Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 18:21:56 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: compsoc@inf.ed.ac.uk To: compsoc@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [compsoc] Cascade On Tue, 13 May 2003, James Addison wrote: > I was just wondering if anyone had any more information on the Cascade project > mentioned at the Grand CompSoc AGM last week. I'm pretty interested in the > idea, and would like to help out. Have we got any kind of collective idea of > how this thing should work or be implemented? We should organise a meeting of the nascent Cascade Working Group, as agreed at the AGM. I'm willing to take people aside during the meeting tomorrow, and/or arrange another time to meet up and discuss it. If anyone else wants in, let me know. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh Grind 'em up, spit 'em out, they're TWIGS. Now with added WOOD! _______________________________________________ compsoc mailing list compsoc@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/compsoc Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 18:57:51 +0100 From: Martin Ling Reply-To: compsoc@inf.ed.ac.uk To: The University Of Edinburgh Computing and Artificial Intelligence Society Subject: Re: [compsoc] Cascade On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 06:21:56PM +0100, pajh@ed.ac.uk wrote: > > We should organise a meeting of the nascent Cascade Working Group, as > agreed at the AGM. I'm willing to take people aside during the meeting > tomorrow, and/or arrange another time to meet up and discuss it. I'm in revision hell at the moment and might not make it along tomorrow, though of course still want to be involved. What's the situation with the School? Are we bringing Mike Fourman to the proposed meeting or is there some lesser creature with whom we must liase? Martin -- http://the.earth.li/~martin/ _______________________________________________ compsoc mailing list compsoc@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/compsoc Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 23:45:11 +0100 (BST) From: Mark A Miles Reply-To: compsoc@inf.ed.ac.uk To: compsoc@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [compsoc] Cascade On Tue, 13 May 2003 pajh@ed.ac.uk wrote: > We should organise a meeting of the nascent Cascade Working Group, as > agreed at the AGM. I'm willing to take people aside during the meeting > tomorrow, and/or arrange another time to meet up and discuss it. I can't attend tomorrow (work; parading at 2pm), but please keep me informed as to what's happening. I remember when I started in '99 I saw how useful Cascade would be and what's its potential could be: I thought it was lamentable that it wasn't (then) Division wide... -Mark _______________________________________________ compsoc mailing list compsoc@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/compsoc Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 18:34:30 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: [cascaders-internal] Welcome to my world This is a mailing list set up for discussion on the Cascade scheme and how it should work. On implementaion of the scheme, assuming that ever happens, it will become a list for cascaders to discuss amongst themselves. All of you have expressed some interest in the scheme at one stage or another. If you have anything you feel we should be talking about, now is the time. Speak. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh Grind 'em up, spit 'em out, they're TWIGS. Now with added WOOD! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 22:42:33 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Welcome to my world On Wed, 14 May 2003, Rupert Hair wrote: > > Speak. > Thanks Paul. Do we have any code or documentation from the previous > incarnation(s?) of cascade? There was some almost entirely unfathomable perl for the signin and signout commands on the AI machines. These have since burned to a crisp. Anyway, the current thinking is to implement Cascade with a ticketing system a la RT3. Hence, we can have an email and web interface and open out support requests to response from anyone who might know the answer. RT is already implemented on DICE, so getting it to work for us will (probably) be (relatively) straightforward. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh Grind 'em up, spit 'em out, they're TWIGS. Now with added WOOD! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 22:58:00 +0100 (BST) From: michael eng To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Welcome to my world * pajh@ed.ac.uk-san ga 2003-05-14 no 22:42 (+0100) ni kakimashita > > Anyway, the current thinking is to implement Cascade with a ticketing > system a la RT3. Hence, we can have an email and web interface and open > out support requests to response from anyone who might know the answer. I am not convinced of this. What then is the difference between Cascade and support? Bitter experience of implementing ticketing systems tells me that people get put off by talking to a machine when they want help -- they want to talk to a human. By all means have tickets but keep the human contact the first and primary means of contact. Michael _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:18:04 +0100 From: Martin Ling To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Welcome to my world On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 10:58:00PM +0100, michael eng wrote: > > > Anyway, the current thinking is to implement Cascade with a ticketing > > system a la RT3. Hence, we can have an email and web interface and open > > out support requests to response from anyone who might know the answer. > > I am not convinced of this. What then is the difference between Cascade > and support? Bitter experience of implementing ticketing systems tells me > that people get put off by talking to a machine when they want help -- > they want to talk to a human. The difference between *Cascade's ticketing system* and support is then: a) anyone can view and respond. b) the subject matter. As Paul and I discussed today, face-to-face help is an almost entirely separate issue from online. The only real potential interactions between the two are how Cascaders might be chosen for some kind of demonstrator duty, and how Cascaders should be advised to update online info (eg FAQs) with problems raised during real-world contact, or check the online archive for previous solutions to a problem that they cannot solve immediately on the spot. Neither is affected greatly by the specifics of the online side. Personally (and I believe Paul agrees with me) I belive we absolutely need both - but the specifics of the face-to-face side depend very much on factors which are currently unknown, so we're getting on with working on the rest while we wait for Informatics to make their move. Martin -- http://the.earth.li/~martin/ _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 10:16:26 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Welcome to my world On Wed, 14 May 2003, michael eng wrote: > By all means have tickets but keep the human contact the first and primary > means of contact. I think I should clarify the way the original Cascade system worked (with the proviso, of course, that there is no reason why we should do it the same way this time). There was almost no electronic component in the original system. The `signin' and `signout' commands were used so cascaders could specify that they were available (i.e. in the labs), and the `cascade' command allowed students to find out who the cascaders were and where they were, so they could go and ask them questions. The moose was also important. The moose was another way of identifying a real live cascader that one could walk up to and ask questions. While I have no doubt that some people used email or talk connections to resolve cascade issues, face-to-face communication was the primary means of dealing with matters. The way I see Cascade is as a slightly more structured way of turning to one's terminal neighbour and saying "excuse me, what am I doing wrong here?", without losing any of the informality of such an exchange. Hence I agree with Michael that face-to-face contact with Real Live Human Beings is important. However, none of us want to become demonstrators. (Clarification: none of us want to become demonstrators without getting paid for it.) And unless we organise a rota so that at least one cascader is in the labs 24/7, there will be cries for help that go unanswered. Furthermore, accessibility is key, and it's important that people have as many ways of contacting cascaders as they feel they need. So I also agree that a web interface (and/or similar) is important. As Martin and I discussed yesterday, it will help to remove duplication of effort and keep the system open. Further, a system with world-readable tickets will act as a kind of FAQ. There will always be the opportunity for people to talk in person after a request has gone into the system. I could have sworn I had a point, but it's gone. Eugh. Mornings. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh Grind 'em up, spit 'em out, they're TWIGS. Now with added WOOD! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 20:07:18 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: [cascaders-internal] Re: Cascade (fwd) Anyone still awake out there? We have a divisional contact. His name is Jacques Fleuriot. Some of you may know him. I don't. (I keep thinking of Jacques-Jacques Livereaux, but that's not him.) It's all been so bloody long that I've forgotten what he was supposed to do. Something to do with being a member of the teaching staff so we can ensure that the cascaders are suitable for the post. Or posts. Whichever. Grammar is for the weak. I think I'll pop him an email and see if we can arrange a time to meet inbetween my busy schedule of work, revision, sleep and anime. Any thoughts, drop me an email. Actually, drop me an email anyway, just so I know that someone still cares. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 17:21:41 +0100 From: Anna Hobbs To: pajh@ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: Cascade Dear Paul, I can finally confirm that Jacques Fleuriot will take on the role of 'Cascaded Learning coordinator' for 2003-04. Please let me (or Neil) know if the ITO can provide you with any assistance. Thanks, Anna pajh@ed.ac.uk wrote: > I've been pointed in your direction by Neil McGillivray, who suggested > that you might be able to help me. You might remember the Cascaded > Learning Scheme run by AIsoc until a few years ago. Essentially an > informal network for student support whereby the older and/or more > experienced students, identified by bean-bag mooses, could help out the > students in lower years. > > AIsoc died a few years ago and the Cascade scheme faded into myth, but the > soc has since been restarted (with a view to amalgamating CompSoc and > AIsoc into what, in all but name, would be an InformaticSoc). I have been > asked to get the Cascade Scheme operational for an October rollout. I will > be Cascaded Learning Scheme Co-ordinator, and constitutionally I need a > Cascaded Learning Scheme Organiser to act as my liaison with the Division. > Since this is a teaching matter, I am concerned that it should be done > correctly. > > The relevant section of the AIsoc constitution follows. Please note that > this is the old constitution from when AIsoc existed as a separate entity > (as did the School of AI). The wording is highly likely to change at the > joint AIsoc/CompSoc AGM, in a fortnight's time. > > "[...]Cascaded Learning Scheme Co-ordinator, responsible in liaison with > the Cascaded Learning Scheme Organiser (a member of staff at the School of > Artificial Intelligence), for the selection and renewal of ``cascaders''. > The Cascaded Learning Scheme Co-ordinator is also responsible for > advertising the Scheme in the School of Artificial Intelligence, and for > maintaining the Scheme's webpage as well as the `cascade', > `signin' and `signout' scripts running on the School of AI > machines. > > People who have been suggested to me as possible Organisers include Qiang > Shen, Gillian Hayes and Chris Mellish. Of these, other members of staff > have begged, nay, pleaded with me not to use Qiang or Gillian, who are > both already too busy; and Chris Mellish, who agreed to take on the post, > then decided to leave Edinburgh. Do you have any ideas for other > possibilities? > > Thanks > > > > pajh > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Paul A J Hamilton > School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh > > Grind 'em up, spit 'em out, they're TWIGS. > Now with added WOOD! > _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 00:44:56 +0100 From: Kate Ho To: pajh@ed.ac.uk Cc: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: Cascade (fwd) [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] Paul, I still care. But in true management stylee, I suggest the best way to go is to meet initally to "brainstorm". This can be done physically or virtually. But for best results, I recommend physically. My two cents, Kate _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:30:09 +0100 From: michael eng To: pajh@ed.ac.uk Cc: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: Cascade (fwd) [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] I am. How is the revision going? (that's not a sarcastic comment, btw). Are you planning to meet with Jacques soon? It might be worth trying to extract his expectations of Cascade as useful input for working out what we are trying to do. I am all up for a meeting. Let's relentlessly break barriers that constrain performance excellence. The pursuit of excellence is all about striving to be the best. Disregarding that, logistics prevent, so if I am able to participate it won't be in person. Michael -- Quoting pajh@ed.ac.uk: > Anyone still awake out there? > > We have a divisional contact. His name is Jacques Fleuriot. Some of you > may know him. I don't. > > (I keep thinking of Jacques-Jacques Livereaux, but that's not him.) > > It's all been so bloody long that I've forgotten what he was supposed to > do. Something to do with being a member of the teaching staff so we can > ensure that the cascaders are suitable for the post. Or posts. Whichever. > Grammar is for the