Oh boy... I inadvertently started a Excel+VBA debate... I brought up VBA mostly because chances are if you are an Excel VBA user, you know some basics of programming. If you know some basics of programming, then you should [1] be able to abstract functions/loops/conditionals regardless of what language is being presented. In that case, if you are a VBA user, learning about 'testing' and 're-usable code' and 'not writing 50 line long functions' can be incorporated into your VBA practice.
These abstract concepts is what swc teaches, we just use Python (and now R) a means to accomplish that [2]. In any case, this does bring up the issue that we as instructors should be more tactful. The students are coming to **us** for help. As far as preparing a 'VBA' set of lessons... I'm not sure how many of us actually know VBA, but if anyone is following the R material development, it is a LOT of work (props to you John). If anything we can incorporate some Data Carpentry materials but that's opening another can of logistical issues (i.e., how can you fit more material in 2 days, we can barely -- if at all -- fit the ones we have) . [1] This all assumes that if you are using 1 language, you are no longer as 'novice' as the 'never-programmed-before novices'. [2] from Greg's talk and someone refereed to it earlier On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 11:55 PM, Bennet Fauber <[email protected]> wrote: > This started a storm of comment, boy howdy! > > I agree with Marianne that Trevor propounds a good strategy: Show > them what you do and why the tools you're selling at your boot camp do > a good job of that. I think that leads to more coherent programs, it > provides a better demonstration of the tools, it shows how the pieces > fit together, and it's about your work and conditions, about which you > presumably know something and can credibly and enthusiastically > expound. Seeing that the tools can be used effectively for your work > will provide good motivation to them to explore more to see if they > can be used effectively for theirs. > > I am a big fan of presenting a bootcamp as a unified story of how work > gets done, with several chapters of details. If there is an overall > story to the weekend, it gives them a narrative from which to hang the > myriad details that the material tries to present. Narrative is > familiar, and it's a form people can easily remember. Those details > need something from which to hang, or it's unlikely they'll be > remembered in any coherent, useful way. These are beginners. Help > them out. > > One question I think should always be on the evaluation form is: How > well did the material presented match the course description? > > -- bennet > > > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Bill Mills <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hey all, > > > > So, a student from a workshop a little while ago didn't have too great a > > time, and asked if their feedback could be shared anonymously with > > instructors. Feedback follows; be aware, this person is *angry* about > what > > happened, but nevertheless has many valid points; I'd like to put ire > aside > > enough to address the key points within. > > > > > > **** begin student comments **** > > > > There was a [workshop] that was meant to introduce Luddites like myself > to R > > and the like. I will admit that R is intimidating, and the fanatical, > > almost cult-like regard some have for it is more than a tad off-putting > to > > me, so I have put such a lesson off. Boy. I should have put it off > longer. > > The workshop was two days. I came only to the first, though I had > planned > > to go to the second, too. The first part was supposed to deal with the > uses > > of Excel, where it was weak, and how to use it better. Great, I > thought. I > > never had any formal instruction in Excel, and instead have clawed my way > > into a decent working knowledge of it over the last almost two decades. > I > > am very proud of what I can do with it, and I have found it of great use, > > but I know there is a ton I don't know, so I was looking forward to that > > session. However, that session ended up being bitterly offensive. The > > basic message being conveyed was "you are an idiot for using Excel to do > > anything expect to put data into R, and an even worse idiot if you do > things > > to make data comprehensible to a human." There were snide cartoons, > there > > was condescension... It was infuriating. The second session was better, > > but still lousy. That was the introduction to R. However, there was > little > > organization. The files we needed to download were not the ones they > told > > us to download, and this led to a lot of confusion at first. Then the > > instructor was very disorganized in [their] teaching style, mumbling, not > > explaining what [they were] doing, and so on. [They] refused to make any > > handouts explaining the language of R, so we were to input commands > based on > > what [they] entered by following [their] projected screen. However, > [they] > > wouldn't stay in the part of the screen with the commands long enough > for us > > to easily enter the commands, and then [they] didn't explain how the > > commands worked. By the end I was livid, tired, and very stressed. I > was > > in one of those moods in which I wish I could run through walls or do > other > > Hulk smash sorts of things. So I didn't go the next day, and decided to > get > > back into a better state of mind by going on a camping trip. > > > > **** end student comments **** > > > > So, there's a bunch of good content here, but the thing that really > sticks > > in my pipe is the line about 'There were snide cartoons, there was > > condescension...' - I'm certain that there are more perspectives on > whatever > > was presented, and it all came from a place of good intention, but having > > someone walk away from a workshop feeling like 'an idiot' is something we > > need to examine whether it was intended or not. > > > > This is a complicated topic. There are a lot of problems with excel, and > if > > we can give researchers a better option, we should. But there is also > huge > > value in meeting researchers where they are with respect, and giving them > > the opportunity to try something new that will empower them, rather than > > denigrating what they have achieved on their own. I admire researchers > who > > are able to build an analysis framework out of the zero training they > > receive on the topic, whether I like the tools they choose or not. And > if we > > truly want change, let's lead the charge with opportunity, rather than > > trying to prod them from behind with aggression. > > > > Which is all very nice to say - but how to do it remains a question. I > think > > that we are prone to communication misfires like the one described above > > when we don't really know how to brooch difficult topics. I propose that > we > > have a discussion about how to approach spreadsheet tools in our > workshops > > at the next Instructor Hangouts, one week from today (on Sept. 26); we > can > > chat about what we want to achieve surrounding spreadsheets, and how to > > advertise different tools in a way that's going to resonate with > students, > > rather than get their shields up. We're moving to a Hangouts on Air setup > > for this round, so if you would like to participate in the conversation > at > > 9AM PDT Sept. 26, let me know and I will be sure to save you a speaking > spot > > in the hangout; those that would like to just observe, may do so through > the > > youtube broadcast (links forthcoming). > > > > Phew! This is a tough one - but it's also an opportunity to reach even > more > > researchers. Looking forward to what we can come up with together! > > > > -- > > Bill Mills > > Community Manager, Mozilla Science Lab > > @billdoesphysics > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
