More generally, for anyone in the community: I'll be adding this topic to the agenda of the next Software Carpentry steering committee meeting so that we can clarify or confirm what Software Carpentry's official policy is re: lessons in a workshop and/or invite further community feedback. I'll plan to summarize points of view presented in both this email thread or the GitHub issue started by Jonah, so if you have opinions beyond what's already stated in these threads, please share.
Christina On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 8:52 PM, Christina Koch <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Bennet, > > Thanks for contributing to the discussion. I like your idea of core > concepts/competencies -- as I've been thinking about the discussion on this > list, that's something that's occurred to me as well. > > Cheers, > Christina > > On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 8:28 PM, Bennet Fauber <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Jonah and all, >> >> I've seen two presentations of the R workshop, both at Software Carpentry >> workshops. They were a couple of years apart. Neither finished the >> material in the SWC lesson. Both were quite different from each other. I >> doubt that if an attendee from one described the workshop to an attendee >> from the other that it would be recognizable. Further, I note that the R >> for Reproducible Scientific Analysis lesson may differ less from the Data >> Carpentry R lesson than it does from the R Inflammation lesson. >> >> Perhaps one avenue of discussion might be to pare down from the current >> lesson(s) and define what constitutes the core concepts and competencies >> that any language lesson _must_ cover during its actual offering to be >> considered for inclusion in 'Software Carpentry'? That would then make >> _how_ those concepts and competencies open to lesson planners, maintainers, >> and to the judgement of the community. I think that might become >> increasingly important. >> >> While I understand that there is a strong desire to keep the discussion >> on this list focused on things that are truly and genuinely of general >> interest, I suggest that it might be premature to shunt what constitutes a >> legitimate lesson for SWC into an issue just yet. What makes a lesson >> legitimate seems to me to be of pretty central interest and importance, and >> I think that removing it from general and public discussion so early is not >> in the best interest of the community. >> >> I urge you to encourage at least a bit more discussion here, so that >> someone reading this later -- and possibly much later -- will be able to >> get a general enough sense of the range of opinions to properly judge >> whether to go to the issue or not. >> >> I am sure it is not your intention to stop discussion, but I think this >> issue is important enough to remain on the main list for at least a little >> while longer. I have had my say, and I will add anything further to the >> issue. >> >> I hope that in stating my opinions here I have not violated any community >> norms or offended anyone, and I apologize now if I have done so. That is >> not my intent. >> >> >> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Jonah Duckles <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> All, >>> >>> When we say we're teaching something called "Software Carpentry" it has >>> been the opinion of our Steering Committee for a long time that it should >>> be using consensus lessons. So if we offer a workshop in a new place we >>> want it to be comparable to a workshop run some other place. Our core >>> lessons (those 10 listed in the upper table of >>> https://software-carpentry.org/lessons/) are those that we allow you to >>> pick from to compose something we call "Software Carpentry" when bringing a >>> workshop to a new place. >>> >>> We accept that local self-organized workshops experiment and innovate >>> from this base. Belinda's guidance is to call your workshop "Inspired >>> by..." or "Based on..." is our recommendation when you go "off script". >>> >>> This is truly where we grow and innovate, so we don't want to stifle >>> this kind of exploration. At the same time, we want someone who says "I >>> went to a Software Carpentry!" talking to someone else who went to one to >>> have a comparable experience. >>> >>> In the context of the upcoming merger of Software Carpentry and Data >>> Carpentry I think the door is open to have the community discuss how this >>> should look in a world of growing lessons. How do we maintain some >>> commonality of experience AND allow instructors to compose the most >>> appropriate workshop for participants. I don't have a silver-bullet here, >>> but I'd welcome a discussion from the community. This is an area where we >>> don't want to overwhelm you with red-tape, but we do want to be opinionated >>> (in an editorial kind of way) as a community about what should and >>> shouldn't go into a workshop of a given branding. >>> >>> I've created a GitHub issue to further this part of the discussion: >>> https://github.com/carpentries/conversations/issues/16 >>> >>> Regards, >>> --- >>> Jonah Duckles >>> Software Carpentry, Executive Director >>> http://software-carpentry.org >>> >>> >>> From: C. Titus Brown <[email protected]> <[email protected]> >>> Reply: [email protected] <[email protected]> <[email protected]> >>> Date: October 23, 2017 at 8:45:47 AM >>> To: Belinda Weaver <[email protected]> <[email protected]> >>> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected] >>> try.org> <[email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: [Discuss] using the DC ecology Python lesson in place of >>> the SWC Python for SWC workshop >>> >>> Hi Belinda, >>> >>> I'm confused. Is the DC R lesson not considered a programming language >>> lesson? I think it should do fine as a lesson in a SC workshop, and I >>> interpreted Azalee's post as agreeing with that: >>> >>> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-O >>> ctober/005525.htmlk >>> >>> Other than that, my understanding matches yours with respect to branding, >>> etc. >>> >>> Who is the final arbiter of this, in any case? Shouldn't it be Jonah or >>> someone on the SC Steering Committee, like Christina, who weighed in >>> here: >>> >>> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-O >>> ctober/005527.html >>> >>> and said the same thing as Azalee. >>> >>> thanks, >>> --titus >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 11:18:00AM +1000, Belinda Weaver wrote: >>> > Hi everyone >>> > >>> > I just want to weigh in on this as I am responsible for starting this >>> > thread in the first place when I asked about teaching R in this post: >>> > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-O >>> ctober/005510.html >>> > >>> > While some people might like the DC R lesson better, I feel it is >>> important >>> > to teach the workshop we advertised, i.e. a Software Carpentry R >>> workshop >>> > that will be using the R Gapminder lesson. >>> > >>> > If a workshop is branded Software Carpentry, then our expectation is >>> that >>> > it will include the shell, version control and either R, Python or >>> MATLAB. >>> > If a workshop does not include those three elements, then it is not >>> really >>> > able to be branded Software Carpentry. >>> > >>> > It can be called 'Based on Software Carpentry", "Inspired by Software >>> > Carpentry" etc if it doesn't include those three elements, or if you >>> are >>> > using extensive personal/local adaptations of our lessons, but a >>> Software >>> > Carpentry workshop must teach shell, git and a programming language to >>> be >>> > the real deal. >>> > >>> > I just wanted to clarify this in case people were not aware of it. >>> > >>> > regards >>> > Belinda >>> > >>> > Belinda Weaver >>> > Community Development Lead >>> > Software and Data Carpentry >>> > e: [email protected] | p: +61 408 841 882 >>> <+61%20408%20841%20882> | t: @cloudaus >>> >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Discuss mailing list >>> > [email protected] >>> > http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> -- >>> C. Titus Brown, [email protected] >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss >> > > > > -- > Christina Koch - Research Computing Facilitator, > University of Wisconsin - Madison <http://www.wisc.edu/>, Center for High > Throughput Computing <http://chtc.cs.wisc.edu/> > Wisconsin Institute for Discovery <http://wid.wisc.edu/>; Advanced > Computing Initiative <http://aci.wisc.edu/>; ACI-REF <https://aciref.org/> > email: [email protected] // phone: (608) 316 - 4041 <(608)%20316-4041> // > calendar: tinyurl.com/ChristinaCHTC >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss
