17:09:58 <rebelsky> #startmeeting
17:09:58 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Jun  3 17:09:58 2013 UTC.  The chair is rebelsky. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:09:58 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:10:17 <rebelsky> Hmm ...
17:10:22 <zodbot> rebelsky: Error: Can't start another meeting, one is in progress.
17:11:20 <rebelsky> #topic Quick Business
17:11:33 <rebelsky> We will have time to break out into small groups later this afternoon.
17:12:11 <rebelsky> Joanie and Cam and company will talk to us about git, with some hands on git stuff.
17:12:34 <rebelsky> Maybe reduce the time with the playing with open source.
17:12:49 <rebelsky> Maybe two groups ... command line and github.
17:13:00 <rebelsky> Details to be determined at break.
17:13:08 <rebelsky> #topic Understanding POSSE Stage 3
17:13:41 <rebelsky> We are the first group to do this three-stage novel.
17:13:59 <rebelsky> They understand the goals.  But they haven't gotten stage 3 groups that we can learn from.
17:14:05 <rebelsky> Slide: Overview
17:14:10 <rebelsky> Slide: Overview
17:14:31 <rebelsky> MouseTrap is one example.  Yay!  We'll finally hear some details.
17:14:47 <rebelsky> Slide: POSSE Stage 3
17:15:11 <rebelsky> He hopes that we feel "This sounds pretty interesting".  He understands that we may not know how to do it yet.
17:15:35 <rebelsky> Evidence from workshops like this ... There's what you know at the workshop and then there's what happens afterwards.
17:15:47 <rebelsky> We'd like to make more significant stuff happen after the workshop.
17:16:24 <rebelsky> Goal of small learning communities - six or so.  Large enough that there's some chance for support, small enough that they can work together.
17:16:46 <rebelsky> An opportunity for student-student interaction across institutions.
17:16:58 <rebelsky> Question: Are we contributing, are we pushing our students to contribute, or both?
17:17:06 <rebelsky> Both, but they understand that there are different models.
17:17:33 <rebelsky> Slide: Prototype Group: MouseTrap
17:17:50 <rebelsky> A prototype for the stage three group.
17:18:21 <rebelsky> Comes from an idea that Joanie had.  Learning from working with Heidi.
17:18:31 <rebelsky> So started to think about outreach to professors.
17:18:50 <rebelsky> "Hey, we have modules that are abandoned.  Can students and faculty take up ownership?"
17:19:03 <rebelsky> If you take ownership of the project, you can better align it with your semester.
17:19:17 <rebelsky> Darci will tell us what has happened.
17:20:15 <rebelsky> A variety of students and faculty.  Students include a 3rd-semester student and a 5th year Drexel student.
17:20:28 <rebelsky> Met weekly in IRC with an agenda to follow.  Students provided updates about what they were working on.
17:20:31 <rebelsky> #link https://live.gnome.org/MouseTrap
17:21:09 <rebelsky> Also discussion outside of the IRC.  E.g., students communicated with Joanie, with the faculty, etc.
17:21:15 <rebelsky> WNE also had a weekly local meeting.
17:21:24 <rebelsky> Slide: MouseTrap as a Model
17:21:42 <rebelsky> #link http://foss2serve.org/index.php/Status
17:22:21 <rebelsky> THe status page was a way for them to communicate with each other.
17:22:54 <rebelsky> Top part ... standardizing development environment.
17:23:10 <rebelsky> Each posts some updates.
17:23:45 <rebelsky> It appears that they used the posts as a way to help each other.  "Hey, I solved this problem in my log on date ..."
17:24:03 <rebelsky> #idea Have students log their experiences (e.g., errors they encounter) on a Wiki
17:24:16 <rebelsky> Slide: MouseTrap Issues
17:24:48 <rebelsky> Note that MouseTrap does not fit the framework very well.  There wasn't really community.
17:25:13 <rebelsky> There were people who made themselves available, e.g., Joanie.  That was nice for students.
17:25:46 <rebelsky> Got it to run under Ubuntu, but not under Fedora.
17:26:11 <rebelsky> They were working for three big things at the same time (Fedora, Python 3, GTK 3)
17:26:35 <rebelsky> Slide: MouseTrap Results
17:26:50 <rebelsky> They feel the results are pretty good.  The students intend to continue working on the product.
17:27:15 <rebelsky> They also learned a lot.  Things like being productively lost, checking in with a team leader (Amber).
17:27:21 <rebelsky> Collaborate, etc.
