Anonymous user
Community Data Science Workshops (Spring 2014)/Reflections: Difference between revisions
Community Data Science Workshops (Spring 2014)/Reflections (view source)
Revision as of 22:12, 15 March 2015
, 9 years agomoved to wiki.communitydata.cc
imported>Mako |
imported>Jtmorgan m (moved to wiki.communitydata.cc) |
||
| (15 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{CDSW Moved}}
Over three weekends in Spring 2014, a group of volunteers organized the [[Community Data Science Workshops]] (CDSW) — a series of four sessions designed to introduce some of the basic tools of programming and analysis of data from online communities to absolute beginners. The CDSW were held between April 4th and May 31st in 2014 at the University of Washington in Seattle. ▼
▲Over three weekends in Spring 2014, a group of volunteers organized the [[Community Data Science Workshops (Spring 2014)]] (CDSW) —
This page hosts reflections on organization and curriculum and is written for anybody interested in organizing their own CDSW — including the authors!
In general, the mentors and students
If you have any questions or issues, you can contact [[Benjamin Mako Hill]] directly or can email the whole group of mentors at cdsw-sp2014-mentors@uw.edu.
== Structure ==
The [[
* '''Session 0 (Friday April 4th)''': [[
* '''Session 1 (Saturday April 5th)''': [[
* '''Session 2 (Saturday May 3rd)''': [[
* '''Session 3 (Saturday May 31st)''': [[
Our organization and the curriculum for Sessions 0 and 1 were borrowed from the [http://bostonpythonworkshop.com/ Boston Python Workshop] (BPW): Session 0 was a three hour evening session to install software. The other sessions were all day-long session (10am to 4pm) sessions broken up into the following schedule:
Line 56 ⟶ 60:
=== Projects ===
In the afternoons, we
In Sessions 1 and 2, the self-directed projects were based on working through examples from [http://www.codecademy.com/ Code Academy] that we had put from material already online on the website. In the self-directed track, students could work at their own pace with mentors on hand to work with them when they became stuck.
Line 65 ⟶ 69:
* All of the libraries necessary to run the examples (e.g., [http://www.tweepy.org/ Tweepy] for the Session 2 Twitter track).
* All of the data necessary to run the example programs (e.g., a full English word list for the Wordplay
* Any other necessary code or libraries we had written for the example.
* A series of small numbered example programs (~5-10 examples). Each example program attempts to be sparse, well documented, and not more than 10-15 lines of Python code. Each program tried both to do something concrete but also provide an example for learners to modify. Althought it was not always
On average, the non-self-directed afternoon tracks constituted of about 30% impromptu lecture where a designated lead mentor would walk through one or more of the examples explaining the code and concepts in detail and answerinig questions.
Learners would work on these challenges at their own pace working with mentors for help. If the group was stuck on a concept or tool, the lead mentor would bring the group back together to walk through the concept using the project in the full group.
Line 81 ⟶ 85:
== Session 0: Python Setup ==
The goal of this session was to get users setup with Python and starting to learn some of the basics. The setup curriculum was adpated from BPW. We ran into the following challanges:
* Users on Windows struggled to get Python setup and added to their path.
Line 99 ⟶ 103:
== Session 1: Introduction to Python ==
The goal of this session was to teach the basic of programming in Python. The curriculum for BPW has been used many times and is well tested. Unsurprisingly, it worked well for us as well.
That said, there several things we will change when we teach the material again:
Line 115 ⟶ 119:
== Session 2: Learning APIs ==
The goal of this session was to describe what web APIs were, how they worked (making HTTP requests and receiving data back), how to understand JSON Data, and how to use common web APIs from Wikipedia and Twitter.
Mentors and students felt that this session was the most successful and effective session.
Line 143 ⟶ 149:
== Session 3: Data Analysis and Visualization ==
The goal of this session was to get users to the point where they could take data from a web API and ask and answer basic data science questions by using Python to manipulating data and by creating simple visualizations.
Our philosophy in Session 3 was to teach users to get data into tools they already know and use. We thought this would be a better use of their time and help make users independent earlier.
Line 173 ⟶ 181:
== General Feedback ==
One suggestion to try to address this is to add an additional
* The spacing between sessions too much. In part, this was due to the fact that we were creating curriculum as we went. Next time, we will try to do the sessions every other week (e.g., 3 sessions in 5 weeks).▼
* The breaks for lunch were a bit too long. We took 1 hours breaks but 45 minutes would have been enough for everybody. Learners were interested in getting back in action.▼
* The general structure of the entire curriculum was not as clear as it might have been. This was at least in part because the details of what we would teach int he later sessions were not done but it led to questions. In the future, we should present this clearly up front.▼
▲* The spacing between sessions too
▲* The breaks for lunch were a bit too long. We took 1
▲* The general structure of the entire curriculum was not as clear as it might have been which led to some confusion. This was, at least in part, because the details of what we would teach
* We did not have enough mentors with experience using Python in Windows. We had many skilled GNU/Linux users and ''zero'' students running GNU/Linux. Most of the mentors used Mac OSX and most of the learners ran Windows.
* Although we did not use it as a recruitment or selection criteria, a majority of the participants in the session were women. Although we had a mix of men and women mentors, the fact that most of our mentors were male and most of
* The SWC-style sticky notes worked extremely well but were used less, and seemed to have less value, as we
In the future We might also want to spend time devoting more time explicitly to teaching: ▼
▲* Although we did not use it as a recruitment or selection criteria, a majority of the participants in the session were women. Although we had a mix, the fact that most of our mentors were male and most of he mentors were female set up a strange dynamic. If we expect to have a similar ratio in the future, we should recruit female mentors and, in particular, attract women to lead the afternoon sessions (all of the afternoon session leaders were male).
▲* The SWC-style sticky notes worked extremely well but were used less and seemed to have less value as we went along.
▲We might also want to spend time devoting more time explicitly to teaching:
* Debugging code
* Finding and reading documentation
* Troubleshooting and looking at StackExchange for answers to programming questions
=== Budget ===
For lunch we spent between $400 (pizza), $360 (a few less
Most mentors could not make the
All of our food was generously supported by the [http://escience.washington.edu/ eScience Institute at UW]. The rooms were free because they were provided by [http://www.com.washington.edu UW Department of Communication]
If you had a total budget would be in the order of $2000-2500, I think you could easily do a similar 3.5 day-long set of workshops. If we had a little more, we could do better than pizza for lunch.
<!-- LocalWords: CDSW BPW JSON
| |||