I found this very interesting. I also find that mixtures of cultural 
backgrounds in the class – or a difference between myself and the learners – 
can sometimes lead to confusion in the different ways people describe the 
symbols in particular.

I spent the first half day leading a week-long training (not for coding, but 
for something internal to the company I was working for where there was an 
internal “language” to be learned) before I realized that while I was 
describing them as “braces,” “square brackets,” and “parentheses,” my learners 
described these as “flower brackets,” “square brackets,” and “round brackets,” 
and the three together under the umbrella of “brackets,” which I only used in 
reference to the square ones. Learning got much faster after we got that 
squared away!

~ Amy

Amy E. Hodge, PhD
Science Data Librarian

Data Management Services
Branner Earth Sciences Library, 212 Mitchell
397 Panama Mall; MC 2211
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305

From: Discuss <discuss-boun...@lists.software-carpentry.org> on behalf of Lex 
Nederbragt <lex.nederbr...@ibv.uio.no>
Date: Monday, March 12, 2018 at 2:48 AM
To: Software Carpentry Discussion <discuss@lists.software-carpentry.org>
Subject: [Discuss] Code Phonology - on reading code aloud


Felienne Hermans has a really interesting blog post and accompanying paper on 
Code Phonology, i.e. on reading code aloud: 

This is relevant for teaching through ‘live follow-along coding’: are we aware 
what vocabulary we use and what effect that has on our learners (e.g. cognitive 
load)? Do we use consistent vocabulary across lessons and between workshops?

Food for thought...


Discuss mailing list

Reply via email to