means on four of five posttest measures were directionally higher for the limited-access group than for the unlimited-access group; females performed better under limited access, while males showed the opposite pattern; and low-ability students performed better with unlimited access, while middle- and high-ability students performed conversely. In addition, students performed better when not required to submit flowcharts, and flowcharting appeared to be regarded by many students as an entirely separate task rather than as a programming aid. Gender was not significantly related to either achievement or attitude. Three important considerations for the teaching of programming are suggested by these results: (1) unlimited computer access may be less important than is generally assumed; (2) more time should be given to instruction in flowcharting than is typically done; and (3) males and females appear to have the same potential and instructional needs for learning programming. (12 references) (CGD)