On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 05:20:50AM -0500, Mel Chua wrote: >>>> 1) To become a POSSE instructor, you must first attend a POSSE yourself. >>>> >>>> 2) Then you co-teach a POSSE with a current instructor. >>>> >>>> >>> I can understand requirement 2. I think co-teaching with somebody who >>> has already taught a POSSE is important to gain an understanding of the >>> target feel for the class. The first requirement, however, seems to be >>> unnecessarily restrictive---there are some faculty who already >>> understand open source, know how to use a wiki, etc. > > First of all, thanks for bringing up the question, Matt - and also to > Titus for chiming in. As I said in my email to you earlier, these are > all first-round thoughts and could definitely use pushback and shaping, > which is in large part why I threw it out to this list. ;) > > The intent behind requirement #1 was twofold: > > (1) To make sure instructors see the process of improvising the POSSE > curriculum before doing it themselves - this remains my primary concern, > but maybe there are ways to address it. > > The thing is, the POSSE curriculum is in some ways like a Barcamp > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BarCamp) - it's highly variable and > responsive to what's happening in the community at the moment, who's > online, who's there, what people are interested in... and it's hard to > describe to someone who hasn't been to one before. If you didn't know > what a Barcamp was and showed up on the first day expected to "run" it, > well... I'd be nervous. But. Again, maybe addressable. > > (2) To make sure instructors would have both tool-using skills and FOSS > community exposure/involvement - this doesn't necessarily correlate with > the first requirement, as Matt and Titus both pointed out. Someone like > Titus, with many years in FOSS and teaching, would have a greater depth > of knowledge and community connections than someone who's just finished > attending POSSE as their first exposure to FOSS contribution - it > doesn't make sense for him to *not* be able to co-instruct. And > actually, we've already broken this "rule" before setting it, since > Harish didn't attend a POSSE before teaching it, though he did watch us > plan and execute the first one, and planned the Singapore one with us > from the very start. > > Maybe that's the solution: To co-teach, if you haven't been to a POSSE > before, you must be a co-organizer of the POSSE you are co-teaching at, > from proposal all the way to execution. That way, you will build a > mental picture over time of what the week might look like. > > How's this: > > 0) POSSEs are always taught by at least 2 instructors. > 1) To become a POSSE instructor, you co-teach a POSSE with a current > instructor. (In this case, you count as the second instructor.) > 2) In order to co-teach, you must either be a POSSE alumni, OR make the > case to your co-instructor that you have equivalent (or better) > background/skills in FOSS tools/communities, AND be the primary > organizer of the POSSE you co-teach at. > > Also: how would folks feel about requiring that at least one of the > instructors at a POSSE teach - or have taught - at the college level? I > think there's a lot of value in the professors-teaching-professors > model, but could be adding more structure than we actually need.
+1 strong suggestion. -1 requirement. But that's a general principle of mine... The Barcamp comparison raises a red flag for illogic: "every one is different, so how will you know how to run one if you don't attend one that we run?" ;) I think you could just say that running a POSSE involves deep interplay between teaching, knowledge of open source, and technology -- and you don't want to run one unless you have a lot of experience in all three. One very good way to get that experience is to participate in one! cheers, --titus -- C. Titus Brown, c...@msu.edu _______________________________________________ tos mailing list tos@teachingopensource.org http://teachingopensource.org/mailman/listinfo/tos
