Jargon Busting - Shorten or Remove it

[nkshin1]

NNLM Region 5 hosted a LC Workshop, and I received A LOT of negative feedback about Jargon Busting. Many people, including myself, believe it's a futile task to brainstorm items that will not be addressed in the LC or Carpentry workshops. Time could be better spent on other LC content - many people were mad that Jargon Busting took an hour and that we were short an hour and did not cover R data visualization. I think we should either remove Jargon Busting or edit it/shorten it to make more relevant to the LC Workshop outcomes/tasks.

[libcce]

@nkshin1 I've seen the negative feedback but also positive. The positive feedback might be more from instructors themselves though? But I've always liked this takeaway -> It helps to share what you know and don’t know about software development and data science jargon. You suggested shortening, any ideas on shorter ice breaker activities or a variation on this activity that is shorter? Another option, based on just a couple of workshops is to start with a metadata detective game + FAIR data intro which really helps with understanding the why is all this important aspect.

[morskyjezek]

I'll just chime in to note that I have also seen the jargon busting activity to be useful in various workshops. @nkshin1 raises a good point, that it may cause frustration amongst learners since the topics may not be addressed, but the goal of the exercise as I have used it is really as an ice-breaker. I see it as an optional activity, which can be used instead if the instructors don't have a different icebreaker activity.

I'll also note that the last time I taught this was a zoom-based workshop, which required some significant changes from the lesson as published. Notably, the pairs -> small groups -> full group pattern is a lot more unwieldy using breakout rooms than it is to ask folks in a room to turn to their neighbors, then to combine pairs, then share with the group. So there could be some rethinking of the activity along these lines too.

Could it be useful to transition this episode to one that has various icebreakers that could be used to start a workshop? It may include jargon busting, but perhaps others like those @libcce mentioned could also be included. Each of those could be included as an activity box. So it would be more of a "choose your own adventure" for the instructors.

[emcaulay]

Finally reading this issue through all the way. Apologies for the delay! Thank you for sharing the negative feedback. The times I have taught it or observed it being taught were always super positive. However that was only 4 or so times so it's not a lot of instances.

In the overview check-in issue, we are considering de-commissioning the entire overview lesson. And we noted that Jargon Busting is really well liked so we should keep it. I'm wondering, though, if it is a lesson episode or if it is a teaching tool. I don't really value having icebreakers in a lesson. I think that's a teaching tool like having introductions or using an ether pad. It's not a lesson.