weak. > > I think I'll pop him an email and see if we can arrange a time to meet > inbetween my busy schedule of work, revision, sleep and anime. Any > thoughts, drop me an email. > > Actually, drop me an email anyway, just so I know that someone still > cares. > > > > > pajh > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Paul A J Hamilton > School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh > > I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2003 17:21:41 +0100 > From: Anna Hobbs > To: pajh@ed.ac.uk > Subject: Re: Cascade > > Dear Paul, > > I can finally confirm that Jacques Fleuriot will take on the role of > 'Cascaded Learning coordinator' for 2003-04. > > Please let me (or Neil) know if the ITO can provide you with any assistance. > > Thanks, > Anna > > pajh@ed.ac.uk wrote: > > I've been pointed in your direction by Neil McGillivray, who suggested > > that you might be able to help me. You might remember the Cascaded > > Learning Scheme run by AIsoc until a few years ago. Essentially an > > informal network for student support whereby the older and/or more > > experienced students, identified by bean-bag mooses, could help out the > > students in lower years. > > > > AIsoc died a few years ago and the Cascade scheme faded into myth, but the > > soc has since been restarted (with a view to amalgamating CompSoc and > > AIsoc into what, in all but name, would be an InformaticSoc). I have been > > asked to get the Cascade Scheme operational for an October rollout. I will > > be Cascaded Learning Scheme Co-ordinator, and constitutionally I need a > > Cascaded Learning Scheme Organiser to act as my liaison with the Division. > > Since this is a teaching matter, I am concerned that it should be done > > correctly. > > > > The relevant section of the AIsoc constitution follows. Please note that > > this is the old constitution from when AIsoc existed as a separate entity > > (as did the School of AI). The wording is highly likely to change at the > > joint AIsoc/CompSoc AGM, in a fortnight's time. > > > > "[...]Cascaded Learning Scheme Co-ordinator, responsible in liaison with > > the Cascaded Learning Scheme Organiser (a member of staff at the School of > > Artificial Intelligence), for the selection and renewal of ``cascaders''. > > The Cascaded Learning Scheme Co-ordinator is also responsible for > > advertising the Scheme in the School of Artificial Intelligence, and for > > maintaining the Scheme's webpage as well as the `cascade', > > `signin' and `signout' scripts running on the School of AI > > machines. > > > > People who have been suggested to me as possible Organisers include Qiang > > Shen, Gillian Hayes and Chris Mellish. Of these, other members of staff > > have begged, nay, pleaded with me not to use Qiang or Gillian, who are > > both already too busy; and Chris Mellish, who agreed to take on the post, > > then decided to leave Edinburgh. Do you have any ideas for other > > possibilities? > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > pajh > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Paul A J Hamilton > > School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh > > > > Grind 'em up, spit 'em out, they're TWIGS. > > Now with added WOOD! > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > cascaders-internal mailing list > cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk > http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal > _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 17:49:39 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: Cascade (fwd) Some thoughts: 000) I don't know yet if Jacques has been told that he's been selected for this honour. Should check with Anna first. 001) Let's not scare him by all piling into a meeting at once. First meeting will just be an introductory thing anyway. I'll go. 010) Bearing in mind the ruckus at the AGM, I would like, therefore, to be sure that I am representing the wishes of all involved parties. That's you, that is. 011) Therefore, if you have any, let me know. 100) Relevant wishes, that is. AIUI Cascade involves some degree of teaching, and therefore the organiser post is to reassure the department that the cascaders are a) good enough b) not breaking any rules. It's probably best to let Jacques decide how he wants to go about this, assuming, of course, that we agree with it. Anything else you think I should mention, let me know. Revision is going moderately well, thanks Michael. It bloody well should be, considering this is my fifth time through the same bloody exams. If anyone can explain big-Oh notation in English, let me know. One more thought. Anna says that Jacques has been selected as Cascaded Learning Scheme Co-ordinator. No he bloody hasn't. That's me. Hope they're not muscling in on us. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 18:13:41 +0100 From: michael eng To: pajh@ed.ac.uk Cc: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: [cascaders-internal] escapade of cascade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] I'm at work, and don't have net access at home now (really, the phone line has gone mysteriously dead) so this'll be briefer than I would like. Quoting pajh@ed.ac.uk: > 001) Let's not scare him by all piling into a meeting at once. First > meeting will just be an introductory thing anyway. I'll go. OK, agree. > AIUI Cascade involves some degree of teaching, and therefore the organiser > post is to reassure the department that the cascaders are a) good enough > b) not breaking any rules. It's probably best to let Jacques decide how he > wants to go about this, assuming, of course, that we agree with it. I see Cascade not as part of the teaching programme (lectures, tutorials, and compulsory practicals) but as teaching support (as opposed to Support technical support). In this they provide a similar role to lab demonstrators in CS. Now the crucial part is that there weren't lab demonstrators that had this role in DAI -- demonstrators were present at timetabled practical sessions as far as I can remember. One of my concerns is that now we are Informaticised and share a lab that there is in effect a conflict of responsibilities that woudn't be present if we were simply restarting Cascade in DAI. Therefore I think that the roles and responsibilities of Lab Demonstrator and Cascader need to be reviewed in light of this -- and this is something (certainly for the former) that needs to have the agreement of the Informatics Teaching Committee. So it would be useful to ask Jacques whether he has any thoughts on this. > Revision is going moderately well, thanks Michael. It bloody well should > be, considering this is my fifth time through the same bloody exams. If > anyone can explain big-Oh notation in English, let me know. No, but make sure you know your Chomsky hierarchy definitions, and do the Viterbi examples plus the ones later on in that chapter in R&N. I don't know who lectured this year, but Bob Fisher had a file somewhere (hopefully not in ashes) which said what parts were examinable and what were not -- very useful. > One more thought. Anna says that Jacques has been selected as Cascaded > Learning Scheme Co-ordinator. No he bloody hasn't. That's me. Hope they're > not muscling in on us. Job titles are meaningless. Round here, for example, you have to have "Global" and "Manager" somewhere in there. Michael _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 19:02:45 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, michael eng wrote: > > AIUI Cascade involves some degree of teaching, and therefore the organiser > > post is to reassure the department that the cascaders are a) good enough > > b) not breaking any rules. It's probably best to let Jacques decide how he > > wants to go about this, assuming, of course, that we agree with it. > > I see Cascade not as part of the teaching programme [...] but as > teaching support (as opposed to Support technical support). Agreed. My point is that (the department will think that) there should be some sort of checks & balances to avoid plagiarism, etc. > In this they provide a similar role to lab demonstrators in CS. Now > the crucial part is that there weren't lab demonstrators that had this > role in DAI -- demonstrators were present at timetabled practical > sessions as far as I can remember. True. There are differences, however. I have never, for instance, met a demonstrator who knew diddley-squat about bash. (I know they exist, they're just never around when I need them.) Cascade is intended to have a somewhat broader remit than the CS2 demonstrators (general computer use, Linux, emacs etc...), and furthermore, is intended to be somewhat more open and informal (it's presented as the students wanting to help the students, rather than the Division paying students to help students). > One of my concerns is that now we are Informaticised and share a lab that > there is in effect a conflict of responsibilities that woudn't be present > if we were simply restarting Cascade in DAI. Therefore I think that the > roles and responsibilities of Lab Demonstrator and Cascader need to be > reviewed in light of this -- and this is something (certainly for the former) > that needs to have the agreement of the Informatics Teaching Committee. > So it would be useful to ask Jacques whether he has any thoughts on this. Good plan. While the majority of the conflict of interest can be avoided by distinguishing between and Informatics-provided service and a volunteer group, this is nonetheless something which should be addressed. It also occurs that the major need for the Cascade system (political wranglings within the university) has been delayed for a year at least. Shall have to see what's going on. > Job titles are meaningless. Round here, for example, you have to have > "Global" and "Manager" somewhere in there. And I'm a Management Assistant, which means... everything. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 00:56:50 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: pajh@ed.ac.uk Cc: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] Quoting pajh@ed.ac.uk: > On Thu, 7 Aug 2003, michael eng wrote: > > [blah, blah, blah ...] > Cascade is intended to have a > somewhat broader remit than the CS2 demonstrators (general computer use, > Linux, emacs etc...), and furthermore, is intended to be somewhat more > open and informal ... From what I understand and hear about Casade, I suggest that Casaders keep strictly off any type of help for the praticals. They should instead keep to any general computer use. To be honest, everything that's not to do with the CS/AI praticals. Although this sounds a bit strict (or even silly), for the start, I think there needs to be a rather clear and huge white line between the two. I say this because unless there needs to be clear lines of responsibilties (and accountability as well between the two), it could lead to further trouble later on in the year e.g. : 1. If a Lab Demostrator is seen not to have done their job properly - they could possibly blame the blurred lines of responsibility for this (and believe me, after knowing the Lab Demostrators for this year, it won't surprise me if this happens). And with all things new, a clear way of how it is managed is needed. Trivial as this may seem, (the geek approach would be to just "go with the flow" and help everyone with everything), but people like boundaries, and if we don't set them, people won't know or understand what is acceptable or unacceptable behaviour (incidentally, there's a fantastic book called Levers of Control which will help you understand this). 2. There could potentially be conflict between the paid staff and the voluntary staff, especially if the Casaders are getting nothing for doing exactly the same job as the lab demostrators. 3. Remember how DCS told off Ben Golding for providing "too much" help in his java for students website back in 1999/2000. > > One of my concerns is that now we are Informaticised and share a lab that > > there is in effect a conflict of responsibilities that woudn't be present > > if we were simply restarting Cascade in DAI. Therefore I think that the > > roles and responsibilities of Lab Demonstrator and Cascader need to be > > reviewed in light of this -- and this is something (certainly for the > former) > > that needs to have the agreement of the Informatics Teaching Committee. I don't see how being "informaticised" will have an effect in the responsibilties of the two. I think you could be possibly blurring two issues here : 1. What are the lab demostrators and Cascaders roles and responsibilities? 