17:27:31 <rebelsky> Students found it very motivating even though they didn't end up with a working project.
17:27:51 <rebelsky> Students were engaged and enjoyed working with each other.
17:28:39 <rebelsky> Slide: Letter from student
17:28:47 <rebelsky> The letter was unsolicited.
17:29:12 <rebelsky> The letter was from the most junior student on the project.  (3rd semester student)
17:30:40 <rebelsky> Even when you're in the ditch and the project isn't working, there's still learning going on.
17:31:07 <rebelsky> The project was good in part because there were students at different institutions.  There was a synergy that happened.
17:31:14 <rebelsky> And faculty were mentoring students from other institutions.
17:32:47 <rebelsky> Greg: We have five suggested projects.  Sahana, OpenMRS, etc.
17:33:24 <rebelsky> We'd like people to consolidate around a series of projects.
17:33:45 <rebelsky> All of the projects have contacts, some faculty who have worked with them, etc.
17:36:35 <rebelsky> Start by sitting down and talking to people in the project.  But it's okay to switch breakout.
17:36:52 <rebelsky> Slide: Stage 3 Evaluation
17:37:01 <rebelsky> (One of a few more things to do before we go into the breakout groups.)
17:37:21 <rebelsky> John Sener, Micropreneur, is our evaluator.
17:38:01 <rebelsky> This is an NSF-funded project.  NSF requires that you have an evaluator.
17:38:05 <rebelsky> There's also an internal evaluator.
17:39:12 <rebelsky> He'll look at our instructor communities etc.
17:40:28 <rebelsky> His job is mostly to make meaning from what we've done.
17:40:34 <rebelsky> Also helps Drexel relate what they did to what they said that they'd do.
17:40:55 <rebelsky> We all know that reality differs from plans.  He tries to keep those two realities in mind - what happened, and what was planned.
17:41:25 <rebelsky> #link http://www.senerlearning.com/about/bio-john-sener
17:41:41 <rebelsky> Greg: There's a hope that we'll get students higher on Bloom's taxonomy and on motivational change.
17:42:30 <rebelsky> There are some data and some publications already.  But they want to plug in with the stage three groups and do more measuring of student learning.
17:42:36 <rebelsky> Remember: There are publication opportunities.
17:43:13 <rebelsky> There's also a hope that this can scale up.  But we need demo to convince others to adapt/adopt.
17:43:50 <rebelsky> His job is to help produce data that are useful.
17:44:08 <rebelsky> #link http://www.grinnell.edu/academic/csla/assessment/risc
17:44:33 <rebelsky> The RISC Survey (Research in the Integrated Science Curriculum) is one of Sam's favorite ways to look at soft learning gains in a class.
17:45:17 <rebelsky> The instrument has been assessed (certainly more carefully than many instruments) - correlating the quantitative data with more qualitative interviews.
17:45:39 <rebelsky> Slide: Group Informatics
17:45:51 <howardf> can anyone use those assessments?
17:45:56 <rebelsky> We'll have a way to stay in touch.  What is going well, what is not going well.
17:46:02 <rebelsky> Give us a community that we can refer to and get help from.
17:46:20 <rebelsky> "Group informatics" will provide us with social awareness so that you can know when people are there.
17:46:32 <rebelsky> You shouldn't have to remember to log in to another technology system to know that something's going on.
17:46:47 <rebelsky> They are considering using foss2serve and computingportal.org
17:47:24 <rebelsky> #link http://computingportal.org/
17:47:33 <rebelsky> An offshoot of the National Science Foundation Digital Library
17:47:59 <rebelsky> Goal of building a portal to help people find resources related to teaching CS.
17:49:09 <rebelsky> Lots of people have a presence out there.
17:51:24 <rebelsky> What's the relationship with teachingopensource.org
17:51:45 <rebelsky> Mostly as a special interest group within teachingopensource.org, focusing on HFOSS.
17:52:06 <rebelsky> And this group will devote some resources to cleaning up the main site.
17:52:46 <rebelsky> 20-30 people hang out in the teachingopensource channel.  About 100 are on the roll.
17:52:57 <rebelsky> This project really focuses on humanitarian open source.
17:55:02 <rebelsky> There's also some money for subsidies to make more extensive work.  Develop, pilot, measure, share back with community.  $3K summer stipend or something similar.  And some travel money.
17:55:54 <rebelsky> We can't do all 50 for the followup activity, but we can get bunches of people together.
17:56:24 <rebelsky> This is a two-year grant, but it's extendible for a third year.
