[Foss4g2009] Workshops

[Paul Ramsey]

"Deep Dive?" :)

2008/10/23 Daniel Ames <amesdani at isu.edu>:
> My team said that the lab had a lot more attendance than the workshop -
> probably since it was shorter (less of a commitment from the attendees in
> case they were only marginally interested) and also the labs were integrated
> into the conference space/schedule. I think that's a good thing.
> Though, I've never had to orchestrate the logistics of such a thing. So,
> given the idea of dropping the computer lab, I would propose:
> Go with the a computer-less lab. In such a setting people could come and get
> a very thorough introduction to a piece of software - much more than in a 15
> minute talk.  They could meet the developer team and learn about the project
> and see a demo and so forth.
> Perhaps a name other than "lab" is needed.  Something like "Project
> Spotlight" where a single project is spotlighted and talked about and
> instructed on and demo'd etc for the 90 minutes. (or even 60 minutes? though
> much less wouldn't be much of a spotlight)
> - Dan
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 3:32 PM, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I'm hearing advice on cutting labs, which I'm fine with, but I'm concerned
>> that no one is addressing what I consider to be our immediate need with
>> regards to defining the revised program, and hence what rooms we require.
>>
>> If we take away labs, should we replace them with computer-less labs?
>> Probably renamed as tutorials.
>>
>> The most important question for me - which I want to resolve by our budget
>> meeting on Tuesday, is are we having 1 day or labs or 2? (I'm adverse to
>> changing to 2 days, I think it is too much of a change to the expected
>> program).
>>
>> Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>>>
>>> Paul Ramsey wrote:
>>>>
>>>> They double (or more) the number of different software combinations
>>>> that need to be supported, but since they are shorter, they have a
>>>> smaller increment of teaching-time-to-logistical-prep-time-required.
>>>> They also tend to be less in-depth and because they are shorter they
>>>> make less effective use of the lab equipment (proportionally more
>>>> watching-the-teacher time and less using-the-computer time).
>>>
>>> Paul,
>>>
>>> Your points are pretty strong.  I would note that some potential
>>> instructors, such as myself, are rather hesitant to take on the
>>> responsibility of a full three hour workshop, and the 90 minute lab
>>> makes a more approach intermediate commitment.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter
>> Geospatial Systems Architect
>> Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
>> Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254
>>
>> Think Globally, Fix Locally
>> Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
>> http://www.lisasoft.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foss4g2009 mailing list
>> Foss4g2009 at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2009
>
>
>
> --
> Daniel P. Ames PhD, PE
> Department of Geosciences
> Idaho State University - Idaho Falls
> amesdani at isu.edu
> www.MapWindow.org
> www.Hydromap.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foss4g2009 mailing list
> Foss4g2009 at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g2009
>
>