2. How will the informaticised school effect what the Cascaders will help with? If, as I mentioned above, that the Cascaders keep strictly off pratical work, then both the issues wouldn't be present. And my final comment is that we need some sort of timescale/plan. My view is that the first step is to write down how we think the Cascaders will fit in, i.e. how we want to run things from the Cascaders point of view - taking in the consideration of the Lab Demostrators. Basically, analytically think through the role and responsibility of the Cascader. Present this to Jacques and see what he thinks. Whilst I think it might be useful to talk to Jacques and get his input, turning up and asking him to meet whilst we have nothing concrete on paper would just be a waste of his time and ours. Besides, if we have some coherent ideas on paper it shows that we are serious, and we have already thought this through. And most of all, that we mean business. Kate _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 02:53:42 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Kate Ho wrote: > From what I understand and hear about Casade, I suggest that Casaders keep > strictly off any type of help for the praticals. They should instead keep to > any general computer use. To be honest, everything that's not to do with the > CS/AI praticals. Understand your point, but where do we draw the line? e.g. using emacs is a vital skill for the practicals. > 1. If a Lab Demostrator is seen not to have done their job properly - they > could possibly blame the blurred lines of responsibility for this Not quite sure what you mean here. A lab demonstrator could say that they assumed they didn't have to do x, because the cascaders were doing it? > And with all things new, a clear way of how it is managed is needed. > Trivial as this may seem, (the geek approach would be to just "go with > the flow" and help everyone with everything), The geek approach is what I was aiming for, actually. > 2. There could potentially be conflict between the paid staff and the voluntary > staff, especially if the Casaders are getting nothing for doing exactly the > same job as the lab demostrators. Troo, dat. (Necessary aside: but we're getting eternal fame and recognition! And the satisfaction of a job well done! And a moose!) > 3. Remember how DCS told off Ben Golding for providing "too much" help in his > java for students website back in 1999/2000. A good point. I'd forgotten him. Did Ben actually ever specifically address the practicals? Was the department justified? > I don't see how being "informaticised" will have an effect in the > responsibilties of the two. In exactly the ways you describe. Michael's point, if I read him right, was that the original cascade was set up to provide a demonstrator-like thing for DAI, which didn't have one. Now DAI and DCS have no separate existence, there is, in effect, no lack of access that needs to be addressed. However, demonstrators still don't do everything[0], and there is other stuff for which support can be provided, and it is that stuff that I anticipate being Cascade's remit. Further, the Division seems to think that there are things that Cascade can do that demonstrators don't. Mike Fourman and the Divisional computing support staff were all for the idea. As I mentioned, their main reason has fallen by the wayside a little, but nonetheless they were enthusiastic. This is one of the reasons I'd like to have a preliminary chat with the Division's allotted representative for such matters, which it transpires now is Jacques. Mike Fourman gave me some ideas when we met last term, which I wrote down in my palmtop, which Jehane recently put a stiletto heel through. Besides, that was a while ago, and the shape of all lands has changed. Projected agenda for as-yet-entirely-hypothetical meeting: kether) Hi. I'm Paul. I'm your friendly local Cascaded Learning Scheme Coordinator. chokmah) We envisage Cascade being an informal system for student support, blah, blah, blah. binah) These are the kinds of things we think we could do, blah, blah, blah. chesed) Your job is to act as our divisional liaison and to ensure that our aims coincide, and probably also to leverage synergies in some way. geburah) To that end, I await with bated breath, nay, agog, your insights on what the Division would like from Cascade. tiferet) Wow. That's interesting. I shall take these pearls of wisdom back to my colleagues and, following some discussion, will speak to you again ere long. netzhach) obviously something about the division of labour between the demonstrators and the cascaders will have to go in there somewhere. hod) We'll need the following stuff: [list of resources that either a) we need or b) can make a convincing case for needing that would nonetheless be cool to have[1]]. yesod) can't think of anything else, but I need another two items for this numbering system to make any sense. malkuth) aaaaand there we go. > And my final comment is that we need some sort of timescale/plan. My view is > that the first step is to write down how we think the Cascaders will fit in, > i.e. how we want to run things from the Cascaders point of view - taking in the > consideration of the Lab Demostrators. Basically, analytically think through > the role and responsibility of the Cascader. Present this to Jacques and see > what he thinks. Whilst I think it might be useful to talk to Jacques and get > his input, turning up and asking him to meet whilst we have nothing concrete on > paper would just be a waste of his time and ours. Besides, if we have some > coherent ideas on paper it shows that we are serious, and we have already > thought this through. And most of all, that we mean business. As you know, I'm wary of doing anything that sounds too much like management science. While something along these lines may be a good idea, I hope that there's a way to keep it informal, and therefore keep my soul somewhat intact. Out of interest, does the task of `analytically thinking through the role and responsibility of the cascader' fall to a) me as the visionary and driving force or b) Kate as the one with management training? I think I had more points to make, but coffee has obliterated any vestiges of rational thought. Including, it seems, the ability to tell the difference between rational thought and not. No change there, then. pajh [0] In other words, while there is no longer a DAI-specific lack of access to support, there nonetheless remains an Informatics-wide lack of access to support. Agreed? [1] This includes mooses, obviously. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 13:31:03 +0100 From: michael eng Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] Quoting pajh@ed.ac.uk: > In exactly the ways you describe. Michael's point, if I read him right, > was that the original cascade was set up to provide a demonstrator-like > thing for DAI, which didn't have one. Now DAI and DCS have no separate > existence, there is, in effect, no lack of access that needs to be > addressed. However, demonstrators still don't do everything[0], and there > is other stuff for which support can be provided, and it is that stuff > that I anticipate being Cascade's remit. Yes. Moreover, I missed a point; even though we share a lab though, this is only due to the other one burning to the ground. AI1/2 still does not provide out-of-practical-hours demonstrators. This results (based on my observations) in Confused Students asking CS1 demonstrators how to use PDP (the program, not the computer) etc, resulting in Confused Demonstrators. When a supervised AI practical session is running, it gets a bit like a zoo in there, although I don't know how/if this will change given that another lab is opening on the 2nd? floor. The point is that AI and CS still have different demonstrating and practical styles even though we are Informaticised. Now, this may change come the dawn of Inf1/Inf2, but not yet. I could imagine that Confused Students would come with an AI problem to CS demonstrator, and get shooed away "not my business" to the Cascader. Result: the Cascader ends up being AI demonstrator for free while the CS demonstrator gets paid. Yes, I accept that this is taking a pessimist's view, but it serves to highlight some of the underlying Informatics issues that need to be addressed, and I'm don't think that it is Cascade's job to do so. > Further, the Division seems to think that there are things that Cascade > can do that demonstrators don't. Mike Fourman and the Divisional computing > support staff were all for the idea. As I mentioned, their main reason has > fallen by the wayside a little, but nonetheless they were enthusiastic. I see the Cascader's role more as that of the "friendly geek". This helps students in a non-teaching role without interfering with the teaching support that already exists. However, I'm worried that Cascaders will end up getting involved in helping people with practicals just out of being present in the lab, and that's the situation where conflict can occur. > to leverage synergies Right then. I agree with Kate that is is very important to develop a job description of the cascader, if you'll pardon the expression. It's important to recognise what Informatics want to get out of this, and also what we (as Compsoc/Cascade Command Central/etc) want to get as well. I think it also would be useful to look at the differing roles of Cascader and Demonstrator with a view to cost-benefit from both ends. Michael _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 00:56:41 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade N.B. I just copied both my comments to Paul's and Michael's replies into this email. It might be a little big, but I hope the points are valid enough. > Understand your point, but where do we draw the line? e.g. using emacs is > a vital skill for the practicals. How to use emacs is teaching the student how to use a tool, not how to do the pratical. e.g. [extreme example] teaching a student how to use MS Word doesn't equate to helping them write their 2,000 word essay on Marks and Spencers. > > 1. If a Lab Demostrator is seen not to have done their job properly - they > > could possibly blame the blurred lines of responsibility for this > > Not quite sure what you mean here. A lab demonstrator could say that they > assumed they didn't have to do x, because the cascaders were doing it? Yes, I think it was beautifully demostrated by Michael's point below about the student being shooed away to a Cascader for something the Lab Demostrator "thinks" its not their job. Another example, there was one demostrator that I heard about (from another demostrator) that would refuse to leave his seat to see the code written by the student on their computer. It was either a print out or telling them to get lost. I can see students like that turning to the Cascader. What would happen is then the Cascader would help the student out. And since the student was helped, they might not bother reporting the demostrator's behaviour to Informatics. > The geek approach is what I was aiming for, actually. I am completely disagree with the geek approach. Why? well, I think you have to tell people what you expect of them and what is acceptable and unacceptable behaviour. A lassiez-faire approach might seem easy at the start, but you'll run into all sorts of problems afterwards. Whereas a bit of time planning at the start will save you a lot of time afterwards. (There is a chart that demostrates this, especially in Software Project Management. I'll attempt to dig it out - it might be in Fred Brook's book). Thinking along those lines, the earlier on a decision is made, the bigger the effect it will have at the end. What that translate to is that if we don't plan reasonably well now, we might find that Cascade will go from a different direction that we intended to. And to change it by then would be too late. > (Necessary aside: but we're getting eternal fame and recognition! And the > satisfaction of a job well done! And a moose!) Whlist that I admire your attempt at making Cascade being able to leviate us all into "Guru" status, I have to say that we will never gain it by having a system that is /that/ flexible. Imagine what you were like when during CS1 when you don't have a clue what's going on, add the complication of demostrators and Cascaders doing reasonably the same type of job, but they're not actually the same. Won't that just be a tad bit confusing? My point : Demostrators and Cascaders /must/ have differing roles and responsibilities - preferably none that overlap. > > 3. Remember how DCS told off Ben Golding for providing "too much" help in his > > java for students website back in 1999/2000. > > A good point. I'd forgotten him. Did Ben actually ever specifically > address the practicals? Was the department justified? Yes, he did relate his "tutorials" to the praticals. The department was definitely /not/ justified as he provided the same level of help across board, whereas you got differing levels of help from different tutors. In a sense, he was standardising what hints you got. I was definitely worst off after he stopped posting. That, and the fact that I should have started the praticals more than 24 hrs before it was due in. Oh, and the alcohol was a factor too. > Further, the Division seems to think that there are things that Cascade > can do that demonstrators don't. Mike Fourman and the Divisional computing > support staff were all for the idea. As I mentioned, their main reason has > fallen by the wayside a little, but nonetheless they were enthusiastic. Whlist I see your point, and it seems inevitable that you will meet Jacques before we get to you first, I think we have to set a list of things that we are /not/ prepared to do. e.g. directly help with practicals. We have to set certain boundaries and let Informatics know this. I don't mean to be rude Paul, but sometimes you have this tendency to give in just to please the "big informatics guys". I'm afraid that you might agree with Jacques, stuff that some of us might think unappropiate, whilst you think its wholey is. > As you know, I'm wary of doing anything that sounds too much like > management science. Not management science unfortunately, this is pure job design/lines of accountability/[touching on] implementation of technology. > I hope that there's a way to keep it informal, and therefore keep my soul > somewhat intact. Too late Paul, I think the management already has your number :) > Out of interest, does the task of `analytically thinking through the role > and responsibility of the cascader' fall to a) me as the visionary and > driving force or b) Kate as the one with management training? It doesn't matter who writes it, as long as it makes sense. And to be honest, as long as you stand back and look at the big picture in how Cascaders will fit in, in relation to everything, it doesn't need business speak. Think of it like a classic 3 circle Venn diagram. One circle is the lecturers, one circle is the tutors and one is the lab demonstrators. All overlap each other at some point, but how are you going to fit that extra "Cascader" circle in? What will it overlap? Who will it work beside? What effect will Cascaders have on the other teaching staff? These are some fundamental questions that has to be answered first. > Yes. Moreover, I missed a point; even though we share a lab though, this > is only due to the other one burning to the ground. AI1/2 still does not > provide out-of-practical-hours demonstrators. This results (based on my > observations) in Confused Students asking CS1 demonstrators how to use > PDP (the program, not the computer) etc, resulting in Confused Demonstrators. I completely agree. > there, although I don't know how/if this will change given that another lab is > opening on the 2nd? floor. I think the labs on the 2nd floor is supposed to replace the labs on the 5th floor. Although I'm not entirely sure of this point, but that's what I've heard. > I see the Cascader's role more as that of the "friendly geek". I agree as well. Although how friendly a geek can be is debatable. > It's