Thanks everybody, this discussion is highlighting a lot of interesting
points and materials.
Just one remark: the course that inspired my question was not a SWC
one, it was a training on analysis softwares (i.e. cytoscape and
others) for biologists.
But since education methods are common to SWC, training like that one
and the more formal university-level courses, I was interested in what
kind of practice/hands-on could be more effective for the two main
purposes
- avoid scaring the students and, possibly, encourage them into be
positive while approaching the topic
- maximize the amount of knowledge and skills gained in the course

Thanks again!

Best,
Giuseppe

2016-03-10 7:40 GMT+01:00 W. Trevor King <[email protected]>:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 05:41:12PM +0000, Code, Warren wrote:
>> … the Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark article [3 in Trevor's comment]
>> can be a bit of a tricky entry point into the literature…
>
> Better (ideally open) entry points are welcome ;).  It looks like
> there is more good stuff and a number of references in [1], although
> that lacks a DOI, clear author information, and possibly peer review.
>
>> For the SWC lesson provided as an example here, there was certainly
>> substantial guidance [snip scaffolding] they were asked to practice
>> the kinds of things that people encounter in scientific computing
>> (dealing with unknown data files, grappling with unexpected bugs,
>> etc.) and had relatively on-demand support from the helpers and
>> other participants.
>
> I agree on the potential for good scaffolding, although it's easy for
> an hour of student-lead exercises to end up being “throw them into the
> deep end” instead of “the shallow end of the pool is over there,
> instructors will be circulating, and lifeguards are standing by for
> anyone that calls out or looks distressed”.  I think Giuseppe's:
>
> * “by themselves” in the subject,
> * “some were stuck at the first [problem]” and “forced to think about
>   the problems they were facing and to ask for help” in the body.
>
> gave me the impression that this workshops dispensed with the
> circulating instructors and just kept the lifeguards.  For some people
> that will be fine.  But folks are probably in a face-to-face SWC
> workshop because they're not comfortable working through the SWC
> lessons (or other online tutorials) on their own, so I think it's
> useful to have more instructor/helper-initiated interaction.
>
>> [snip reasonable thoughts about scaling practice periods with
>> exercise complexity].  If there is a widespread difficulty that
>> isn't terribly interesting to the main ideas, like the GUI bugs,
>> maybe having a shorter cycle of "try this - did everyone get this
>> error - this is why, there's this bug" would be warranted before the
>> longer period working alone.  In my experience, the only practical
>> way to discover these sort of difficulties is to run the lesson,
>> collect that sort of information, and do it differently the next
>> time. :)
>
> I'd certainly recommend avoiding known library/tooling bugs in the
> first two days that folks are coding.  The existing SWC lessons are
> fairly narrowly scoped (e.g. see the “other 90%” phrasing [2]), and a
> tool with novice-noticeable bugs in the most fundamental 10% is
> probably not a good tool to introduce to novice programmers ;).  But
> yeah, sometimes it's not clear that a particular exercise will be
> confusing until you put it in front of people, so +1 on emphasizing
> evolutionary lesson polishing.
>
> Cheers,
> Trevor
>
> [1]: http://www.deansforimpact.org/the_science_of_learning.html
>      
> https://github.com/swcarpentry/instructor-training/blob/58c6942bc6d910d7f886098c231b4d107c9ff0c3/papers/science-of-learning-2015.pdf
>      Deans for Impact (2015).  The Science of Learning.  Austin, TX: Deans 
> for Impact.
> [2]: 
> https://github.com/swcarpentry/python-novice-inflammation/blob/v5.3/instructors.md#overall
>
> --
> This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org).
> For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org

Reply via email to