It's a bit of both, right? If git and github could be taught in 5 minutes, I'm guessing it would be included in DC material...
I feel like this speaks to the nuance of tailoring material to the audience of learners and prioritizing the content that is most relevant to them! (which is understandably different for academic software developers, database maintainers, statisticians, and librarians) Best, -- Hao Ye [email protected] On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:40 PM Karen Cranston <[email protected]> wrote: > As I remember it (and other early DC-ers should chime in here), we didn't > choose not to teach git because git is hard, but rather prioritized the > skills we thought were necessary for better data management, and version > control wasn't close enough to the top to warrant an episode in a two-day > workshop. Note also that the early DC curriculum included bash and bash > scripting (see the blog post [1] and first course website [2]), which we > later removed in favour of episodes on spreadsheets and open refine [3]. > > So, I can't corroborate the statement that DC doesn't teach git and GitHub > because they are hard. > > Cheers, > Karen > > > [1] > https://software-carpentry.org/blog/2014/05/our-first-data-carpentry-workshop.html > [2] http://nescent.github.io/2014-05-08-datacarpentry/ > [3] https://datacarpentry.org/lessons/#ecology-workshop > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:22 PM Brooks Kieffer, Elizabeth Jamene < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> I’m reading the Baker *et al* article about the initial instance of >> Library Carpentry (Baker, J., *et al*, (2016). Library Carpentry: >> Software skills training for library professionals. *LIBER Quarterly, 26*(3), >> 141–162. https://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10176). In the Next Steps section, >> the authors mention learners’ struggles with Git during this workshop, and >> note that other curricula exclude Git because of its difficulty. >> Specifically: “…this is a finding of comparable training programmes and is >> a reason for Data Carpentry not teaching Git and GitHub” (p. 158). >> >> >> >> There isn’t a citation for the information about why Data Carpentry >> doesn’t teach Git and GitHub, and the Teal *et al* article describing >> Data Carpentry doesn’t mention Git (Teal, T. K., * et al*, (2015). Data >> Carpentry: Workshops to Increase Data Literacy for Researchers. >> *International >> Journal of Digital Curation*, *10*, 135–143. >> https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v10i1.351). >> >> >> >> I would appreciate any insight and/or links to discussions specifically >> about this decision to exclude Git from Data Carpentry. I’m not interested >> in debating the decision. Rather, I’m working on a paper on teaching Git; >> documentation of this discussion would be helpful supporting information >> for the paper’s opening contention that Git is difficult to both teach and >> learn (something that’s not news to this group!). >> >> >> >> Thanks very much in advance, >> >> Jamene >> >> >> >> Jamene Brooks-Kieffer >> >> Data Services Librarian >> >> University of Kansas Libraries >> >> 785-864-5238 >> >> [email protected] >> >> she/her/hers >> >> >> >> > > -- > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > [email protected] > kcranston.github.io > @kcranstn > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > *The Carpentries <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/latest>* / discuss / > see discussions <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss> + > participants <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/members> + > delivery > options <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/subscription> > Permalink > <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/T914cb72e74e12319-M388c8792d2085f1e44cb664b> > ------------------------------------------ The Carpentries: discuss Permalink: https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/T914cb72e74e12319-Mb2888a60950eceaf6c4f1725 Delivery options: https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/subscription