important to recognise > what Informatics want to get out of this, and also what we (as Compsoc/Cascade > Command Central/etc) want to get as well. Couldn't agree more. I recommend that should you meet with Jacques, we get him to gather information in regards to what informatics expects of Cascade. At the same time, we compile a list from our point of view. [In an ideal world, it would be fantastic as well to get a list from the Lab Demonstrators and tutors as well (although they might be quite short).] Then we have a big meeting and see if the two lists matches up. Then we can begin to identify the areas which we agree with and the areas which we disagree with. Hopefully some negotiation will take place and we can begin to see how Cascade will help Informatics. Kate _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 13:40:13 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade On Sat, 9 Aug 2003, Kate Ho wrote: > there was one demostrator that I heard about (from another demostrator) > that would refuse to leave his seat to see the code written by the > student on their computer. It was either a print out or telling them to > get lost. This is why Cascade is needed. In an ideal world, the demonstrators would do their jobs properly and the Division would provide adequate student support. Cascade would merely be a duplication of effort in this case. Whatever Cascade does, it will always be possible to make the argument that `the university should be doing this anyway'. To do so is, IMO, to miss the point. It's fairly safe to assume that the university is either unable or unwilling to provide the sort of level of student support that the students would like to see. Discussions on the fairness or not of such a situation will have to wait. As I see it, in order to redress the balance, an organisation (such as Cascade) can do one of ten things: 01. Provide support for free, ie. do (some of) the university's job. 10. Campaign the Division for better support. No one is going to listen to a bunch of whiny students making demands. They mights listen to a bunch of students who have taken it upon themselves to help out, integrated themselves with the Division's aims, leveraged synergies etc. etc. In other words, once we've made a name for ourselves amongst the Division, then we'll be in a better to position to lobby the Division to do their own job better, should we so wish. Nonetheless I completely agree that there should be a clear distinction of roles between Cascaders and paid support staff. I do not, however, expect a clear enough distinction to be made in practice. This is one of the things I plan to discuss with Jacques. Thoughts? pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 19:34:24 +0100 From: michael eng Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] Quoting pajh@ed.ac.uk: > This is why Cascade is needed. In an ideal world, the demonstrators > would > do their jobs properly and the Division would provide adequate student > support. Cascade would merely be a duplication of effort in this case. [et cetera] This is why we need to assess the needs from both Inf and Cascade pov. If I am A. Cascader, why should I do a job for Cascade and get paid nothing, when I could do the same job for Inf and get paid 10.22ukp/hr ? Paul, you may be all up for eternal fame and recognition etc., but we need to recognise that in order for Cascade to work we need a good stock of willing and able Cascaders. And to be honest I don't see that happening unless there is a clear distinction in roles and that the Cascade role is an attractive one to the discerning geek with many guru points etc. Michael _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 09:52:44 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] > This is why Cascade is needed. In an ideal world, the demonstrators would > do their jobs properly and the Division would provide adequate student > support. Cascade would merely be a duplication of effort in this case. I agree with what Michael says. We have to list roles and incentives here. But I am most worried about this "duplication of effort". Surely, if I was a Demostrator, I would feel a little threatened by all of this. And more importantly, was this duplication implied by Mike Fourman or by you (Paul). Because if it from Mike Fourman, I think it definitely gives a clear indication that he wants more lab demostrators than he can afford, in which case, just pay each demostrator less and employ more of them. Well, that or the fact that he doesn't want to write the software to do what Cascade does. If, on the other hand, it was implied by you, then we could be in trouble as the School might think there is a load of us all for free labour. I don't think making demands is unreasonable. As long as we make reasonable demands they will support it, right? Surely if we back it up with the correct thinking - and not just Paul with his PDA - I mean a proper proposal on paper to show the School that we have fully thought about Cascade, how its going to work etc then I think they will take the risk. I wish that I could sit down and write it, but I've got so much on my plate at the moment. I'll try and fit some time into my life to have a good wee think about it (that, and in amongst trying to find a roof over my head in time for the start of term in a completely random city). I think that the rough outline for the "Cascade Plan" is : 1. Get the list of roles and responsibilites for Support (i.e. support@inf) and lab demostrators 2. Think and decide amongst ourselves what the roles and responsbilities of a Cascader is and how it fits in with current support staff. 3. Decide how system would work (i.e. how to implement it - aka "the plan") e.g. How students can contact Cascader staff -> would there be a "Grand-Master Cascader"? 4. Talk to Jacques and tell him what we've come up with. Give him the proposal and ask him to get feedback from the Inf teaching and support staff. 5. Take feedback, change "the plan" accordingly, then write the software, implement it and gain eternal fame and recongision, blah, blah, blah. Comments? Kate PS. Just thought, since this is the first time we've /really/ done something with the School - lets get yourselves into shape and give them a good impression of Compsoc. _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2003 11:29:47 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] Paul, Is it possible for you to ask Informatics for a list of roles and responsibilities for the Lab Demostrators and Support staff. It might be useful to get a copy of the contract for the Lab Demostrators since some of their regulations might be useful. Kate _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 12:55:17 +0100 From: michael eng Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade I think somewhere on the dcs or inf website there is an advert for lab demonstrators which lists their job description. I couldn't find it offhand but it is in there somewhere. Michael On Friday, Aug 15, 2003, at 11:29 Europe/London, Kate Ho wrote: > Paul, > > Is it possible for you to ask Informatics for a list of roles and > responsibilities for the Lab Demostrators and Support staff. It might > be useful > to get a copy of the contract for the Lab Demostrators since some of > their > regulations might be useful. _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 18:29:47 +0100 From: michael eng Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade Trying to keep this alive. Paul have you spoken to Jacques yet? Here's the blurb: http://www.informatics.ed.ac.uk/admin/ITO/tut-dem-jobs.html Michael On Saturday, Aug 16, 2003, at 12:55 Europe/London, michael eng wrote: > I think somewhere on the dcs or inf website there is an advert for lab > demonstrators which lists their job description. I couldn't find it > offhand but it is in there somewhere. > > Michael > > On Friday, Aug 15, 2003, at 11:29 Europe/London, Kate Ho wrote: > >> Paul, >> >> Is it possible for you to ask Informatics for a list of roles and >> responsibilities for the Lab Demostrators and Support staff. It might >> be useful >> to get a copy of the contract for the Lab Demostrators since some of >> their >> regulations might be useful. > > _______________________________________________ > cascaders-internal mailing list > cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk > http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal > -- _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 19:12:44 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade On Sun, 24 Aug 2003, michael eng wrote: > Trying to keep this alive. Like a hideous, lumbering, zombified, unholy aberration against nature? > Paul have you spoken to Jacques yet? No. Was kinda hoping we could settle our internal differences first. Besides I don't think he's here atm. > Here's the blurb: > http://www.informatics.ed.ac.uk/admin/ITO/tut-dem-jobs.html That, and a couple of other ones (urls to follow). Doesn't say much. My take on things, having spoken to various demonstrators and read the job descriptions etc, is that a demonstrators role is poorly defined and best, and not defined at worst. There is, however, a consensus that demonstrators are supposed to provide support for the practicals and "basic linux knowledge" which boils down to, essentially, pointing out when someone is using `java' instead of `javac'. Anything more complex is left for tech support. Officially, then, there is little for Cascade to do. The official state of affairs has, of course, very little in common with reality, but it presents a problem in trying to determine the official responsibilities Cascade would like to take on---which is one of the reasons I have been trying to avoid all this management-speak. I shall forward the email I got from Anna and let you draw your own conclusions. More thoughts from me to follow when I have some time. Aren't you all lucky? pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 19:13:29 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: [cascaders-internal] Cascade system (fwd) Here you go. Forwarded message, full of words and spaces between them, follows below. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 16:41:42 +0100 From: Anna Hobbs To: 9901468@sms.ed.ac.uk Cc: acm@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Cascade system Dear Paul, Miriam tells me that you are keen to ensure that students volunteering for the cascade system aren't given duties which overlap with students who are paid to be demonstrators in the lab. Details of the demonstrator's jobs can be found at http://www.informatics.ed.ac.uk/admin/ITO/jobs/2003/cs1.html#demo and http://www.informatics.ed.ac.uk/admin/ITO/jobs/2003/ai1-demo.html and http://www.informatics.ed.ac.uk/admin/ITO/jobs/2003/cs2-demo.html A demonstrator's contract simply requires them to be in the lab at certain times and help the students with any queries they have (without doing their work for them). I presume that there were paid demonstrators in the lab before when the cascade system operated but I'd recommend that you speak to Helen Pain for more details of how the system used to operate as I wasn't involved and I believe she coordinated it then. For courses which don't have demonstrators in the lab (ie AI2 and most of AI3 and AI4, and CS3/4) there won't ever be a possibility of overlapping responsibilities, but it is something you will have to consider for first year courses and cs2. If you wish to talk in person about this, then let me know. Anna. _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 11:41:55 +0100 From: michael eng Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] Quoting pajh@ed.ac.uk: > Like a hideous, lumbering, zombified, unholy aberration against > nature? I hope it isn't beginning to feel like that already. > My take on things, having spoken to various demonstrators and read the > job descriptions etc, is that a demonstrators role is poorly defined and > best, and not defined at worst. It is therefore hardly surprising that the quality of demonstrators varies then, as it is left up to the demonstrators what they do and don't do. > Officially, then, there is little for Cascade to do. The official > state > of affairs has, of course, very little in common with reality, but it > presents a problem in trying to determine the official > responsibilities > Cascade would like to take on---which is one of the reasons I have > been trying to avoid all this management-speak. OK. Let's defer casting roles and responsibilities until we have had some thoughts about how we would like our ideal to be. Paul, as our Key Visionary, I think you have some ideas about how cascaders and demonstrators could coexist? When you have a moment, it would be helpful if you could elaborate and elucidate. However, I should stress that avoiding this and letting it all hang loose is almost destined to go horribly wrong. Clearly there are problems with the demonstrating system as it stands at the moment (otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion). I think that this is partly due to the role of the demonstrator being poorly defined by Informatics. Adding another poorly defined role to the mix at best won't make any difference, and at the worst will lead to a culture of finger-pointing, as previously discussed. I hope that an outcome of this will be to more clearly define the role of the demonstrator as well as the cascader. Both sides will need to make changes if this is to work. Michael _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 12:07:01 +0100 From: Nicholas Wolverson Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade On Wed, Aug 27, 2003 at 11:41:55AM +0100, michael eng wrote: > > Quoting pajh@ed.ac.uk: > > > Like a hideous, lumbering, zombified, unholy aberration against > > nature? > > I hope it isn't beginning to feel like that already. > > > My take on things, having spoken to various demonstrators and read the > > job descriptions etc, is that a demonstrators role is poorly defined and > > best, and not defined at worst. > > It is therefore hardly surprising that the quality of demonstrators > varies then, as it is left up to the demonstrators what they do > and don't do. I have never felt the role of the demonstrator to be poorly defined. At the start of the year, when demonstrators initially meet with the course organiser they are given a booklet outlining course structure, responsabilities of demonstrators, etc. Whether they are any good at it is a different issue. I think the quality varies because demonstrators are left to their own devices and assumed to be competent and helpful. Giving (not overly specific) help on coursework, and help on systems issues, seems a good definition to me. The main problem I have always found is being helpful and increasing the student's understanding while not guiding them towards answers. -- Nicholas Wolverson _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 12:44:33 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] > they are given a booklet outlining course structure, > responsabilities of demonstrators, etc Paul, is it possible to get hold of the booklet from Inf? Or rather, Nick, do you still have the booklet in question? I would add more, but I've just come back from a round trip of 550 miles to Manchester, where, it seems impossible to find any decent houses to live in. Kate _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 15:51:39 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, michael eng wrote: > OK. Let's defer casting roles and responsibilities until we have had > some thoughts about how we would like our ideal to be. > > Paul, as our Key Visionary, I think you have some ideas about how > cascaders and demonstrators could coexist? When you have a moment, > it would be helpful if you could elaborate and elucidate. I shall give it some thought in between my hectic schedule of work, revision, alcohol, and legal wrasslin'. > However, I should stress that avoiding this and letting it all hang loose > is almost destined to go horribly wrong. Agreed. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 15:54:33 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Nicholas Wolverson wrote: > I have never felt the role of the demonstrator to be poorly defined. > At the start of the year, when demonstrators initially meet with the > course organiser they are given a booklet outlining course structure, > responsabilities of demonstrators, etc. This is not what I've heard from other demonstrators. Do you still have a copy? Whom should I ask if I want one? Why didn't Anna mention it? > Giving (not overly specific) help on coursework, and help on systems > issues, seems a good definition to me. Sounds about right. Again, the emphasis appears to be on coursework. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 16:10:34 +0100 From: Nicholas Wolverson Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade Oops. Replying to the wrong mail. Attached is the demonstrators guide. Note that this is usually a password protected web page for demonstrator access. [ Part 2, Text/HTML (charset: unknown-8bit) 857 lines. ] [ Unable to print this part. ] Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 19:55:55 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] > Attached is the demonstrators guide Thanks Nick, its much appreciated, now we can see what the Demostrator guidelines are. And Paul, can I suggest an alcohol ban in the lead up to the resits? Kate _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 01:20:41 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade Many thanks, thinks and thunks, Nick. On Wed, 27 Aug 2003, Kate Ho wrote: > Thanks Nick, its much appreciated, now we can see what the Demostrator > guidelines are. Note these are only the guidelines for CS1/CP1 demonstrators. No such guidelines appear to exist for CS2. See the urls I posted in my last... I think. > And Paul, can I suggest an alcohol ban in the lead up to the resits? No. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:17:22 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] > Note these are only the guidelines for CS1/CP1 demonstrators. No such > guidelines appear to exist for CS2. I think that the CS2 and CS1 courses are similar enough to assume that the guidelines are transferable between the two, right? As far as I know, its not until 3rd year that the course structure/layout changes significantly. Kate _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 16:06:07 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Kate Ho wrote: > I think that the CS2 and CS1 courses are similar enough to assume that the > guidelines are transferable between the two, right? As far as I know, its not > until 3rd year that the course structure/layout changes significantly. Guidelines may be transferable, but demonstrators are not. CS2 demonstrators don't read the CS1 demonstrator guide. CS2 demonstrators don't read any demonstrator guide, because they don't receive one. CS2 demonstrators, therefore, and note that I am picking on them because that's the year I have most recently been through and shall therefore concentrate my bile thereupon, have no clue what they're supposed to be doing, and are therefore largely ineffectual. This is why I have tried to stress the distinction between the official policy and the reality of what happens. The guidelines are, however, very useful for giving us an `official' basis to start from. Note however that whatever Cascade turns out to be, I would like it to actually work, so let's try to get rid of this culture of blind faith in the documentation. As a random, probably totally unrelated example: I was on the phone with tech support the other day, who said "do this... do this... now do this." "It didn't work." "Well, it should have worked." "But it /didn't/ work." "But it /should/ have worked." "But it /didn't/ work." "Well, I can't help you any more." If something along these lines ever happens with a Cascader, and I get to hear about it, then I shall make it my life's work to hunt down that Cascader with a big, phallic-looking sword, and proceed to remove one of that Cascader's dimensions, probably `height'. (Note also that I am somewhat bitter today, having been up till 7am this morning staring blankly at software engineering notes. You're all intelligent people, and I hope I can trust you to extract the signal from the noise.) (I mean extract the signal from the noise in this email. Not to extract the signal from the noise in software engineering notes, which is more difficult because there is no signal.) When I started the reanimation of the Cascade system (there are those zombie metaphors again), it was loosely defined as `an informal social network for student support'. The reason for this was twofold: the orginal DAI Cascade system was similarly defined, and `student support' in general was the need that Cascade was supposed to address. `Student support' is still the need that Cascade is supposed to address, regardless of whether or not there exists another entity whose aims are also to address it. I agree that Cascade will need an official, published statement of aims and roles, and I further agree that it is in our interest to make this disjoint with those aims and roles published by other groups, e.g. the demonstrators. However I do not expect this statement to reflect reality. Furthermore, remember what Dogbert said about the importance of having a strategy. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 00:22:00 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade Paul, I was about to start nit-picking in your email, when I realised it wasn't the best thing to do. Besides, I'm not in the best of moods either, after just been threatened by the burglars from our burglary three weeks ago that "we were going to get our heads kicked in" , so I'll attempt to be short and to the point. From your long email, you seem to raise several points: 1. We shouldn't blindly follow documentation. 2. Practice is different than law. 3. Most Tech Support people are useless. 4. Cascade is meant for "informal, social" purposes. I have 1 suggestion only. Lab Demonstrators deal with practical work and Cascaders deal with non-practical work, acting as an "informal support services". In the same way that I wouldn't ask support why my Computer Communications practical didn't work, I would expect that Cascaders wouldn't be asked either. Now, in practise, people might find that Cascade is a useful way to communicate with others doing the same practical and helping each other out. In the same way that during the exams I used IRC to ask Nick and Bruce questions on coursework I didn't understand (and which, I am very grateful for). Now, Cascade won't kick people out for that, but its simply something that we couldn't ask everyone to do. e.g. Whilst working on my project late at night, some 1st year came up and asked me for help. I did my best, but I couldn't help much since I couldn't do much until I actually went through the practical. Hence I was useless to him. Get my point? And at that point we could briefly touch on plagrism etc. But I won't bother. I agree that student support should be present. Just that we shouldn't be asked/expected to provide support for any practical work. Full stop. In reality, it *might* happen, but we shouldn't include it in our formal roles and responsibilities. Once we can agree on that, we can proceed from there. I feel we're just walking round and round in circles at the moment. Are we actually agreed on the point that Cascaders should not be asked or be expected to provide help for practical/coursework help (Y/N)? One more thing Paul, I'm quite concerned at your example of Tech Support. One example. I was in the labs getting my results, and I remember some girl asking me on how to use the floppy drives in the JCMB labs. I told her I didn't know (briefcase.yahoo.com is far to handy to mess around with disks) and since I was on msn to Michael, I asked him. He suggested several things, but it didn't help, and in the end I just had to say, "Sorry, I can't help you" at which point she acknowledged that I tried and thanked me. I think people try their best, and we shouldn't be too harsh on that. After all, would you know the answer to every technical question I asked you? Just one very last thing, did any documentation survive on how Cascade worked internally, not the code, but the hierarchical structure to it? e.g. who would you complain to when there was a problem with a casader? Even better, does anyone know of a "high-ranking"/"highly-respected" Cascader we can talk to? ------------------- Kate Ho A computer scientist is someone who, when told to 'Go to Hell', sees the 'go to', rather than the destination, as harmful. _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 16:04:52 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Kate Ho wrote: > I was about to start nit-picking in your email, when I realised it wasn't > the best thing to do. Please feel free. I'm not mad at any of you. As you should know, I have a tendency to rant. It feels... soft... against my skin... or something. > Besides, I'm not in the best of moods either, after just been threatened > by the burglars from our burglary three weeks ago that "we were going to > get our heads kicked in" Sounds like a fun story. > so I'll attempt to be short and to the point. Would that I could do the same. > From your long email, you seem to raise several points: > 1. We shouldn't blindly follow documentation. > 2. Practice is different than law. > 3. Most Tech Support people are useless. > 4. Cascade is meant for "informal, social" purposes. Blimey. That's exactly what I said, and it only took you a paragraph. I must learn how to do that. > Are we actually agreed on the point that Cascaders should not be asked or be > expected to provide help for practical/coursework help (Y/N)? Wholeheartedly agree. However, I expect that we'll get asked. In such an instance the Cascader should ask if they've spoken to a demonstrator. Further, I think that, if possible, Cascaders should be allowed to help with general concepts of computer science, without impinging on the practical work. I shall illustrate my point with an example. This is good for two reasons: it gives me the opportunity to wax lyrical, and I have no idea how the concept should scale. Clueless Student: "Could you explain to me what the pants is an interface?" Noble Cascader: "Sure thing. An interface is a [insert what an interface is, about which I have not the faintest whit of a clue, and incidentally if anyone wants to explain this to me before Tuesday I'd be most appreciative]." Clueless Student: "Ah, I see. So how do I implement this interface for this evil CS2 Java CUP/Swing/JFlex/JDBC buzzword-laden interface-related Prac 4 of DOOM!?" Noble Cascader: "You'd have to ask a demonstrator about that." > One more thing Paul, I'm quite concerned at your example of Tech Support. Was not a university-related example, just an example of a clueless tech support drone who was avoiding doing any work. > Just one very last thing, did any documentation survive on how Cascade > worked internally, not the code, but the hierarchical structure to it? Not to my knowledge. Helen Pain will know most of it, but she's busy. > Even better, does anyone know of a "high-ranking"/"highly-respected" > Cascader we can talk to? No, but if anyone knows how I can get hold of Hannah, the hot fourth-year with the tartan skirt, then I'll be happy to talk to her for you. Over drinks, or dinner, or something. