Long-time lurker here, if I might add to the conversation. I organized a workshop February (2014) and one of our participants asked me if there was a certificate for R or Python. She mentioned how SAS has a well-known certification program. I explained how there wasn't an equivalent certification program. Historically, certification schema focus primarily on commercial software and the needs of businesses. In open-source and academic circles, my experience has been that software certificates are somewhat less common.
That being said, I see pros and cons for software carpentry certificates. Pros: -Providing a post workshop assignment could help participants apply what they've learned. - It would also provide assessment and feedback on the impact of workshops. - Students could include certificates on their annual evaluation reports and on their CV's. -Certificates provide a sort of institutional legitimacy that could appeal to administrators and funding agencies. Cons - What if someone with no connection to SWC wanted a certificate? - Who would set the criteria and grade the submissions? - How would the possibility of plagiarism be handled? - What if this certificate grew beyond the scope of SWC? I like the idea and want it to succeed. My point is merely that we will want to think through the logistical aspects before committing to a course of action. John R. Moreau University of Missouri, Kansas City > On Nov 2, 2014, at 3:00 PM, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Send Discuss mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Targeting intermediate learners (Hsi-Kai (Kai) Yang) > 2. Re: Targeting intermediate learners (Katy Huff) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2014 12:50:44 -0800 > From: "Hsi-Kai (Kai) Yang" <[email protected]> > To: Daniel Chen <[email protected]> > Cc: Software Carpentry Discussion > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Targeting intermediate learners > Message-ID: > <CAK2WhKTueEcW2Q8obNz_=ekcs86skxwkf+c+cnhkp8dsctt...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >> Greg wrote: I don't know how big a problem this is, but several > conversations in the past two years make me believe it's big enough that we > need to design for it. > > > I assume that ?intermediate? python classes have indeed been advertised as > ?intermediate.? However, the issue seems that we don?t want to discourage > people who may have thought the ?intermediate? course is too difficult to > them. At the same time we don?t want to encourage people who are not ready > for ?intermediate? level. I think using a ?certificate? system could be a > solution. At the end of each course, we can issue a ?certificate? to those > who pass a certain threshold. To attend level-2 course, a ?certificate? > from level-1 course, either on-site or on-line, is a pre-requisite. Then > both students and instructors can have a more objective method to make > judgment. > > > If a formal ?certificate? method has already been adopted by SWC, please > disregard my idea above. > > > Thanks. > > -kai > >> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Daniel Chen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> If it is actually a intermediate only workshop. can we give them an >> assignment to do? >> They're not novices, so a little more should be expected from them. >> >> One that comes to mind is the snap crackle pop hw. >> It goes along the lines of: >> "write a program that prints the numbers from 0 to 99 inclusive, for each >> multiple of 3 print 'snap' >> each multiple of 7 'crackle', and multiple of 11 'pop'" >> mention that if they cannot solve this in 20? minutes , they should opt to >> attend a beginner workshop >> >> let it be on their own merit in terms of doing and 'correctness'. >> >> This would avoid having that student who has never seems a list or loop >> from attending >> >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Greg Wilson < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> On 2014-10-30 2:55 PM, Naupaka Zimmerman wrote: >>>> >>>> I'd love to hear if any other people have advice for improving the >>>> pre-course surveys to discriminate (make everyone write a fizz-buzz in >>>> their language of choice? bringing a printout of their favorite geeky >>>> meme?) between experience levels or more broadly about how folks have >>>> effectively/successfully engaged groups with heterogeneous experience >>>> levels. >>>> >>> >>> I'm strongly in favor of finding out more about our learners before our >>> workshops and/or making sure that people attend the right ones, but there's >>> a trap we need to avoid. Our educational system trains people to believe >>> that every test counts. Even if we tell them the pre-assessment isn't a >>> test, some will perceive it that way, and if they can't get the right >>> answers, they won't sign up for the workshop. Ironically, these are often >>> exactly the people we most want to help. I don't know how big a problem >>> this is (I don't even know what metric I'd use), but several conversations >>> in the past two years make me believe it's big enough that we need to >>> design for it. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Greg >>> >>> -- >>> Greg Wilson >>> Software Carpentry | http://www.