Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2016 20:59:40 +0000
From: Stephen RUSS <firstname.lastname@example.org>
A funny day. I rather bullied the students into giving feedback on some construals. 'We' decided not to say much to them. They have adopted a
pseudo-Aristotelian line that our construals are simply not-very-good programs (what else could they be?). Some have suggested some (very few)
interesting ideas. But none have shown any awareness at all (to my mind) of what I think of as a construal.
We've had about 8 sheets of feedback so far. I've not seen the two Hamish got yesterday.
Tricky - I'd have liked the Finnish to go away after tomorrow with some kind of 'feel-good' factor - instead of the reverse. We have time to
do something with the Slovaks, but I'm not sure now how to play tomorrow. I have no confidence the older Finns (let alone the younger!) have
any idea what we are doing. Do you?
I've asked the older Finns (4 of them with Tapani) each to 'mentor' one of the four pairs of younger students. The older ones were seeming to
need a 'role' this afternoon. I don't think they are well-suited to this task ... so may need to back-track.
I don't feel we have got any of our visitors to do any thinking! I guess it means our construals - taken without introduction - are inevitably
misunderstood. And yet I find talking to them (en masse) very unrewarding - they do not really seem to listen to either of us. So .... seems
to me we do need to have some short, punchy, arresting, cautionary tales to get them thinking a bit more deeply about these construals we show
them. (Mind you I have found Triangles quite odd ... you have to re-interpret a lot to make a construal of it.) They have looked at Lift,
NimCoins (this afternoon), Hex and OXO, Triangles and Bubblesort (this morning).
I think we must talk to them 10 - 11.15am, but then what? Your thoughts welcome! It worries me as far as conference is concerned.
We somehow need a presentation of construals that strongly encourages an approach different from approaching a program.
Mon 12 Dec 2016 see email #1321 in inbox.28.1.17#
Kieran and I have done some work towards replicating the Hex colouring script using for-loops. I think we've sussed
generating centres of hexagons, but are having difficulty specifying points.
Do you see any problem with the nested-for loops we've written at
Hamish refers to conversation about lifts on mod 12 Dec first session
Cites paternoster lift resources
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 23:26:45 +0000
From: Nicolas Pope <email@example.com>
To: Meurig Beynon <W.M.Beynon@warwick.ac.uk>, Steve Russ <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Jonathan Foss <Jonathan.Foss@warwick.ac.uk>
Subject: Presenting Examples/Tutorials
1 OK 11 lines Text
2 Shown ~9 lines Text
Hi Meurig and Steve.
Here is a link to my presentation of the examples generated today (or most of them). It is in the style of w3schools but we can play with
that. Also, I intend to automatically extract doxy comments and put them into bubbles point to the line where the comment originally was.
WMB Sept 2017 can't get this to work wth construit.c7 in role of latest-master, but appears that people were developing examples to illustrate
["is", "with", "when", "if", "for", "list", "string", "canvas"];
Some relevant examples seem to be stored in the examples/ and c7/ project directories for construit.c7
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 14:14:10 +0000
From: Samuli Laato <email@example.com>
To: Meurig Beynon <W.M.Beynon@warwick.ac.uk>
Cc: Erkki Sutinen <firstname.lastname@example.org>, "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Subject: VS: VS: VS: C7
sorry for not replying earlier. I must admit I've been very busy with my programming work these past few days.
Yesterday I spent some time trying to understand the exercises, and read the input code which was given. I especially looked at the solar
system exercise and it was relatively easy to see how the input and output were related. I wasn't sure if was I supposed to do something
interactive, or just study what was given. When trying to change the input code or write my own, it did not affect the visual output in any
way. Was this intended or did I do something wrong?
In any case I found them inspiring. Is the idea behind making construals that the user learns to draws connections between, for example, code
input and output? Or physics and real life phenomenon? This is partially a new field for me and I'm not too familiar with how everything
works, so please excuse my ignorance.
One more quick question: will the material stay available even now after the C7 event ends? Just in case I want to glance at the material
further later on.
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 19:03:44 +0000
From: Hamish Macleod <email@example.com>
To: Dr Piet Kommers <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: Student Interviews C7
1 OK ~27 lines Text
2.1 Shown ~26 lines Text
2.2 OK 6.8 KB Image
On 15 Dec 2016, at 6:30pm, email@example.com wrote:
Please just check if my conclusions make sense
Some really interesting observations. Not always consistent. :-) I seemed to hear both that more guidance would have been appreciated, but
also that direct interaction with examples worked well. Clearly, it is going to be able getting the balance right.
I think that it is clear that there was quite a mixture of ideas of just what the students were expected to get out of the meeting; perhaps
seeing it as a “course” which would be of less use to CS majors, but more relevant to other, “theoretical” domains.
WMB Sept 2017
[This is Hamish's response to the feedback that Piet gained via his interviews at C7]