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 23:40:39 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade > > Are we actually agreed on the point that Cascaders should not be asked or be > > expected to provide help for practical/coursework help (Y/N)? > > Wholeheartedly agree. However, I expect that we'll get asked. In such an > instance the Cascader should ask if they've spoken to a demonstrator. I agree that if the student has asked the demostrator and got no help, they /could/ ask the Cascader. I suggest that we add this into the R+R as something that we know will happen, but the pratice is frowned upon (since its the demostrators job to help, that's what they're paid for) etc. > Further, I think that, if possible, Cascaders should be allowed to help > with general concepts of computer science, without impinging on the > practical work. I completely agree as well. > Not to my knowledge. Helen Pain will know most of it, but she's busy. Can you ask Helen to take time (e.g. half an hour to speak to us). If she agrees, I think we should compile a list of questions to ask her and so it doesn't look like we're wasting her time. > No, but if anyone knows how I can get hold of Hannah, the hot fourth-year > with the tartan skirt, then I'll be happy to talk to her for you. Over > drinks, or dinner, or something. Wouldn't it be funny/ironic if she turned out to be a lesbian? _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 11:22:13 +0100 (BST) From: Alex Panayotopoulos Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Kate Ho wrote: > > > Are we actually agreed on the point that Cascaders should not be > > > asked or be expected to provide help for practical/coursework help > > > (Y/N)? Yes. It is rather hard to see in practice where we draw the line between practical-specific questions and general questions about programming. So I suggest we follow the rule "ask us about anything, but we don't want to see your practical code". I think the most important part about this whole demonstrator/cascader distinction is that the *students* know who does what. I suggest we do this by getting the department to announce the demonstrators as the official line of help as usual. Afterwards, we send round an email saying "hi, we're your friendly neighbourhood student-run support service to help you with general questions about the system. Note that we're not allowed to help with practical-specific questions; they should be directed towards the demonstrators". That gets the picture across well enough, ne? > > No, but if anyone knows how I can get hold of Hannah, the hot fourth-year > > with the tartan skirt, then I'll be happy to talk to her for you. Over > > drinks, or dinner, or something. > > Wouldn't it be funny/ironic if she turned out to be a lesbian? No, Alanis, that would merely be *unfortunate*. 8^) -- <<>> Defender of Spudkind _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 11:35:02 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Re: escapade of cascade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] > Yes. It is rather hard to see in practice where we draw the line between > practical-specific questions and general questions about programming. Hm, I could agrue against that, but I'm tired, so I half-heartedly agree. ... > official line of help as usual. Afterwards, we send round an email saying > "hi, we're your friendly neighbourhood student-run support service to help ... I half agree with what you say, but I suggest that rather than we introducing Cascade, that Inf would include Cascade in their official email as well. i.e. make the distinction between Cascade and Demostrators. After all, Cascade is Inf backed. That way, hopefully everyone will be clear on the situation. And, of course, we can pop an email round afterwards stating what we do as "informal, friendly" help. Alrightly, now that we're pretty clear on the main difference between Cascaders and Demostrators (right? ... anyone that disagrees, hands up now) I think our next steps might be either to: 1. Agree on the different ways that students can contact Cascade (i.e. are we going to be in the labs? in person? online? etc ...) 2. The hierarchical structure to Cascade? (How will Cascade be managed?) From question 1, we can hopefully deduce what resources we'll need. Paul, seems like you might have most of the ideas on this part, any suggestions? Kate _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 21:35:30 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: [cascaders-internal] Cascade Cavalcade In her most recent email, our friendly local Management Scientist raised two issues: how students will contact Cascade, and how Cascade will be managed. With regard to the first of these, I see no reason why we should limit ourselves. Students should be able to contact Cascade any way they can. Traditionally, this involved the use of meece when in the labs, the cascade script, finger and talk connections. Also, we've agreed that an RT system would be an excellent idea, and Johann has pretty much agreed to let us piggyback this off the preexisting Informatics system. Also there will be an email list once we can agree on a name that fits with the Informatics naming scheme. Further, if anyone, for instance, feels a deep and overweening urge to set up an IRC channel somewhere for us, then this could also be a good idea. So, we have real live human beings in the labs, a web-based system and email. That's good to be going on with. Before this we need to agree on what kind of support we are doing. Again, personally I see no reason to limit ourselves except by a) the laws of physics and b) departmental regulations [and also c) how busy we are, etc]. We have agreed that Cascaders should not touch student's practicals. It should be noted that demonstrators do not cover all areas where support may be required: for one thing, demonstrators cover CS1 and CS2 only, with a very heavy emphasis on the practicals only. Some demonstrators are encouraged to have Linux knowledge, some are not. Sometimes the demonstrator is busy or absent or useless. And there are no demonstrators in, for instance, AI. Additionally, I think we should encourage the kind of people who start thinking `hey wouldn't it be cool if we could do this' with Linux, or whatever. One of Cascade's roles could be as an after-school club of sorts, obviously without actually being an after-school club because that would suck, where people go beyond the basic skills they need to complete the course, and start hacking. By this I mean that no one within Informatics will help you if you want to change your window manager or write a shell script. Or if you think that Java-based database frontend GUI JSwing SQL PHP intarweb technology is really cool and want to find out more about it. As for management, I expect Cascade to be pretty much self-managing. You're all grownups and with an initial set of guidelines you can all go off and do your own thing. Obviously we will need, for instance, someone to maintain the web page, if any, but let's work out what resources we will have before we decide job titles and salary for positions that may not exist. Thoughts on any of the above would be much appreciated. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 00:59:20 +0100 From: michael eng Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Cascade Cavalcade On Sunday, Aug 31, 2003, at 21:35 Europe/London, pajh@ed.ac.uk wrote: > With regard to the first of these, I see no reason why we should limit > ourselves. Students should be able to contact Cascade any way they can. Agree. Although the KPU have been doing some research on telepathy, I think the current work is limited to one-to-one transmissions only. It might be worth seeing if a multicast option is available. > Traditionally, this involved the use of meece when in the labs, the > cascade script, finger and talk connections. The plural of moose is moose, unless I'm very much mistaken. > Also, we've agreed that an RT system would be an excellent idea, I understand RT is a trouble-ticketing/call-tracking/call-management/service-delivery- management/et-cetera system that Support uses. Why would we be doing call tracking in Cascade? In the generic case, these systems are normally used to ensure that each case is recorded and closed off with the user, and to provide management statistics. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Cascade is not a guaranteed response organisation. We are there to help *to the best of our efforts*, but if the cascader present doesn't know, the response to the student should be "Sorry, I don't know", or preferably a suggestion as to where the student could find the answer eg. mailing list / man page / Google. If we have tickets building up, it needs to be someone's responsibility to be closing these off, and I don't think that is a good use of A. Cascader's time. > Also there will be an email list once we can agree on a name that fits > with the > Informatics naming scheme. I presume the idea is that both Cascaders and non-Cascaders can provide help on these things? > Before this we need to agree on what kind of support we are doing. > Again, > personally I see no reason to limit ourselves except by a) the laws of > physics and b) departmental regulations [and also c) how busy we are, > etc]. We have agreed that Cascaders should not touch student's > practicals. As long as the 'hands off practicals' rule is observed, I think the level of support provided should be at the discretion of the individual cascader. For example, if a student comes up to a cascader with a five minute question like "how to use gnuplot" or "how to stop xemacs loading prolog programs in perl-mode", that's fine. But what if a student comes up and asks "how to use PDP" or "how to install Linux on my Sony Vaio laptop"? The latter could take forever, so it's up to the Cascader to decide how much time/effort they wish to commit. This may seem obvious, but it's important to make this explicit. > It should be noted that demonstrators do not cover all areas where > support > may be required: for one thing, demonstrators cover CS1 and CS2 only, > with > a very heavy emphasis on the practicals only. > Some demonstrators are encouraged to have Linux knowledge, some are > not. Sometimes the > demonstrator is busy or absent or useless. And there are no > demonstrators in, for instance, AI. (This is not strictly correct, AI1 does have demonstrators during practical hours) Inf really needs to get this sorted out. One way would be to have the level of support for AI1 and AI2 the same as CS1 and CS2. Could we make it clear in our discussions with Inf that this would be our strongly preferred option (if it is)? As things stand, even with Cascade as it is currently proposed in place, there is still no non-teaching support for AI2 students working on practicals. Does the 'hands off practicals' rule still apply, as we can't very well say "go see a demonstrator"? Someone (brave..) needs to be there to support these poor needy souls. > Additionally, I think we should encourage the kind of people who start > thinking `hey wouldn't it be cool if we could do this' with Linux, or > whatever. [etc] Absolutely. I imagine that this will be the area in which Cascade and Compsoc converge. > As for management, I expect Cascade to be pretty much self-managing. > You're all grownups and with an initial set of guidelines you can all > go > off and do your own thing. I don't imagine there will be a hierarchy -- there isn't the need, and besides, that's far too sinister. There will be a contact between Inf and Cascade -- this will be the one known as 'pajh' on the Cascade side and Jacques on the Inf side. I imagine that any other administrative responsiblities can be divided or rotated within the pool of cascaders. As I've said before, job titles are meaningless. What's this about salary? Michael -- _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 09:58:22 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Cascade Cavalcade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] I think the thing that strikes me the most about this conversation is this weird thing. Follow my thinking for a second ... There's been quite a bit of discussion about AI1 and AI2. This, once again rounds us back to the original agrument of whether Cascaders should touch on praticals or not. My view of Cascade is that it'll do stuff such as "how do you do in linux?" or "I'm building a website and need to do , how do you suggest I approach it?" However, we seem to be talking about more coursework specific stuff here. And I imagine that you guys are thinking the questions will be more the lines of ... "How does the wide-mouth frog protocol work?" or "How do you implement this stupid and annoying communications protocol that I've been working on for the past 72 hours non-stop1?" To me, conceptually, these two areas are rather separate. Now, my thoughts suddenly drifted to Cascaders and the drafting of. Now, with the view that Cascade will do techie support stuff, surely anyone can join the Cascade team, and they will be seen as a group of cool guru people who can do stuff. [But they might have to prove that they are worthy to wear the guru badge first. Or even provide some extra skill that no one else in the Cascade team has.] But thinking along the coursework specific route. Now, I think we touch on almost an interactive newsgroup. People post stuff onto the newsgroup and other people reply. Now, the reason why the newsgroup is so sucessful, is because there are many people using the newsgroups. Which means there are more chances that you'll find someone that know something about what you're on about. For Cascade to emulate that sucess, you would have to provide a system that surely would have similar effect(s)? Which would mean that Cascade must have a lot of Cascaders before it being quite sucessful? Does anyone understand what I'm getting at? It almost like asking "How do you model the airport system in PEPA?" in the compsoc list, where, no one else (apart from me) is doing Modelling and Simulation module. Whereas, if I posted it on the newsgroup I would get some sort of reply. Which means this ties in the question do we want most of the students to be Cascaders or do we want a small [well, relatively small compare to the whole Inf student population] elite group of students to be Cascaders? Thinking about it even more, I personally think that the gap in the student pratical help area is already filled by the Inf newsgroups and whilst this maybe a interactive thing, at least with the newsgroups, you can get several people's input rather than just one. And that person might have given you the wrong answer. Any thoughts on this? I would write more, but I unfortunately have an appointment with the bank manager in 10 mins. So I'll have to go. Oh, and whilst job titles are "meaningless", roles and responsibilites aren't. We might not need any job titles, but we certainly need people with responsibilites. Remind me to give you my copy of the "Levers of Control". Kate 1. the latter question being from Eric McKenzie's evil Computer Communications pratical which, as you can tell, I'm not bitter about at all. Oh, and just before I forget, I personally think that 3rd and 4th year praticals differ some what from 1st and 2nd since there is probably more collbration - not in a dodgy cheating way. Sizes of each module class varies. In my experience, some of the classes are small enough