Software Carpentry

Helping scientists make better software since 1997

Archive for August 2007

Random Survey about HPC

This was just forwarded by a friend:

The High Performance Computing (HPC) community is initiating a study to develop education and training pathways in order to enable scientists and engineers to advance the pace of discovery by taking advantage of high performance computing (HPC) and grids.

In order to inform our study, we invite you to complete a survey about your experiences. We would like you to evaluate a list of categories of expertise according to how relevant they are for your work. We also would like to collect additional information about your training experiences.

The survey is very short and should only take a few minutes to complete.

Please go to the following link to complete the survey: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=_2f7D2YUJfkH9Dua0PP_2f30_2fQ_3d_3d.

The survey will be open for input through September 11, 2007.

Your input is very valuable to us and will help us understand your training needs.

Thank you for your participation in this study!


Scott Lathrop
TeraGrid Director of Education, Outreach and Training – http://www.teragrid.org
SC07 Education Program Chair – http://www.sc-education.org

The questions seemed pretty random/subject to broad interpretation, but I filled it in anyway—I’ll be interested to see what if anything comes of it.

Advertisements

Written by Greg Wilson

2007/08/31 at 14:04

Posted in Community, Noticed, Research

How I’m Doing

I wasn’t happy with the two courses I taught this past winter — too many distractions, too little preparation.  The feedback on the Software Carpentry course was therefore a pleasant surprise: I’ve heard second-hand that several of the Computer Science grad students were disappointed by its slow pace, but overall I did better than I expected.  On a 1-5 scale:

  • Background required to successfully complete the course: 2.0
  • How easy to obtain details/background to supplement lecture material: 2.0
  • Did term work increase understanding: 3.7
  • Material was presented too slow/fast: 2.0
  • Material was too broad/specialized: 2.9
  • Workload was too light/heavy: 2.9
  • How well organized was the lecturer: 4.0 (no idea whose class they were in…)
  • How satisfied: 4.5
  • Overall rating: 4.2

The most common positive comments were that the course was practical and pragmatic, and that the collaborative projects were worthwhile.  Negatives include the assignment being distributed and marked very late, not enough examples of what good programs actually look like, the course being slow for CS students, a lack of depth in some areas (particularly security), and my jokes being corny.

Written by Greg Wilson

2007/08/07 at 12:14

Posted in Toronto, Version 3