17:56:50 <rebelsky> 31 August 2014 is current end, but expect to extend to 31 August 2015.
17:57:14 <rebelsky> #topic Grading and Evaluation
17:58:11 <rebelsky> Let's drill down a bit into grading, evaluation, licensing, IP, FERPA, and more.
17:58:12 <stoneyj> (rebelsky: getting tired?)
17:58:12 <howardf> (are we moving on to 2.5 now?)
17:58:17 <rebelsky> Slide: Overview
17:58:28 <rebelsky> Slide; Instructional Style - 1
17:58:47 <stoneyj> howardf: yes, 2.5
17:59:02 <rebelsky> KNowing all the details of a project is nearly impossible.  "If I know discrete math, I know all the details."  And there are tons of textbooks.
17:59:11 <rebelsky> Not having as much context means that you have to train your instructional style.
17:59:20 <rebelsky> You switch from being a lecturer than a mentor.
17:59:26 <rebelsky> "How would *you* solve this problem?"
17:59:33 <rebelsky> "Who should we turn to to ask about this."
17:59:39 <rebelsky> And you learn as much as your students do.
17:59:50 <rebelsky> You're a co-learner, not the person who has all the knowledge.
17:59:56 <rebelsky> Slide: Instructional Style - Mentor
18:00:11 <rebelsky> Tell them up front: "This class will be different than any other class that you've ever taken."
18:00:12 <rebelsky> And repeat it.
18:00:25 <rebelsky> "Because it's a different learning style, it may not meet their expectations.
18:00:40 <rebelsky> So make it clear that it won't be as scaffolded as a traditional class.
18:00:56 <rebelsky> You may feel like you don't know a lot.  But you know a heck of a lot more than you think you do.
18:01:04 <rebelsky> You know what a good assignment is.
18:01:11 <rebelsky> You know when things are going south in your class.
18:01:15 <rebelsky> You know how to ask questions.
18:01:43 <rebelsky> If you're looking and observing within the community you can give good and bad examples of all sorts of things (e.g., code, artifacts, comments)
18:02:00 <rebelsky> Slide: Instructional Style - Co-Learner
18:02:41 <rebelsky> Heidi's first teaching career was teaching professionals.
18:02:55 <rebelsky> At the start of the semester, should could ask them to set their own learning and assessments.
18:02:59 <rebelsky> Midway through, check in.
18:03:04 <rebelsky> End of semester - They can grade themselves.
18:05:34 <rebelsky> "This is a journey we're taking together.  I don't know it all, but I know enough to keep us on the path."
18:05:47 <rebelsky> Maybe position yourself as project manager.
18:07:21 <rebelsky> Warning!  This is a risky activity.  Be cautious.  Students can be sharks.
18:07:28 <rebelsky> And your evaluations may go down.
18:08:28 <rebelsky> You really have to reconceptualize how you interact with your students.
18:09:22 <rebelsky> Need to make sure that you have appropriate support from your senior faculty.
18:10:23 <rebelsky> Unclear expectations can be harder for less strong students.
18:10:41 <rebelsky> Heidi's expectation is clear: Become involved in the community.
18:12:06 <rebelsky> Difference between a small class (under 10) and a large class.  You know what's going on more with the small class.
18:13:18 <rebelsky> Even students who fail can learn a lot.
18:14:20 <rebelsky> These less clear expectations can be a particular problem where there's a more adversarial relationship - students who will threaten suits if they fail.
18:15:58 <rebelsky> Slide: Instructional Style - Preparing Students
18:16:28 <rebelsky> Gives many opportunities for students, particularly in preparing them for what it's like as a professional.
18:16:43 <rebelsky> Teaching them things in areas in which you don't know much.
18:17:58 <rebelsky> A really hard lesson from Greg's professional life: Having experienced people on the front line - It's hard to get them to say "I don't know.  Let me ask and get back to you."
18:18:26 <rebelsky> Slide: Instructional Style - Be Opportunistic
18:18:35 <rebelsky> Example - Taking students to the Gnome summit.
18:18:54 <rebelsky> Now she's looking for those opportunities any place that she can find them.
18:19:13 <rebelsky> Not all user meetings or FOSS conferences will be hits.  But many will.
18:19:33 <howardf> How does someone find out about these meetings?
18:19:35 <rebelsky> Even when the meetings aren't hits, the students still learn.  Sometimes they learn what they do and don't find interesting.
18:20:38 <rebelsky> Example of Joanie coming to class showing what happens with different visual issues.
