2020-04-01-online-swc-at-hzdr.md 11.7 KB
Newer Older
1
---
2
title: "Our First Online SWC Workshop"
3
date: 2020-04-10
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
authors:
  - erxleben
layout: blogpost
title_image: default
categories:
  - report
tags:
  - workshop
excerpt:
    "
    It was supposed to be our first Software Carpentries workshop at the HZDR.
    We were in full swing organizing a live event until it became clear that we
16
    would have to move online. <em>Challenge accepted!</em>
17
18
19
    "
---

20
21
22
23
24
25
### Contents
{: .no_toc}

1. TOC
{:toc}

26
27
# Planning Phase

28
29
Our first own Software Carpenty workshop was supposed to be a live event.
We intended to take it easy, learn a few lessons and then build upon these.
30
31
With these goals in mind we set out to plan an two-day workshop for the
31st of March and the 1st of April 2020.
32
In the beginning of March it became clear that the effects of the Covid-19
33
34
35
36
37
pandemic would reach us long before this date.
It was unanimously decided to switch the workshop to an online event instead of
cancelling it — even though this would mean a lot of organizational work with an
increasingly tight deadline.

38
39
## Our Original Approach

40
As it was expected to be a first experience for us as instructors, organizers
41
and helpers, we advertised 25 workshop seats on the PhD mailing list of
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
our institute.
To our complete surprise the event became booked out within the day.
As a reaction we created a second "event" in our system to act as a waiting
list and to be worked off in follow-up workshops.
The side effect was that we got a first glimpse of the huge demand for training
opportunities by our scientific staff.

49
50
51
Our initial plan was to split the first workshop day equally between the
_Bourne again shell_ (_Bash_ for short) and _Git_ lessons and use the complete
second day for _Python_.
52

53
54
We did however estimate that we might have to cut later episodes from these
lessons, depending on the learners' speed.
55
56

## Switch to Online
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72

When we decided to switch to an online event it was clear that there are
additional unknowns to be expected.
For this reason we decided to reduce the number of participants for the first
iteration of the workshop to only 9 persons.
As we had no prior experience with online teaching it seemed better to start
with a conservative amount of participants and increase the number in future
workshops if everything went well.

Therefore we set up a seperate event in our system and transferred the planned
amount of participants over, based on the first-come-first-serve principle.
The remaining participants will be enrolled with priority into a follow-up
workshop in April 2020.

Additional time had to be spent on selecting and organizing a suitable
video-conferencing system.
73

74
75
76
77
{:.treat-as-figure}
![Image: Example Setup]({{ site.directory.images | relative_url }}/2020-04-01-online-swc-at-hzdr/view_from_home.jpg "Example Setup")
An example setup. The second monitor proved very useful.

78
# Role Call
79

80
81
82
83
While in the live-setting one _instructor_ is supported by one or multiple
_helpers_, the online environment also demands one of the helpers to
additionally take on the role of the _host_.
The roles can change from lesson to lesson since especially the instructor has a
84
high cognitive load and may be subject to a strained voice after prolonged periods
85
of teaching.
86

87
88
89
90
## Instructor
The primary task of instructors is to lead the workshop.
They present the content of the teaching material, determine the pace of the
workshop and coordinate the with hosts and helpers.
91
Thus, it is especially important for them to familiarize with the workshop
92
93
materials and manage the time required for teaching episodes, exercises and
breaks.
94

95
96
97
98
99
100
## Host
Running a workshop also requires to complete a lot of organisational side-tasks
during the event.
The nature of these tasks changes significantly when switching from a live event
to an online workshop.
Notably, video-conferencing tools tend to determine one person as _host_ who has
101
the full management rights for the event.
102
To reduce the instructors' workload, a seperate person fulfils the role of the
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
_host_ who can overtake these tasks during the session:

* Prepare and open breakout rooms
* Monitor the chat (together with the helpers)
* Keep an eye on the time
* Observe the participants reactions
* Organize quick polls for feedback or exercises
* Manage shared document and insert exercise questions on demand

In general the host is less focused on the participants but on the instructor
and helpers, taking note of the lesson progress and anticipating required
organizing actions.
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122

## Helper
Helpers are the backbone of a successful workshop.
They monitor the participants and proactively interact with participants that
have questions, may fall behind or have technical issues.
Questions may either be answered by helpers directly or be forwarded to the
instructor in an opportune moment if they are of more general concern.

123
## The Workshop Team
124
We split our workshop into the three parts _Bash_, _Git_ and _Python_ between
125
126
127
128
129
130
our three instructors.
The two instructors who were not actively teaching, assumed the roles of host
and helper respectively.
We further expanded our team by two full-time helpers which allowed us to
respond to questions without delay.

131
132
# The Tools

133
134
135
136
The choice of tools significantly affects the organizational effort and workshop
quality perceived by the participants.
In the following our selected tools will be shortly introduced.

137
## Indico
138

139
140
We employed [our self-hosted _Indico_ instance](https://hifis-events.hzdr.de)
as the event planning and registration tool.
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
It proved to be a good choice to facilitate the registration procedure and
allows to message selected (or all) event participants directly which proved
very useful when switching the workshops to the online version.

