Wow. Lots of stuff happening since I logged out. Wanted to say before actually getting to all the recent emails on this thread that Tim with respect to your original post about training wheels, I was + oo. Found it incredibly thoughtful/thought provoking and introspective. Part of it might of been that I learned on training wheels and did so successfully in rather short order. [not actual sure but think it's a great approach and probably wouldn't fix that working system....the teacher on the other hand probably has a profound effect on the learners maintaining of said training wheels for too long etc].
-->S.G. On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 9:09 AM, David Martin (Staff) < [email protected]> wrote: > I've not used xlstat. I do use Excel frequently for quick and dirty > things, and I understand it's limitations, and where it does things better > than R/RStudio. [1] I'm also one of the local R champions/gurus. > > > Most of my research colleagues use Excel as that has been the easiest way > for them to get at the results they want. It isn't big or clever to > disrespect them or their competence. What we should be doing is > demonstrating ways to go beyond what they can do, or to do it with more > robustness, or to do it faster and repeatable, or usually a combination of > all three. That doesn't mean putting Excel down. There are enough Gotcha's > with R (students missing missing data and calculating across factors > instead of numerical values for example, on a parallel with Excel's date > handling train wreck). > > > We don't need to mock or put folk down. We just show them what we do, and > explain why we do it, and help them learn how to do it that way. There is a > learning curve and students will require some incentive to get over the > 'activation energy' and into a new way of working. Typically we enforce > that at undergrad level by requiring they use R for reports and submit > source code with it. This forces them to climb the cliff (as it were), and > then realise how quick it is to perform exploratory analyses or plots once > your data is in correctly. > > > If you want to compare Excel/R (for example) then maybe there should be a > set of exercises that demonstrate the difference. > > > E.g. A data frame of three continuous variables x,y,z > > Plot X against Y then put a ring around the top 10 values by z > > > We can get along without inflammatory zealotry. There are folk who have > built robust and reproducible piplelines with Word and Excel. What we are > teaching isn't so much software as a way of thinking. > > > [1] Adds fuel to the fire.. there are some but there aren't many. > > > Dr David Martin > Lecturer in Bioinformatics > College of Life Sciences > University of Dundee > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Discuss <[email protected]> on behalf > of Philip Rosenfield <[email protected]> > *Sent:* 05 May 2016 13:53 > *To:* Bert Overduin > *Cc:* [email protected]; Dirk Eddelbuettel > *Subject:* Re: [Discuss] Word and PowerPoint "all wrong"? > > I’ve been working with a professor who likes excel (+xlstat extension) for > students learning to do statistical analysis because it allows them a quick > feedback loop from their data to visualizing a result. It allows students > to try different regressions etc, and see the differences, where command > line stats packages separates that knowledge. In other words, could Excel > be a good a sandbox for learning, and the question would become when and > how to transition the students toward methods taught in SC/DC. > > I’d be interested to hear the groups’ thoughts on that. > > -Phil > > On May 5, 2016, at 8:30 AM, Bert Overduin <[email protected]> wrote: > > I couldn't have said it better, Alistair! > > On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 12:59 PM, GRANT Alistair <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> >>It sounds like they were shunted into an R course they didn't care >> about. >> >> If you read the comment, I don’t think this was the case, I think the >> major point here is that the session (instructor/helper or material) gave >> off an impression that they were an idiot for using Excel - This is not >> conducive to a good learning environment - no matter an instructors >> viewpoint they have to ensure students can learn. This is the impression I >> have been getting from this whole thread of conversation - “If you don’t >> do it a way I consider to be good or completely change how you work to >> that way, you are an idiot” - especially in the use of evocative words >> like “terrifies”. People have to exist in the real world and in many >> places sudden change just isn’t possible so making small changes to move >> towards a more efficient or “better” path is all they can do. >> >> >>We should all take responsibility for the way we market our courses. If >> >>someone is perfectly happy with Excel, then I might wonder what they're >> >>doing in academia, but I wouldn't push them to do an R course. >> >> >> I think that this statement is utterly out of order - one) the quote prior >> to this never claimed to be perfectly happy and two) who are any of us to >> judge who should or shouldn’t be in academia - you don’t know what they >> are using it for, what their background is or anything to contribute to >> saying whether anyone should be academia. >> >> My understanding of SWC was that is was about improving things, and >> teaching about process and concept with grounding in tools such as Git, >> etc, but lately it appears in some cases that the Git part is becoming >> more important that the version control - there are many version control >> systems with advantages and disadvantages - just getting someone to >> realise the usefulness of any of these is good and getting them to start >> is even better. There appears to be an undercurrent of “fundamentalism” >> forming which reads as do it my way as your way is just wrong. >> >> I am reminded of what I teach students about software development: >> If you the developer make business decisions about your client’s business, >> then you are doing something wrong. >> People have to make their own choices and change their own ways of >> working, at these courses, we can show people what may be a new approach, >> but if we denigrate their prior knowledge or call them idiots then we lose >> any willingness to work with us and they will close down receptiveness. >> >> Regards, >> Alistair >> ----------------------------------------------- >> Alistair Grant >> EPCC >> Rm 2403 >> 0131-650-5028 >> ----------------------------------------------- >> >> >> Thought to be thought about: >> Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, >> because your character is what you really are, >> while your reputation is merely what others think you are. (John Wooden) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 05/05/2016 12:24, "Timothy Rice" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> It isn't productive if they think they're being patronised then go >> >> on the defensive, get irritated or switch off altogether. As an >> >> example, an attendee at a SWC workshop in September 2014 commented: >> >> >> >> >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. ... >> >> >By the end I was livid, tired, and very stressed. >> > >> > >> > >> >More awareness around the shortcomings of Excel can be advocated as a way >> >to attract people into R courses, but if they only find out about it >> after >> >they sign up then you've falsely advertised what you're teaching. >> > >> >You can't force someone to take training wheels off, it just terrifies >> and >> >confuses them. You can only show them videos of people doing stunts >> >without >> >training wheels, and help them find their balance and pick them up and >> >give >> >them a hug when they fall -- after they agree to take off their own >> >training wheels. >> > >> >~ Tim >> > >> >_______________________________________________ >> >Discuss mailing list >> >[email protected] >> > >> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.softwar >> >e-carpentry.org >> >> -- >> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in >> Scotland, with registration number SC005336. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> >> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org >> > > > > -- > Bert Overduin, PhD > TRAINING AND OUTREACH BIOINFORMATICIAN > [email protected] > orcid.org/0000-0002-5281-8838 > > EDINBURGH GENOMICS > The University of Edinburgh > Ashworth Laboratories > The King's Buildings > Charlotte Auerbach Road > Edinburgh EH9 3FL > Scotland, United Kingdom > > tel. +44(0)1316507403 > http://genomics.ed.ac.uk > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.software-carpentry.org > > > > The University of Dundee is a registered Scottish Charity, No: SC015096 > > _______________________________________________ > 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