for you to ask random people in the same modules that you haven't talked to before about questions in the praticals. And whilst I see a /potential/ market in doing this online, I personally think its not going to be too much. Any thoughts? _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 14:17:45 +0100 From: michael eng Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Cascade Cavalcade [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] How about we divide this discussion about access and scope the other way; from the point of view of the student after different types of help. Coursework related queries: for me, one of the principal benefits of Cascade is that there is an in-person element to it. If communication is electronic, what benefit do I gain from talking to a self- nominated "Cascader" in a mailing list rather than one of my peers on the newsgroup, the latter who is working on the same practical as me and therefore likely to have a better understanding of the problem? General geek stuff: If I'm an aspiring geek, again there are wider scope newsgroups and also the web. Again, I'm communicating with people who I probably don't know; does it make any difference that where these people are or whether they are in some way backed by Inf? Not really, in my view. Also, I would imagine that by far the vast majority of queries would be coursework related in one way. I'm not talking about "How do you do Part B of Prac 6", but "How does X class work in Java" "Why does Matlab refuse to do anything in a intelligible manner" and so on. If Cascade keeps far away from coursework queries, I think it becomes a niche so small to be useless. On size of audience and average clued-upness per head. Why would I (as student) turn to a Cascader instead of some random next to me, or a mate etc? Because I would assume that to be worthy of the title of cascader, they would have to have more of a clue than the average joe. To that end, it would make sense to have cascaders listed with some kind of skills portfolio (eg. in the return from the 'cascade' script, if this were to be revived). Especially across the AI/CS divide, the skills that people will be looking for will differ greatly. Remember that one bad experience for a student undermines that students' confidence in the whole system. Not to sound overly pessimistic ... but that's how I see it. Michael _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 00:32:11 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: [cascaders-internal] Cascading in the darkness [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] I had to ponder over this for a little while ... Firstly, lets make one distinction. I view coursework specific stuff as code and answers to the praticals themselves. If the question is, "how do I use X class?" then that's not coursework specific, that's java specific. innit? Ironically, whilst reading your reply, I personally feel the opposite of what you're saying. In regards to coursework specific stuff, if I wanted help, I would either; a) read my notes, b) ask my tutor/lecturer c) ask my mate or d) ask some random who is also doing the same module/pratical. If I wanted to be an aspiring geek instead, I would appreciate the "human" touch, since it's harder to find specific answers to specific geek questions online. Besides, sometimes its easier for someone to see what you're doing wrong. i.e. Why this computer is knackered/ why does linux do this? - questions to answers like that are a matter of trial and error stuff. Whereas in coursework, there is a right(ish) and wrong(ish) answer. Full stop. Gettit? Very simply, I don't need some guru telling me how to do coursework stuff, since I should be intelligent and hard working enough to work it out or ask people who are doing the same modules. Whereas if I wanted to learn about very specific geek stuff, mainly relating to the usage of linux then I would appreciate the human, in-person, touch. Lets admit it, how many people will have problems in doing the java praticals rather than these windows-reared linux-newbies (myself included) asking stuff like "What's the command to locate stuff?" and "How do you get a table with more than 6 columns that doesn't overflow the page in LaTeX?" or "Why can't I FTP my stuff across to my account?" Whilst it was very cool spending 6 hours working out/posting/googling in an attempt to find why LaTeX tables are so evil, I think it might have been easier to get someone to just look at my code. In addition, for geek stuff, its always easier for someone to show you stuff. Anyway, I think I'm beginning to drift slowly away, so I'll stop. My second question would be: How would we pick who gets to be a Cascader or not? Now, I don't like this because the image of an elitist bunch of geeks running Cascader springs to mind. Even worst, the image of a bunch of imcomptent geeks running Cascade springs to mind too. I don't know how you fit "Cascade running itself" and "Cascaders are clever than the average joe". Surely there must be either some selection process or some ass-kissing to current Cascaders. I don't like the sound of either (maybe its at this point that I should be glad I'm not here next year ...) and I'm confused as to how that all fits in. Once again, I reiterate the need to find a past Cascader to ask. I mean I haven't used the Cascade system before, so I don't know what its about or how the hell it works. Sounds like a managers worst nightmare. I'm also confused about whether we're just inheriting and implementing the previously system exactly (or near enough to) or we're actually coming up with a brand new system from stratch with the previous system as a crude basis. If you kids, (i.e. Michael and Paul) have some specific strong ideas of how to care take of management of Cascade based on your experiences in the previous system, I suggest that you put them on paper. Its just that what you guys seem to have experience differ to what I imagine Cascade to be. And since I have more important stuff to do, it might give me a chance to stop procastinating. There's only 2 more weeks to read the entire pre- course reading list. This is not good, not good at all ... Kate _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 13:45:57 +0100 From: michael eng Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] Cascading in the darkness [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] Quoting Kate Ho : > Firstly, lets make one distinction. I view coursework specific stuff as > code > and answers to the praticals themselves. If the question is, "how do I > use X > class?" then that's not coursework specific, that's java specific. > innit? OK. When I said coursework specific I did mean things like how to use LaTeX to format my report and stuff like that. I think we are thinking of the same thing. So it is course related but not course specific, if you get what I mean. As opposed to stuff which is completely irrelevant to the course ie. general geek stuff like setting up a network in your flat. So: - For course specific stuff, they should go and see a demonstrator (assuming the demonstrator exists, is willing and able) - For course related stuff and for everything else, they ask the cascader. I don't think this is a change of what we have already said. > My second question would be: How would we pick who gets to be a > Cascader or not? I feel there needs to be some form of selection process. Each cascader should contribute something in a specific area of expertise. This 'skills portfolio', if you like, should be readily accessible to the student. Because Inf has quite a diverse base, I wouldn't expect a machine learning expert to be a proof theory expert, and vice versa (this is just an example). More importantly, it's really important that Cascade does not become in any way elitist where the selection is based on who knows who. Cascaders need to have excellent communication skills, they need to be approachable, coherent, and competent. Appropriate checks need to be put in place to ensure that this remains the case. It will not maintain itself. > I'm also confused about whether we're just inheriting and > implementing the previously system [...] I feel that the circumstances have changed so much that the old Cascade system can only be used as a template and we should not be constrained by what went before. Michael _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 16:45:09 +0100 (BST) From: Alex Panayotopoulos Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: [cascaders-internal] A blight of management Hmmm. Some of us seem to be under the impression that it is both possible and desirable to design the cascade system in one go, from scratch. I say we keep the system as a network of friendly students, and let it evolve into whatever it needs to be. But okay, lets air a few concerns. Q: Will we be able to build the critical mass to establish cascade as a viable avenue of support? A: Yes. The very fact that there is a *need* for cascade means that it will be used. There aren't enough demonstrators, and newsgroups take a while to get a reply from, so people will see the meese, and decide to give us a shot. Q: Is there a danger of cascade getting filled up with incapable people? A: Maybe, if the department provides benefits to cascaders. In this case, it may be desirable for prospective cascaders to fill out some sort of skills questionaire or whatever and submit it to existing cascaders. But I personally don't see this being a problem right now. Q: What if cascade becomes elitist? A: We currently have a couple of roles like MSc coordinator (aargh, that's me, innit?) that involve sending round emails to a bunch of people asking them to join cascade. Hopefully this will stop cascade from filling up just with existing members' friends. Actually, that reminds me. What other coordinators etc. do we have? -- <<>> Defender of Spudkind _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 00:01:02 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] A blight of management [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] > Hmmm. Some of us seem to be under the impression that it is both possible > and desirable to design the cascade system in one go, from scratch. I wouldn't say design the entire system in one go, but at least provide some type of structure with aims and stuff. I admire the whole "lets go with the flow thing, man", its very cool and "down with it", but I have my concerns as to how the whole Cascade thing will work. My biggest concern would be the selection of Cascaders. Selection processes are all cool, but if its just a matter of filling in a form, I'm sure some people can lie on it (lets admit it, being a Cascader will earn you some bonus CV points). But then you would have to resort to friends of Cascaders to ensure they know what they're on about. Its all one big mess if it all goes wrong. And while I'm all for evolution, if I was Inf, then I would be a little concerned as to giving resources to some freeforming system. If you do go down the freeforming, evolutionary, "that's so chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah" approach, then I suggest that you ask Inf for as little resources as possible to start off with. We don't want to be making demands when we don't even know what we want the system to be like. When we grow, then we can start asking for real, material, touchable computers. And I think that is what bothers me the most, there's too much left to chance and I think that Cascade might end up wanting to be be /so/ many things by the end of the year that it will get stretched in a hundred different directions. Do what you will, because it looks like that Cascade will end up being a group of students, capable or incapable, and writing some sort of meece system (if the original command was moose, can I suggest we come up with something witty to call the next command, such as yoghurt, since, like moose/mousse, they are both desserts ) implementing the previous cascade system (or what we remember from it). Besides, I'm tired of all this chat about the aims and stuff, I suspect the conversation about what we're going to call the command is far more interesting than the current one. And apathy has overtaken me, so lets move on. Kate _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 13:34:15 +0100 From: michael eng Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] Quoting Kate Ho : > And while I'm all for evolution, if I was Inf, then I would be a little > concerned as to giving resources to some freeforming system. If you do > go down the freeforming, evolutionary, "that's so chilled and cool, > yeah baby, yeah" approach, then I suggest that you ask Inf for as > little resources as possible to start off with. We don't want to > be making demands when we don't even know what we want the system > to be like. When we grow, then we can start asking for real, > material, touchable computers. Doubt we need to ask Inf for anything material at this stage, but I don't think the risk is in waste of Inf's resources but more in that if Cascade is Inf backed then Inf is going to expect something out of it (this goes back to what we said before). How is it going to work when Jacques or Mike F comes to us and asks us what Cascade is doing and what it is going to do for the Division and we say "Well, dunno mate, we're just going with the flow, nah wot ah mean". What really is at stake here is Compsoc's rep in the eyes of the Division. As this is our first actual contact with Inf, it seems pretty poor to the point of negligence to just avoid what are pretty difficult problems in terms of structure and people management by just pretending that they don't exist and avoiding them. Michael _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 00:25:57 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] > What really is at stake here is Compsoc's rep in the eyes of the > Division. As this is our first actual contact with Inf, it seems pretty > poor to the point of negligence to just avoid what are pretty difficult > problems in terms of structure and people management by just pretending > that they don't exist and avoiding them. Well said, mate. Well said. We're going round and round in circles again. I suggest that we all should meet to bash this out. Otherwise, we would agrue forever. Since we're all here next week, I suggest then. Would tuesday be ok? Kate _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 00:29:36 +0100 From: Kate Ho To: michael eng Subject: Cascade, again [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] Don't you think that we'll never, ever win this agruement with Alex and Paul over this whole Cascade thing? I almost feel like letting them have it their way just so that when they do fall flat in their face, I could laugh at them. But that's just a bit sick, innit? -- Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 09:34:49 +0100 From: michael eng Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] > Since we're all here next week, I suggest then. Would tuesday be ok? Tuesday ok for me. michael -- _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 10:12:53 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] From http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/groups/aisoc/cascade/cascade.html All cascaders have been subject to a background check by a member of staff. This sounds painful. Does anyone know what this is? -- _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 10:25:10 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] AngusH (10:17 AM) : humm. I suppose you could just select the best student based on academic performance but there is no guarantee that that group could interact sucessfully with other students as required. If the 'cascaders' are to be selected from upper years why not have a vote by the upper year students for the best candidates? --- What do you think? I reckon its by far the best idea that's been thrown about. We did it in our high school for prefect duties and stuff, and it's always worked out fine. Plus, people can show their "guru-ness" on the newsgroups before being selected onto Cascade. That'll eliminate any elitism. Plus you always know who the best people in your year are. Fantastic! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 11:24:41 +0100 (BST) From: Mark A Miles Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Kate Ho wrote: > Well said, mate. Well said. > > We're going round and round in circles again. I suggest that we all should meet > to bash this out. Otherwise, we would agrue forever. Since we're all here next > week, I suggest then. Would tuesday be ok? I am at work until 2pm,and then driving lesson until 4pm, but available after that. -me _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 11:30:29 +0100 (BST) From: Mark A Miles Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Kate Ho wrote: > From http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/groups/aisoc/cascade/cascade.html > > > All cascaders have been subject to a background check by a member of staff. > > > This sounds painful. Does anyone know what this is? Judging from the language it sounds as if it will be either a scholastic check... OR ...a standard Part V Disclosure Scotland check (i.e. vetting for pre-cons, etc.). -Rama _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 14:53:59 +0100 From: Kate Ho To: michael eng Subject: Re: Cascade, again [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] > I was quite surprised, I thought you were caving in and I know that Kate > *never* caves in right? You're right, I never cave in to something that I care about. But it gets to a point where I just don't care. I'm not going to be here, I'm not going to be using it and most of all, I won't get any of the aforementioned fame and recongition even if I do the planning or not. They're hellbent on not wanting to plan, and you're right, at the end of the day, we'll (or rather, you) will get stuck with it all. It happened to me when I did Young Enterprise and I got stuck with doing everything. I vowed never to do that again. Leave them to it Michael, that's what I say. They don't think far enough beyond their own noses to realise what can happen. Sorry to be harsh, but Paul will be f*** all help to anyone when its up and running - after all, if you had to take 2nd year 3 times, you ain't exactly a genius. As for Alex, he'll be too busy concentrating on 4th year anyway (besides, he's not the management/planning type). So if I were you, don't bother. Concentrate on getting a 1st and getting a proper job. It'll be more rewarding and satisfactory than attempting to agrue to the two people with least management experience out of us. Lets admit it, Paul would absoutely love the fame and attention he would get out of getting to select who gets to be a Cascader. People like you and me get satisfaction out of running a good system, not about fame and recongition that others do (running slightly into a rugby rant here). Anyway, I'd best be off to work. We'll do dinner on tuesday regardless of the meeting (its either tuesday, or next December, since I don't have any other free time from now until I move). Sorry to be grumpy. Just spent all day tidying up the place so not in the greatest of moods. Have fun on your last day tho! Kate Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 15:25:16 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Kate Ho wrote: > > What really is at stake here is Compsoc's rep in the eyes of the > > Division. As this is our first actual contact with Inf, it seems pretty > > poor to the point of negligence to just avoid what are pretty difficult > > problems in terms of structure and people management by just pretending > > that they don't exist and avoiding them. > > Well said, mate. Well said. Once again, Cascade is no longer officially any part of CompSoc. Discussion at the AGM made this clear. > We're going round and round in circles again. I suggest that we all should meet > to bash this out. Otherwise, we would agrue forever. Since we're all here next > week, I suggest then. Would tuesday be ok? Exams until the 11th. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 15:36:15 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] A blight of management On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Alex Panayotopoulos wrote: > Q: Is there a danger of cascade getting filled up with incapable people? > > A: Maybe, if the department provides benefits to cascaders. In this case, > it may be desirable for prospective cascaders to fill out some sort of > skills questionaire or whatever and submit it to existing cascaders. But I > personally don't see this being a problem right now. Partly this is what Jacques is for. The selection of cascaders is something to be decided between Jacques and the Cascaded Learning Scheme Coordinator (argh, that's me, innit?). The criteria for selection is something else I'd like to discuss with you lot. At the moment I am tempted towrds `anyone willing to do it', but I can see the folly in such a scheme. > A: We currently have a couple of roles like MSc coordinator (aargh, that's > me, innit?) that involve sending round emails to a bunch of people asking > them to join cascade. MSc Liaison was an AIsoc position. Now AIsoc no longer exists, nor does the position. I suppose I should have told you that you were being fired, Alex, sorry about that. The MScs promise to be a rich seam of potential cascaders, however, once we get a little further with determining the selction process. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 15:51:56 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, michael eng wrote: > Doubt we need to ask Inf for anything material at this stage, but > I don't think the risk is in waste of Inf's resources Resources seem not to be a problem. Have a little faith in me. > but more in that > if Cascade is Inf backed then Inf is going to expect something out of > it (this goes back to what we said before). We've said that we will provide some informal student support, and so we shall. As was said before, there is a concern that Inf may start expecting us to be their unpaid tech-support monkeys. We will need some way to prevent this happening, but there is no concern that they'll be able to accuse us of not fulfilling our contract, because that wasn't in it. > How is it going to work when Jacques or Mike F comes to us and asks us > what Cascade is doing and what it is going to do for the Division and we > say "Well, dunno mate, we're just going with the flow, nah wot ah mean". We're going to turn into Frank Bruno? I never said anything about absolving responsibility. What I said was that I expect Cascade to be largely self-managing. Obviously some structure (eg. the guidlelines I mentioned) will need to be worked out in advance, and the selction process will need to be agreed on and put into practice, but after that there will be very little management. Cascade's stated aims are very simple: provde student support. The Division has agreed that these aims are worthwhile and has not attempted to tack anything else on to them (as yet). There were a few things Mike mentioned, such as selection from Cascaders for summer research positions, but these were all voluntary. After my exams I shall draw up a draft statement of aims and processes for you all to look at. I shall include statements of what cascaders are expected to do and what they are not. I shall make it all nice and managerial and I shall try to keep it short. Then we can meet up and discuss it. Once we've agreed on it, presumably after some revisions, we can get Inf to agree to it as well. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 16:06:53 +0100 (BST) From: pajh@ed.ac.uk Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Kate Ho wrote: > From http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/groups/aisoc/cascade/cascade.html Didn't know those webpages were still up. I see Lucas Dixon is listen as one of the cascaders-in-chief. He's still around, so it might be worth collaring him for a chat and seeing how they did things in AI. I reiterate, though, that there is no reason why the new version of Cascade (ie. this one) should resemble the old. > > All cascaders have been subject to a background check by a member of staff. > > > This sounds painful. Does anyone know what this is? Well, cascaders are essentially performing teaching, so it's fair for them to try to get some assurances that it's being done properly. Again, this is what the Cascade Organiser (Jacques) is for. I have no doubt that the Organiser's involvement consisted of little more than looking at a list and saying `okay', however. Inf may have some statutory requirements on processes that have to be undergone---Mark mentioned one possibility---but I expect them to be relatively painless formalities. The selection of cascaders who are likely to be any good may be a little more tricky. More thoughts on this later. Now I do some work. pajh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul A J Hamilton School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh I don't want to be Elfstar any more! I want to be Debbie! _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 23:57:37 +0100 From: Kate Ho Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah [ The following text is in the "ISO-8859-15" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Some special characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] > Once again, Cascade is no longer officially any part of CompSoc. > Discussion at the AGM made this clear. Well, that's different to what I had agreed to. As I understand it, Cascade is part of Compsoc, its just that we chose not to include it in our constitution as something we /had/ to do. Michael, as minute taker at the AGM, can you confirm this? > Exams until the 11th. How many exams do you have?? I thought you only had to retake CS2Ah/Bh. And that was 2nd/3rd Sept? Anyway, I can't do any other date apart from next tuesday since I'm moving stuff on the 16th and I'm working every day apart from that. I suggest that you go on without me. Since I wont be using the system anyway. On that note, dinner on tuesday night anyone? Kate _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 07:55:12 +0100 (BST) From: Mark A Miles Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Kate Ho wrote: > > Once again, Cascade is no longer officially any part of CompSoc. > > Discussion at the AGM made this clear. > > Well, that's different to what I had agreed to. As I understand it, Cascade is > part of Compsoc, its just that we chose not to include it in our constitution > as something we /had/ to do. Michael, as minute taker at the AGM, can you > confirm this? I can confirm both yes and no. Cascade was seen as something CompSoc would do, however not constitution-enshrined. That notwithstanding, Cascade is actually something of the Department's making and ownership that we just would do for them. > On that note, dinner on tuesday night anyone? Sounds nice. -me _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 20:32:37 +0100 (BST) From: Alex Panayotopoulos Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah > On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Kate Ho wrote: > > > We're going round and round in circles again. I suggest that we all > > should meet to bash this out. Otherwise, we would agrue forever. Since > > we're all here next week, I suggest then. Would tuesday be ok? I'm out of the country. You can simulate my input to the discussion by shouting 'PIE!' at random intervals. Thanks. -- <<>> Agruing furiously _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:18:48 +0100 From: michael eng Reply-To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk To: cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk Subject: Re: [cascaders-internal] chilled and cool, yeah baby, yeah On Friday, Sep 5, 2003, at 07:55 Europe/London, Mark A Miles wrote: > > I can confirm both yes and no. Cascade was seen as something CompSoc > would > do, however not constitution-enshrined. That notwithstanding, Cascade > is > actually something of the Department's making and ownership that we > just > would do for them. The minutes read that Cascade would be operated by Compsoc, but would not be obliged by constitution to do so. I don't think this is worth getting picky about, to be honest. >> On that note, dinner on tuesday night anyone? > Sounds nice. me too!! Michael -- _______________________________________________ cascaders-internal mailing list cascaders-internal@inf.ed.ac.uk http://lists.inf.ed.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/cascaders-internal