[LispSea] instruction then presentation
Stating the obvious, what's needed right now is instruction. So, let's start at the beginning of shaping Seattle as a Lisp town-- shall we? After all, the more people who know Lisp locally, the better chances we all have for getting paying work doing Lisp since having a pool of talent is a requirement for most business. For the consultant's perspective (where businesses don't care what language it is, so long as the work-for-hire does what they need it to do), I would like to deploy a Lisp-based system knowing that there are others whom can continue the on-going operations. Anyone interested in teaching Lisp? Anyone have formal experience as an instructor? I believe Lisp is more about the approach than syntax or API, and that's saying a lot, considering how the "core" Common Lisp library is massive compared to the usual suspects. What's needed is a demonstration of code maturing from blank canvas to just-get-something-working to various directions of "what if?" before settling on what's right for the task at hand. We could structure our sessions with the first 30 minutes for instruction and the next hour or so as deeper presentation, show & tell, etc. Comments? -Daniel
What's needed is a demonstration of code maturing from blank canvas to just-get-something-working to various directions of "what if?" before settling on what's right for the task at hand.
We could structure our sessions with the first 30 minutes for instruction and the next hour or so as deeper presentation, show & tell, etc.
I agree this is a good approach but I do think that the emphasis has to be on how to do things 'The Lisp Way (tm).' I have found Marco Baringer's video demos <http://http://www.cl-user.net/asp/web-sites/slime-video>, <http://www.cl-user.net/asp/web-sites/ucw-video>) useful in how the lisp development process can work; I would be very interested in learning how to think in lisp -- CLOS, macros, "bottom-up, top-down" approaches, idioms, etc. Common Lisp is a general purpose language, with acute accent on 'general' so it would be great to see how different developers attack similar problems.
Daniel J Pezely wrote:
Anyone interested in teaching Lisp?
Not for $0. I just went down to Portland and made $0 on signatures, after my motel bills. It's not fun. Overdrafting one's bank account sucks.
What's needed is a demonstration of code maturing from blank canvas to just-get-something-working to various directions of "what if?" before settling on what's right for the task at hand.
I think it needs domain-specific grounding. People aren't interested in Lisp or Scheme. People are interested in what Language X can do for game development, webhosting, system administration, scientific visualization, etc.
We could structure our sessions with the first 30 minutes for instruction and the next hour or so as deeper presentation, show & tell, etc.
Nobody learns anything in 30 minutes. Nor does anyone learn anything in 2 days. I am completely cynical about conferences. I don't think "being a free instructor" can possibly work as Grand Strategy. I think we have to motivate people to learn on their own, and provide them resources that help them do that. The reality is you have to be pretty smart and self-motivated to bother to swallow a new language or technology when you're already innundated with many other mundane life concerns. People like that do exist; SeaFunc has a disproportionate number of them. The vanguard that is competent to do things on their own is what needs to be cultivated. The masses have to wait until the vanguard has proven they can get some results. Cheers, Brandon Van Every
Brandon wrote:
Anyone interested in teaching Lisp?
Not for $0.
Think bigger! Who said anything about not getting paid? It's easy enough to get a course into the UW Experimental College or via one of the community colleges. (SCCC is taking applications for Winter session.) I was actually hoping that we might tap a grad student or professor who might be interested in offering a course outside the normal computer science curriculum but not diluted, either. It can and should be separate from a "users' group" structure.
Nobody learns anything in 30 minutes.
For picking up something like an entire language, I agree. For incremental tweaking of one's knowledge such as picking up an alternative approach or finding a new library, 30 can be enough.
Nor does anyone learn anything in 2 days.
I disagree with the blanket condemnation. Immersion-- even a brief two day series of workshops-- has its place for /some/ people. Perhaps it's just not for you. Likewise, some learn best in classrooms while others find that "spoon-fed" knowledge just doesn't work for them. I've taken the discussion of a seminar/workshop to the Gardeners list last night, so we'll see what comes of that.
... I think we have to motivate people to learn on their own, and provide them resources that help them do that. ...
People have to motivate themselves-- you know, "you can lead a horse to water but can't make it drink" and all that. Having used Lisp in the past, I know that it's a steep two year learning curve for Common Lisp. That's two solid years of progressive use and before crossing-over for it becoming one's principal language. Many just want to take the blue pill, jack in and download knowledge-- sorry, try again! As far as resources are concerned, there are enough out there for people to learn; of course, *finding* anything easily is the biggest problem, and quality could be improved. ...And that takes us back to comments last month on this list: build a "one stop shopping" portal web site for lisp, do something useful with the Lisp Questionnaire, etc. However, the Gardeners are addressing those types of larger issues; participation encouraged: http://www.lispniks.com/cl-gardeners/ Plus, several individuals are adding to the collection of Lisp movies. http://www.cliki.net/Lisp%20Videos Where does that leave us? What need would we fill that isn't already addressed elsewhere? -Daniel
Daniel J Pezely wrote:
Brandon wrote:
Anyone interested in teaching Lisp?