18:21:34 <rebelsky> A lot of HFOSS groups would like to have a local hackathon, but they don't have space.
18:21:46 <rebelsky> Internet connections plus a room is helpful.
18:22:04 <rebelsky> [Since Sam's in the middle of Iowa, he doesn't quite believe the "buy pizza and they will show up" message]
18:22:12 <rebelsky> Slide: Issue: Complexity
18:22:29 <rebelsky> The community can help identify the portions of the project that may be of interest.  Potential starting places, etc.
18:23:57 <rebelsky> What do you do about the more remote locations?
18:23:59 <rebelsky> Skype, IRC, etc.
18:24:14 <rebelsky> Although you lose the whiteboard opportunity for design things.
18:25:40 <howardf> there are interactive whiteboards for that.. i'd have to hunt around for some urls though
18:26:56 <rebelsky> Slide; Issue: Unpredictability -1>  What if something goes wrong?
18:27:19 <rebelsky> Loss of contact person can be really hard.  There isn't always a clear successor.  So use the community to try to get support.
18:27:38 <rebelsky> Your grade should not depend on what gets submitted back to the community.  There can still be "deliverables", just local deliverables.
18:28:40 <rebelsky> Heidi's last fall nightmare: Working on Epiphany.  It has a plug-in architecture.  At Hopper, learned that Epiphany was going away from the plug-in architecture.  Students had done requirements and design document.
18:28:58 <rebelsky> So, even though they didn't have code that could be accepted, the code that they developed could provide a base for future stuff.
18:29:38 <rebelsky> Sometimes projects fork (e.g., OpenOffice vs. LibreOffice).  Stick with one of the forks, preferably the one with your contact person.
18:29:48 <rebelsky> And it's a great opportunity for discussion.  Why did this happen?
18:29:55 <rebelsky> Also true for the architecture change.
18:30:35 <rebelsky> Sometimes the need for student contributions disappears.  You can sometimes avoid this by being transparent.
18:30:55 <rebelsky> Pick projects that aren't very specific fixes.  As long as there are choices for the students to make, there can be useful results.
18:32:52 <rebelsky> Slide: Issue: Unpredictability - 2 What if Something Goes Wrong?
18:32:59 <rebelsky> Communities are unlikely to give you anything on the critical path.
18:33:35 <rebelsky> Remember that there's still learning value, even if you don't meet community goals.
18:33:46 <rebelsky> Slide: Issue: Schedule Creep
18:35:51 <rebelsky> Slide: Evaluating Student Work - 1
18:36:04 <rebelsky> Give them the rubric with the assignment.
18:36:12 <rebelsky> Sometimes a 1-3 scale for various things.
18:36:47 <howardf> comment to add... sometimes the rubric can be developed with the students
18:36:48 <rebelsky> The grade does not need to reflect whether or not the task was accomplished.  It can be about what the student has *learned*.  E.g., five positive points, five negative points, what the biggest hurdle was.
18:37:40 <rebelsky> #link: http://swenet.org
18:37:51 <rebelsky> A location that has some resources.
18:38:01 <rebelsky> 'Blogs are public.  Her grades are not public.
18:39:10 <rebelsky> Participation grades also give you a bit of leeway.
18:39:58 <rebelsky> Another alternative: Core set of stuff required and then the student chooses from an additional menu of deliverables (e.g., IRC vs 'Blog vs ....)
18:56:12 <stoneyj> #endmeeting
18:58:44 <rebelsky> .slam rsuehle
18:58:44 <zodbot> rebelsky: (slam <an alias, 2 arguments>) -- Alias for "$1 body slams $2".
18:59:17 <rebelsky> .slam ghilsop rsuehle
18:59:31 <rebelsky> .slam ghislop rsuehle
19:00:46 <stoneyj> .moarbacon
19:00:46 <zodbot> Really stoneyj? I'm not giving up my bacon!
19:01:34 <rsuehle> .table stoneyj
19:01:34 <zodbot> stoneyj is put before a table heaping with bacon and other delights.
19:01:49 <rsuehle> .fire stoneyj
19:01:49 <zodbot> adamw fires stoneyj
19:03:10 <rsuehle> .hotdog
19:03:10 <zodbot> Bow down to your beefy overlord!
19:03:25 <rsuehle> .crane rsuehle ghislop
19:03:25 <zodbot> rsuehle stands in crane technique like daniel-san and face kicks rsuehle ghislop
19:03:59 <rebelsky> #endmeeting