[eclipse.org-pmc-leads] Re: Suggestion for tutorials

[Richard Gronback <richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Title: Re: Suggestion for tutorials

I like the explicit distinction between hands-on and “just talking” with this approach, which is as important to the presenters as it is the attendees when selecting.

I also think it fits well with the concept of multi-project/track mash-ups, as they would require longer talks and/or day-long tutorials to do well.  If we’re going to do this, we’ll need to adjust our current allocations to make room. Volunteers?

Who else is in favor of this approach, and which tracks would like to divide their tutorial allocation along these lines?  Attached is an updated spreadsheet.

Thanks,
Rich




On 7/27/06 11:49 AM, "Bjorn Freeman-Benson" <bjorn.freeman-benson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> There are no logistics constraints on tutorial length.
>
> The hands-on tutorials have not been a big success at EclipseCon in the past few years for a few reasons: (1) some people don't have laptops (I can't imagine why you would go to a hands-on tutorial without a laptop, but there it is); (2) the exercises tend to be too hard to do in a short time (basically, it's very hard to design small informative coding lessons against the huge Eclipse APIs); (3) many of the attendees are at the wrong knowledge level to do the exercises effectively. (Note that there have been successful hands-on tutorials so these are not 100%.)
>
> So I like this idea. In fact, maybe we should change the tutorials to two kinds: Very Long Talks (2 Hours; 3 per day) and Hands On Workshops (all day; 1 per day). The HOW could then be smaller and have sufficient time to really do a programming exercise. The HOW would be sort of a plug-in clinic about one specific topic.
>
> Richard Gronback wrote: 
> >  Re: Suggestion for tutorials Hi Doug,
> >  
> > I don’t think it’s a bad idea, although I personally feel tutorials should be hands-on and not just a long(er) talk.  In reality, not all who attend tutorials come prepared to actually do hands-on activities, which is unfortunate.
> >  
> > >From last year’s feedback (http://www.eclipsecon.org/2006/SurveyResults/report.html), <http://www.eclipsecon.org/2006/SurveyResults/report.html%29,> it’s not quite clear what the general consensus is, so I’d be interested in hearing feedback from others on this as well.  I’m sure there are some logistical aspects Bjorn can enlighten us about.
> >  
> >  


-- 
Richard C. Gronback
Borland Software Corporation
richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx
+1 860 227 9215

Attachment: EclipseCon2007.zip
Description: Binary data