Not for $0.
Think bigger! Who said anything about not getting paid?
It can and should be separate from a "users' group" structure.
Ok, but how about the horse before the cart? Would like to get a user group healthy and not confuse it for paid instruction.
... I think we have to motivate people to learn on their own, and provide them resources that help them do that. ...
People have to motivate themselves-- you know, "you can lead a horse to water but can't make it drink" and all that.
We could do plenty to make the water more accessible. Even getting an open source Lisp or Scheme system set up and operational is a PITA.
Having used Lisp in the past, I know that it's a steep two year learning curve for Common Lisp. That's two solid years of progressive use and before crossing-over for it becoming one's principal language.
It can be sped up if there's a driving problem with concrete examples.
Where does that leave us? What need would we fill that isn't already addressed elsewhere?
Personal interaction, people with specific domain expertise that can show Lisp or Scheme actually being useful for something. Cheers, Brandon Van Every
At risk of getting myself into trouble here, I would like to add two things to this conversation: 1. I teach a course in the UW biomedical and health informatics graduate program, which is about biomedical computing using Common Lisp, but the disadvantage of that (it IS open to nonmatriculated students) is that the UW is expensive relative to other possible options. I'd love to have some people from the community join in. Here is the URL: http://www.radonc.washington.edu/medinfo/mebi531/ 2. I'd be willing to teach an intro Common Lisp course, either in the context of the UW Experimental College or under other auspices, and I would not necessarily need to get paid for it. In fact, if I got paid I would have to get permission in advance... I have some small and large concrete examples from my own work, which involve numerical computation, interactive graphics, network sockets, and more. If it helped to kickstart some interest, I would be willing to put together a one hour enticement that could be done at a user's group meeting, too. Ira Kalet Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
Daniel J Pezely wrote:
Brandon wrote:
Anyone interested in teaching Lisp?
Not for $0.
Think bigger! Who said anything about not getting paid?
It can and should be separate from a "users' group" structure.
Ok, but how about the horse before the cart? Would like to get a user group healthy and not confuse it for paid instruction.
... I think we have to motivate people to learn on their own, and provide them resources that help them do that. ...
People have to motivate themselves-- you know, "you can lead a horse to water but can't make it drink" and all that.
We could do plenty to make the water more accessible. Even getting an open source Lisp or Scheme system set up and operational is a PITA.
Having used Lisp in the past, I know that it's a steep two year learning curve for Common Lisp. That's two solid years of progressive use and before crossing-over for it becoming one's principal language.
It can be sped up if there's a driving problem with concrete examples.
Where does that leave us? What need would we fill that isn't already addressed elsewhere?
Personal interaction, people with specific domain expertise that can show Lisp or Scheme actually being useful for something.
Cheers, Brandon Van Every
_______________________________________________ seattle mailing list seattle@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seattle
At risk of getting myself into trouble here, I would like to add two things to this conversation:
1. I teach a course in the UW biomedical and health informatics graduate program, which is about biomedical computing using Common Lisp, but the disadvantage of that (it IS open to nonmatriculated students) is that the UW is expensive relative to other possible options. I'd love to have some people from the community join in. Here is the URL:
This is very cool. How does one go about enrolling?
For anyone interested in my class, MEBI 531, which I mentioned in a previous email, anyone can enroll at the UW in what used to be "non-matriculated" status, without going through any admission process. The new name for this is "Non-degree enrollment" and you can take almost any class at the UW that has room (some are limited to degree majors, some have size limits, but mine is not limited in this way). All the info is at the UW web site at http://www.outreach.washington.edu/nondegree/ Two important things: 1. For a 3 credit graduate class (which mine is), the cost is about $1300 for tuition and other fees. 2. It looks like the UW outreach web site is missing a link - our department changed its name and course prefix a few years ago, to Medical Education and Biomedical Informatics (MEBI), so rather than going to the Time Schedule through the "Find a class" alphabetical list, use the link on the left, "go directly to the UW time schedule". Then select Autumn 2006, then scroll down through the schools, colleges and departments to the School of Medicine, then the Department of Medical Education and Biomedical Informatics. If you find that registering for the class requires an entry code or some such thing, contact Joan San at 206 616 0369 (jvsan@u.washington.edu). Best regards, Ira Kalet Gregory Martin Pfeil wrote:
At risk of getting myself into trouble here, I would like to add two things to this conversation:
1. I teach a course in the UW biomedical and health informatics graduate program, which is about biomedical computing using Common Lisp, but the disadvantage of that (it IS open to nonmatriculated students) is that the UW is expensive relative to other possible options. I'd love to have some people from the community join in. Here is the URL:
This is very cool. How does one go about enrolling?
participants (5)
-
Brandon J. Van Every -
Bruce Butterfield -
Daniel J Pezely -
Gregory Martin Pfeil -
Ira Kalet