[TOS] [Osdc-edu-authors] POSSE SA lead-in article on opensource.com

Karsten Wade kwade at redhat.com
Fri Oct 1 00:49:19 UTC 2010


Folks not on osdc-edu-authors list -- the original thread for this
starts here:

https://www.redhat.com/archives/osdc-edu-authors/2010-September/msg00063.html

I'm sort-of moving this discussion over to tos@ mailing list, although
Matt is wisely suggesting we don't get too deep until after the next
POSSE is done.

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 07:07:57PM -0400, Matthew Jadud wrote:

> ===
> Everything past this point is really just a "marker" for further
> conversation that really doesn't apply to this particular article,
> given the timeframe. Perhaps it should become a blog post that could
> be responded to later? However/wherever you think it is best to kick
> off some more conversation on this topic.
> ==
>
> I still find the rhetoric around introducing faculty to being
> "productively lost" far from ideal. I personally don't like it. I'm
> glad it's a watchword for the community, but it doesn't map cleanly to
> higher ed, in my opinion*. It conflates too many things.

Just for this article, I made a nod in a better direction by amending
the paragraph with a final sentence; as published:

  One of the most important programs at Teaching Open Source is the
  Professors' Open Source Summer Experience (POSSE). POSSE is a
  weeklong bootcamp that gets professors and POSSE instructors
  productively lost.  The idea is to help educators understand how to
  include being productively lost in their curriculum.
 
> * (Also, note that it might map better to some other educational
> contexts... but we'd have to make a case for that.)

Are we moving toward a sort-of glossary?  Something to map terms and
concepts between FOSS and ACAD?

> 1. Researchers know how to be productively lost.
> 
>  As researchers, we have (and must continue to demonstrate) this
> ability in spades.
> 
> The difference between open projects and research projects is that
> most contributions seem to involve being productively lost long enough
> to fix a bug, or use a tool, or whatever. After accomplishing a
> short-term goal, you move on. (If you're a leader in a project or
> long-term contributor, you move past being "productively lost,"
> because you become an expert in the codebase/documentation/tools/etc.
> Or, if you prefer, you've made the novice/expert transition, and this
> concept really doesn't apply anymore.)

I agree, with the addition that open projects seem to be like short
spurts of research that is in the vein of productively lost, and they
continue to happen.  I've been involved in the Fedora Project since
the start, and I still find myself lost all over the place --
admittedly much less so, for much less longer, and I always know who
to go to who can fix or redirect me properly if I get to frustrated.

> Research agendas last years. We must choose research directions that
> are productive over a long period of time with many avenues for
> exploration. We target publications six months to a year in advance.
> We plan recruitment of researchers (students, often -- undergrad or
> PhD) based on funding cycles that may involve a year-long process of
> developing a grant, followed by one to three years of work
> implementing the project. During the same time, we're analyzing data,
> implementing new explorations, and writing up the work. Every time we
> bring a new researcher on board, we shepherd them through being
> "productively lost," because they must explore a new space and begin
> adapting/working within that space quickly without full knowledge.

It is this Zen-like patience, which many of just call, "Snail's pace,"
to be the hardest to grasp of all. ;-D

/me ducks and runs

> 2. As teachers, we don't like being lost at all.
>
> It takes a lot of work to get over being "productively lost" as a
> teacher. Our students rate us down if we don't know the answer right
> away, and they're especially harsh on women. (Numbers exist somewhere
> on that.) In conservative departmental/institutional contexts,
> changing pedagogic practice can be dangerous to one's career, because
> students may react badly, or colleagues may react badly. That fear
> alone is often enough to keep people from adapting their classroom
> practice.

Good info, thanks.  One reason I added the sentence, "The idea is to
help educators understand how to include being productively lost in
their curriculum," is to show we don't mean to turn their classrooms
in to chaos.  I think I understand the multiple, reasonable fears
there.

> (This is why I think having multiple people from an
> institution/department take part in a POSSE is a Very Good Idea. It
> eliminates some/many of these concerns.)

That wisdom we really should consider applying, at least in terms of
removing the (I think Red Hat supplied) prejudice of multiple
institutions being preferable at one POSSE.

I reckon that we brought that multiple institutions to the table
because of the way we think of creating scalability.  In some
countries, it might work best that way -- if different institution are
working more in step with each other.  In the US, probably Western
Europe, I can see the "all from one institution" as being a good way
to make an impact and scale within that institution v. trying to
blanket the region and not make enough individual impact.

> I AGREE that we need to introduce students to working in this way,
> because it relates well to the notion of "lifelong learning," which is
> a popular buzzword nowadays. But I don't think faculty need to be
> introduced to being productively lost... they need to be introduced to
> how to work it into their curriculum effectively, and still meet
> curricular requirements or checking off boxes for accreditation while
> doing so. I felt we got this from Dave/Chris in the first POSSE,
> because both of them have been integrating FOSS into their classrooms
> for so long.
>
> Others might object/disagree, but I think the focus needs to be on
> practical strategies for integrating this idea into the classroom
> context. That's my 2p, anyway. And, it's a conversation for *after*
> POSSE SA, not before. (I don't think I've articulated my concerns in
> this space before... at least, I don't think I have.)

Yeah, and we can take this to the TOS list, actually?

What you say tells me, "We know how to talk to FOSS people and faculty
that are akin to that way of thinking, but to really make it good for
them and to reach many others, we need to map our ideas to different
idioms that have similar/same meaning in academia.  We need to also
think about how to position our ideas as being evolutionary instead of
revolutionary.  People attracted to revolution are likely already
involved, it's the ones who want a steady evolution they can count on,
grade, accreditate, etc. -- those are the people we need to reach
from the start with our program."
 
> PS. Also note, my assumption is that there is an expectation of
> research. Depending on institutional context, this expectation shifts.
> Community colleges have different expectations than four-year liberal
> arts institutions than large state institutions. In thinking about
> POSSE, these distinctions, and where impact might be best made, hasn't
> been discussed. See the article on "Science in the Liberal Arts" that
> I linked from my last os.com/edu post... it might give you a sense, in
> a different context, for what I mean w.r.t. different kinds of
> undergraduate institutions having different kinds of impact with their
> students.

It seems like we may need to tailor (market) POSSE a bit for different
types of institutions.  We might also want to dive more in to the idea
of institution-specific POSSEs as a primary flagship.

- Karsten
-- 
name:  Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener
team:                Red Hat Community Architecture 
uri:               http://TheOpenSourceWay.org/wiki
gpg:                                       AD0E0C41
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://teachingopensource.org/pipermail/tos/attachments/20100930/58210463/attachment.asc>


More information about the tos mailing list