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 >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.software-carpentry.org/pipermail/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org/attachments/20141102/d91ab8be/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2014 12:59:37 -0800 > From: Katy Huff <[email protected]> > To: "Hsi-Kai (Kai) Yang" <[email protected]> > Cc: Software Carpentry Discussion > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Discuss] Targeting intermediate learners > Message-ID: > <CAFoDED1PTdqnU4tdZ9AQf7qADdduLMuG5F=56hzpi5n03kz...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hi Kai, > While I fully understand where your suggestion is coming from, I think > there are many potential students who are sufficiently self-taught to just > entirely skip a level-1 course. Those people would be quite turned off by > being required to take a course too basic for their skill-set. > > I'm not sure what the alternative is, but I would definitely push back > against requiring that intermediate level people take our beginner level > course. In addition to being inconvenient for them, having advanced > students in a beginner course is often more disruptive to the whole room > than having a few beginner people falling behind in an advanced course. > > I know we've tried a few things. Questionairres ("do you know what a loop > is"), entrance exams ("what will this code produce"), and simple > self-assessment based on a clear decription of the course. They all have > weaknesses, of course. > > Katy > > On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Hsi-Kai (Kai) Yang <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Greg wrote: I don't know how big a problem this is, but several >> conversations in the past two years make me believe it's big enough that we >> need to design for it. >> >> >> I assume that ?intermediate? python classes have indeed been advertised as >> ?intermediate.? However, the issue seems that we don?t want to discourage >> people who may have thought the ?intermediate? course is too difficult to >> them. At the same time we don?t want to encourage people who are not ready >> for ?intermediate? level. I think using a ?certificate? system could be a >> solution. At the end of each course, we can issue a ?certificate? to those >> who pass a certain threshold. To attend level-2 course, a ?certificate? >> from level-1 course, either on-site or on-line, is a pre-requisite. Then >> both students and instructors can have a more objective method to make >> judgment. >> >> >> If a formal ?certificate? method has already been adopted by SWC, please >> disregard my idea above. >> >> >> Thanks. >> >> -kai >> >>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Daniel Chen <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> If it is actually a intermediate only workshop. can we give them an >>> assignment to do? >>> They're not novices, so a little more should be expected from them. >>> >>> One that comes to mind is the snap crackle pop hw. >>> It goes along the lines of: >>> "write a program that prints the numbers from 0 to 99 inclusive, for each >>> multiple of 3 print 'snap' >>> each multiple of 7 'crackle', and multiple of 11 'pop'" >>> mention that if they cannot solve this in 20? minutes , they should opt >>> to attend a beginner workshop >>> >>> let it be on their own merit in terms of doing and 'correctness'. >>> >>> This would avoid having that student who has never seems a list or loop >>> from attending >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Greg Wilson < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>>> On 2014-10-30 2:55 PM, Naupaka Zimmerman wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I'd love to hear if any other people have advice for improving the >>>>> pre-course surveys to discriminate (make everyone write a fizz-buzz in >>>>> their language of choice? bringing a printout of their favorite geeky >>>>> meme?) between experience levels or more broadly about how folks have >>>>> effectively/successfully engaged groups with heterogeneous experience >>>>> levels. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I'm strongly in favor of finding out more about our learners before our >>>> workshops and/or making sure that people attend the right ones, but there's >>>> a trap we need to avoid. Our educational system trains people to believe >>>> that every test counts. Even if we tell them the pre-assessment isn't a >>>> test, some will perceive it that way, and if they can't get the right >>>> answers, they won't sign up for the workshop. Ironically, these are often >>>> exactly the people we most want to help. I don't know how big a problem >>>> this is (I don't even know what metric I'd use), but several conversations >>>> in the past two years make me believe it's big enough that we need to >>>> design for it. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Greg >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Greg Wilson >>>> Software Carpentry | http://www.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 >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> >> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org >> > > > > -- > http://katyhuff.github.com > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <http://lists.software-carpentry.org/pipermail/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org/attachments/20141102/3a5ce3c2/attachment.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org > > ------------------------------ > > End of Discuss Digest, Vol 16, Issue 3 > ************************************** _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org
