Following up on this interesting and important thread Since I started playing with coding agents, I have rolled out a host of working apps - although I never really got my head around python and json in any meaningful enough way - At first, the apps did not work, but then the LLM embedded debugged them and I got them to work, and they produce valid output. They did not cost anything, took very little time to deploy. I still cannot code meaningfully, but as the debugger gives explanations, I continue to learn I am developing my coding skills very fast, at last
So just to follow up on this thread, I am now developing some lessons on a) code quality evaluation metrics and methods b) free web based platforms tho evaluate the quality of AI generated code I would like to suggest that Carpentries, which is still rocking and has done so much for so many learner considers developing its curriculum in that direction and how if so, I ll be happy to share my lessons I take the opportunity to greet and send winter holiday wishes near and far Paola Di Maio On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 5:46 PM Patrick McCann via discuss < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > > > This has been really interesting to follow. > > > > Apologies if I missed it, but while there has been discussion of the use > of AI in programming and learning to program, I wonder about the relevance > of the purpose to which our learners will be applying their skills. > > > > Our learners are (generally) researchers. They will be using the > techniques and practices we teach to analyse data and generate results for > publication and, ideally, they'll be sharing their data and code alongside > their papers. > > > > Is it of more importance here than in other fields that the person writing > the code has a thorough understanding of how results are achieved, and does > this mean that there should be a different attitude to the use of AI in > programming for research than there might be elsewhere? > > > > Paddy > > > > *From: *Paola Di Maio <[email protected]> > *Date: *Friday, 21 March 2025 at 06:36 > *To: *discuss <[email protected]> > *Subject: *{Disarmed} Re: [cp-discuss] Feedback Request: Lesson Updates > on Generative AI > > Okay, so we need to learn and teach how to code > > How do we go about it? It depends, whatever means are at your disposal > > > > You can code to code camp, find a free online course etc etc > > > > For me ChatGPT and the other tools are like 'teachers' you may be able to > ask questions and get some answers > > > > When I first learned how to code, it must have been Pascal. honestly I had > a lousy human teacher, who could not answer most > > of my questions anyway. He thought I was a pain in the neck because I > asked things that were not in the lesson plan > > He was there to walk me through some text book and exercises and then give > me a mark. > > > > How many people are put off learning code because their teachers are not > really 'good teachers' *or maybe they have limited > > time and patient to deal with difficult students > > > > Given great teachers - there are many around for sure - with abundant time > and patience, of course, it would be great to learn from humans > > but given their limited availability . we can lern through books, online > courses, We are lucky there are plenty of excellent first class free > resources including The Carpentries lessons . Actually when I first got > onto the Carpentries I was told that they were not written for beginners > They > > presumed some familiarity with coding the respective languages, and were > teaching specific tasks. > > > > Even what human teachers say may need critical reading at time - , > because they teach is what they think/know/believe/have experience of > > > > So we must learn how to critically evaluate what our teachers, humans or > otherwise teach us anyway > > Coding is language. AI code generators are just another source of learning > > These days we learn from subjects from online sources. We better keep up > with the > > evolving learning environments and methods > > > > Thanks for the valuable opportunity to exchange! > > > > PDM > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 8:45 AM Adam Obeng <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thank you to the other lurkers for inspiring this lurker to also > participate. > > > > I think the point is very well made that the way someone who can already > code uses GenAI differently to someone who can't, so we can't necessarily > endorse folks taking the existing lessons with GenAI tools. > > > > But which analogy is right: Is using GenAI for coding without knowing how > to code like using a calculator without knowing how to count? Or is it like > using Python without knowing C? > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025, at 1:44 PM, Federica Gazzelloni wrote: > > I am genuinely excited to be living in these times, witnessing the > advancements in technology that are reshaping the way we work and learn. > > > > Comparing this era to when I was in school, it’s fascinating—and perhaps a > little intimidating—how these tools now empower us to achieve results > faster than ever before, while simultaneously elevating our roles to > expert, managerial levels. > > While it’s true that the new generations won’t experience the > labor-intensive learning processes of the past, this isn’t necessarily a > disadvantage. > > > > The removal of some of the more tedious elements of learning allows for a > deeper focus on understanding, critical evaluation, and mastery. > > > > In fact, the expertise required to trust and verify the output of AI tools > demands even greater intellectual engagement. > > > > This shift doesn’t diminish learning; it enriches it. > > > > Consider a reliable assistant always at hand—one that delivers tirelessly > without fear of failure while we focus our efforts into assessing, > correcting, and optimizing. > > > > The act of working alongside AI pushes us to expand our knowledge of the > subject matter and its broader context, ultimately enhancing our learning > journey. > > Rather than replacing foundational learning, AI encourages us to think > critically, explore new approaches, and refine our expertise in ways that > were previously unimaginable. It’s this partnership with technology that > makes learning not only more efficient but also more dynamic and > forward-thinking. > > > > > > Best, > > Federica > > > > > > On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 at 19:55, Hao Ye <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 1:07 PM Sarah Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I think the single most important thing to think about in applying "how to > use AI" advice to this context is expert awareness gap (or blind spot in > broader lit). If you **already knew how to program** before chatgpt came > out, then your experience using them is irrelevant to our target learners. > You are using it with the knowledge of programming you had before you > worked with an LLM. The crux of the issue is that people cannot really test > their knowledge of the underlying concepts that you still need to know > when you work with AI assistance unless you write some code on your own. > > > > THANK YOU > > > > Now i can delete the message I've been churning around in my drafts > folder. :) > > > > Best, > > -- > > Hao Ye > > (he/him/his) > > [email protected] > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 1:07 PM Sarah Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have also been following this "with one eye". > > > > I think the single most important thing to think about in applying "how to > use AI" advice to this context is expert awareness gap (or blind spot in > broader lit). If you **already knew how to program** before chatgpt came > out, then your experience using them is irrelevant to our target learners. > You are using it with the knowledge of programming you had before you > worked with an LLM. The crux of the issue is that people cannot really test > their knowledge of the underlying concepts that you still need to know > when you work with AI assistance unless you write some code on your own. > > > > We have had calculators for a long time, but it has remained essential > that children learn the *concept* of adding and subtracting and relating it > to combining things and taking them away, typically through counting. As > we teach in instructor training, the goal of the carpentries is to help > learners get a good mental model so they can learn more independently > later. If they use the AI right away, they are deprived of the chance to > build the initial mental model. > > > > Someone shared in a carpentries slack channel a while ago a post about an > art class using paper first before digital tools, because digital tools > help you go faster, but learning is necessarily slow. > > > > I feel strongly that it would be in opposition to our goal of applying > evidence-based teaching practices to encourage the use of AI from the > beginning. > > > > *Sarah M Brown, PhD* > > sarahmbrown.org > > Assistant Professor of Computer Science > > University of Rhode Island > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 6:20 AM Jannetta Steyn via discuss < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Thank you Anelda for the link to that post. It did make me realise that > the one thing I didn't mention in my post was that apart from testing one > also has to make sure your code is still readable and maintainable. I did > say in my previous post that it needs to get the job done "in the right > way" which implies that but it is probably worth stating it implicitly. > > > > Jannetta > > > > *Dr. Jannetta Steyn* > > *Training Lead * > > *Senior Research Software Engineer* > > The Catalyst > > Newcastle University > > 3 Science Square > > Newcastle Helix > Newcastle upon Tyne > NE4 5TG > ORCID: 0000-0002-0231-9897 > > RSE Team: https://rse.ncldata.dev > > Personal website: http://jannetta.com > > > > > <https://outlook.office.com/bookwithme/user/[email protected]?anonymous&ep=bwmEmailSignature> > > Book time to meet with me > <https://outlook.office.com/bookwithme/user/[email protected]?anonymous&ep=bwmEmailSignature> > > > ------------------------------ > > > > *From:* Anelda Van der Walt <[email protected]> > *Sent:* 19 March 2025 09:57 > *To:* discuss <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [cp-discuss] Feedback Request: Lesson Updates on > Generative AI > > > > Hi all, > > > > I've also been following this conversation with one eye, being someone who > use ChatGPT all the time for coding-related questions because I don't code > often enough and forget some basics/struggle to debug rediculous error > messages. > > > > By chance, I'm subscribed to a newsletter which included a blog post about > this exact topic today - > https://simplybegin.co.uk/skip-ai-tools-and-learn-for-yourself/. Might be > of interest. > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Anelda > > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 11:54 AM Jannetta Steyn via discuss < > [email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Everyone > > > > I've been following the conversation "with one eye" while busy with a shed > load of other things so I hope my comment is not completely off track. > > > > One word I have not noticed (I might have missed it) is "testing". I don't > really think it matters what tools one uses, as long as it gets the job > done the right way. But, the only way too prove that the actual job is > being done is through thorough testing. If you blindly believe AI tools, > which is what really worries me, you are in for a world of trouble. Just a > couple of weeks ago I witnessed an RA excitedly showing how she got CoPilot > to write code for her and enthusiastically telling everyone that they don't > even need to learn to code because CoPilot will do it for you. > > > > One of my favourite talks is by Prof Brian Randall: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSULNuNP29M. I think it is worth the > watch. > > > > One thing that things like ChatGPT is good for is explaining existing > code, especially for people still learning and trying to figure out what > some existing code does. > > > > Jannetta > > > > *Dr. Jannetta Steyn* > > *Training Lead * > > *Senior Research Software Engineer* > > The Catalyst > > Newcastle University > > 3 Science Square > > Newcastle Helix > Newcastle upon Tyne > NE4 5TG > ORCID: 0000-0002-0231-9897 > > RSE Team: https://rse.ncldata.dev > > Personal website: http://jannetta.com > > > > > <https://outlook.office.com/bookwithme/user/[email protected]?anonymous&ep=bwmEmailSignature> > > Book time to meet with me > <https://outlook.office.com/bookwithme/user/[email protected]?anonymous&ep=bwmEmailSignature> > > > ------------------------------ > > > > *From:* Toby Hodges via discuss <[email protected]> > *Sent:* 19 March 2025 09:38 > *To:* discuss <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [cp-discuss] Feedback Request: Lesson Updates on > Generative AI > > > > ⚠ External sender. Take care when opening links or attachments. Do not > provide your login details. > > Thanks everyone. Responding to a couple of specific points/questions: > > > > @Lex wrote > > > > This point > > > > 1. For most problems you will encounter at this stage, help and answers > can be found among the first results returned by searching the internet. > > > > is to me not very helpful as I think it takes longer time and can be more > frustrating to sift through the search results, while asking a chatbot is > just as helpful for a fraction of the effort. > > > > I intended for this point to be read in the context of the preceding > paragraph about (some of) the ethical concerns with LLMs. The implication > being that search results can be similarly helpful, at a considerably lower > cost. I could make the implicit explicit, by writing something like > > > > “Although it might take you slightly longer to find them, the answers > available online will have been provided directly and willingly by a human, > at a fraction of the environmental cost of getting equivalent help from a > genAI tool.” > > > > I chose to keep things vague, 1. for brevity, 2. for simplicity, and 3. > because opinions vary considerably among the Instructor community on > whether or not such concerns are a “dealbreaker” for the routine use of > genAI. (See also the Instructor Note at the beginning of the section.) > > > > @Somebody (sorry I cannot see who!) wrote > > > > > > I wonder if more could be said about *how* to demonstrate the use of > LLMs. All the bad things people do with LLMs (and Stack Overflow) are > opportunities to demonstrate a better way. > > > > So we could show getting some code from an LLM, and then the steps of > examining variables and understanding their types, inserting debugging > "print" statements, looking up documentation, considering alternative > solutions, and explaining our thought process. > > > > If we want to cover this, it needs to be in a separate lesson or as an > almost total rewrite of existing materials IMO. Delving into this in detail > would be too time consuming during a workshop otherwise, at the cost of all > the other important things we want to teach people. > > > > I hope that next week’s community sessions (Tuesday 25 March, 12:00 and > 21:00 UTC! Sign up on the etherpad! > <https://pad.carpentries.org/community-sessions-2025>) will be an > opportunity for some Instructors to describe and maybe demonstrate how they > have been teaching exactly this. > > > > Thanks again, > > > > Toby > > > > On 19. Mar 2025, at 01:58, Allen Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Lots of great discussion here, and glad to see the community engagement > around this important topic. I posted some comments on the GitHub PR but > wanted to re-share these two links here as I think they are worth the time > (sorry, the video is 2hrs 🫠!) > > > > https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/decoding-and-debunking-hard-forks > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWvNQjAaOHw > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > -- > *Allen Lee* > > Senior Global Futures Scientist > > School of Complex Adaptive Systems > > *Arizona State University* > > Mail Code: 2701 > > Tempe, AZ 85287-2701 > > *p: *480-727-4646 > > *email: *[email protected] > > *git: *https://github.com/alee > > *orcid: *https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6523-6079 > > Center for Behavior, Institutions, and the Environment > <https://complexity.asu.edu/cbie> > > Network for Computational Modeling in the Social and Ecological Sciences > <https://www.comses.net/> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 5:40 PM Paola Di Maio <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I do teach prompt engineering, and would encourage a Carpentries > module/course/lesson > > The question really is learning how to use AI intelligently and critically > > > > Materials on how to use AI for learning to code are already plenty but > > how to work with specific platforms and packages may need refining/require > a more specialised LLM > > <image.png> > > In theory, the LLM can learn from your interaction, so plenty of scope > for Carpentries Instructors to teach the LLM how to code as well :-) > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 8:26 AM Reed A. Cartwright <[email protected]> > wrote: > > My experience with using AI for coding is that if you are not asking it > questions from an algorithms class or similar, you get a lot of > hallucinations that do not work, e.g. R packages that don't exist. You can > ask it follow up questions and it will eventually fix the issues, but that > requires having a firm mental model and the ability to read code and know > how it would work in practice. > > I can see the utility of a Prompt Engineering Carpentries lesson, but I > have no idea how to properly teach prompt engineering. > > > > -- > > Reed A. Cartwright, PhD > > Associate Professor of Genomics, Evolution, and Bioinformatics > > School of Life Sciences and The Biodesign Institute > > Arizona State University > > > Address: The Biodesign Institute, PO Box 876401, Tempe, AZ 85287-6401 USA > > Packages: The Biodesign Institute, 1001 S. McAllister Ave, Tempe, AZ > 85287-6401 USA > > Office: Biodesign B-220C, 1-480-965-9949 > > Website: *MailScanner has detected a possible fraud attempt from > "urldefense.com" claiming to be* *MailScanner has detected a possible > fraud attempt from "urldefense.com" claiming to be* http://cartwrig.ht/ > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://cartwrig.ht/__;!!IKRxdwAv5BmarQ!eK7h6FQJomgaZ0TF4wrpnUvBl0tbFH_vtWOXP7s_vKvM_jV2jEQj951z1w0YCG4WV87pX9F3uxj5he-kAHagHY3Omg$> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 5:04 PM Paul Harrison via discuss < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I wonder if more could be said about *how* to demonstrate the use of > LLMs. All the bad things people do with LLMs (and Stack Overflow) are > opportunities to demonstrate a better way. > > > > So we could show getting some code from an LLM, and then the steps of > examining variables and understanding their types, inserting debugging > "print" statements, looking up documentation, considering alternative > solutions, and explaining our thought process. > > > > It's not so different from the skills needed to read other people's code. > > > > Since LLM output is random it's hard to script this fully, but that also > seems in keeping with the Carpentries workshop format. > > > > > > -- > > > > Dr Toby Hodges (he/him) > > Director of Curriculum > > The Carpentries | https://carpentries.org > > > > Schedule a meeting with me: https://calendly.com/tobyhodges > > > > This list is for the purpose of general discussion about The Carpentries > including community activities, upcoming events, and announcements. Some > other lists you may also be interested in include discuss-hpc, discuss-r, > and our local groups. Visit https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/ to > learn more. All activity on this and other Carpentries spaces should abide > by The Carpentries Code of Conduct found here: > https://docs.carpentries.org/topic_folders/policies/code-of-conduct.html > *The Carpentries <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/latest>* / discuss / > see discussions <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss> + > participants <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/members> + > delivery options > <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/subscription> Permalink > <https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/T6365b55e0df488d9-Mf2966cbf069d83cb1326b62b> > ------------------------------------------ This list is for the purpose of general discussion about The Carpentries including community activities, upcoming events, and announcements. Some other lists you may also be interested in include discuss-hpc, discuss-r, and our local groups. Visit https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/ to learn more. All activity on this and other Carpentries spaces should abide by The Carpentries Code of Conduct found here: https://docs.carpentries.org/topic_folders/policies/code-of-conduct.html The Carpentries: discuss Permalink: https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/T93784e3bf5482411-M7986039714a845490d9b512c Delivery options: https://carpentries.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/subscription