One drawback was the limited capability to transfer registrations from one event
to another, which had to be done manually, since the provided _export_ and
_import_ features did not support a common data layout.
148

149
150
> [Official Indico Website](https://getindico.io/)

151
152
## GitLab

153
It appeared to be a good idea to extend the _Git_-lesson and also give a quick
154
155
156
157
look at _GitLab_ as a web-based application for the knowledge acquired in the
workshop and a good collaborative tool.
As most of our participants were members of the HZDR and we also had the
sufficient administrative rights to allow access for all other participants, we
158
159
chose to use the [institute-local _GitLab_ instance](https://gitlab.hzdr.de)
for this purpose.
160
In future workshops with participants from other institutions we might switch to
161
162
163
164
165
166
[_gitlab.com_](https://www.gitlab.com) for this exercise.

It is worth mentioning that people who signed in via a third-party provider need
to use an access-token when cloning via _https_.
This can also be the case on _gitlab.com_ and forces to organizers to plan some
time to get this set up for all affected participants.
167

168
169
## HackMD

170
171
Amongst the many collaborative online editors that were availabe we chose
_HackMD_ for its plentiful characteristics:
172

173
* Ease-of-use
174
* Markdown formatting capabilities
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
* Code / syntax highlighting
* Side-by-side editing and preview

Even though our participants had no previous experience with markdown documents,
they quickly adopted its basics.
Some exercises required the solutions to be put into code blocks or tables which
were either copied and pasted from prepared examples or formatted by the
helpers.
183

184
185
> [Official HackMD Website](https://hackmd.io)

186
## Zoom
187
188
189
190
191
192

The choice for a video-conferencing tool was probably the most important
decision during the switching to online.
We were already familiar with Zoom from the Carpentry instructor lessons and had
the good fortune to be offered a share in a Zoom-Account by the Carpentries for
the purpose of holding workshops untile we could organize our own account.
193
There was not enough time to get a _BigBlueButton_ or _Jitsi_-instance
194
195
196
197
installed and evaluated properly.

During the workshop we could make good use of the offered features and
experienced good video and audio quality.
198
199
We prefixed the screen names of helpers and instructors with their respective
role to make them easier to distinguish by name alone.
200
201
202
203
204

In the light of rising security and data protection concerns regarding Zoom we
continue to monitor the situation and keep exploring alternatives with the aim
to offer the best possible workshop experience to our participants in a
privacy-friendly way.
205
206
207

## IPython

208
For teaching the basics of _Python_ we went with _IPython_.
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
It offers syntax highlighting to aid the learner.
Since it is an interpreter, the participants get instant feedback if the entered
line is valid python.
The command-line based approach significantly reduces the ammount of objects on
the screen and aids to focus the learners attention on the code itself.

The tool comes with the standard installation of the _Anaconda_ packages as
recommended in the setup instructions by the Carpentries.

218
219
# How it Went

220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
It became clear early on that an online workshop progresses notably slower
in comparison to a live version.
Due to the lack of non-verbal communication, it is more often required to assess
the learners progress and also, in the case of helpers, to interact with each
learner individually.
Sometimes communication can also be impded by low quality audio tranfers making
it necessary to repeat parts of sentences or write things in a chat or shared
document.
We enjoyed a mostly stable connection with good quality and the participants
were very cooperative and disciplined, muting themselves if they did not wish to
speak.

232
233
234
235
236
237
To encourage users to use the shared document and signal that they are allowed
and expected to modify it, we included a warm-up exercise which asked the
participants to note down their attendance together with a short statement about
themselves.
"What is your favourite cake?" turned out to be a suitable icebreaker question.

238
As a consequence of the speed reduction and the spontaneous insertion of a _Git_
239
collaboration exercise with _GitLab_ the _python_ lesson was postponed by a
240
quarter of a day to make room for the last part of the _Git_ lesson.
241
All these aspects led to many episodes being compressed or dropped altogether.
242
243
244

## Issues Encountered

245
### OS Differences
246
{: .no_toc}
247

248
249
250
251
The participants were, with one exception, using Windows.
While this required some additional research effort for the helpers on some
occasions it kept the overall effort low, since participants could also help
each other out if necessary.
252

253
254
255
Particular issues, for example accomodating for the different line ending
encodings, that would arise were also covered by the Carpentries' lecture
materials and could thus quickly be solved.
256

257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
### Handling More Challenging Problems
{: no_toc}

Two more complex issues could be solved by the host assigning the participant in
question to a breakout room together with a helper.
This way the lessons could progress for the unaffected participants and the
breakout room was joined back once the issues were resolved.

From the experiences made we would reserve such procedures only for the most
dire of problems since the involved learners lose the connection to the workshop
and may have trouble getting back on track.

It is preferrable to try helping in the shared online environment first, to
allow the other participants to either learn something new for themselves or
contribute on their own.

273
## Feedback, Reactions and Lessons Learned
274

275
276
277
278
The post-workshop survey determined that the participants viewed the event in a
positive light.
Compared to the pre-workshop survey, most participants felt enabled to make
first steps towards improving their workflows.
279

280
281
282
A general consensus between participants and organizers alike was the need to
plan more time for the workshop content as well as the demand for follow-up
workshops covering more advanced topics.
283

284
285
As organizers we consider this first event a success and a good foundation upon
which to build our future events.