WIP-PPIG

(Belated in organisation, but now done.) 

The WIP-PPIG is a workshop for students and established researchers to present ongoing work in the psychology of programming and will be at the University of Sussex on 21-22 February 2008. The call for papers for the PPIG Work-in-Progress Workshop 2008 is now online.  Submission of extended abstracts (1 to 2 pages) is due by 14th January 2008.

"A feature of the PPIG workshops has been their openness to a wide spectrum of concerns related to programming and software engineering, from the design of programming languages to communication issues in software teams, and from computing education to high-performance professional practice. Similarly, PPIG entertains a broad spectrum of research approaches, from theoretical perspectives drawing on psychological theory to empirical perspectives grounded in real-world experience."

More information available from the workshop website.

HCT Postgraduate Workshop

Thursday 6th December was the Human-Centred Technology Postgraduate Workshop that we* organise at the University of Sussex.

This year things were done a bit differently.  Rather than traditional research paper presentations the day was re-focussed on research methods (by year) appropriate to everyone's level and interests.  The idea was to take full advantage of the functionality of the Sussex Creativity Zone (CETL) and provide the chance for all attendees to critically reflect on the research approaches they are taking.

Unexpectedly I found out the week before that I was to take part as well.  I am glad I did - even if my digital poster did suffer somewhat from being generated at the last moment - as it was enjoyable and useful.

So, on the day, I finished class early so that we could all get to the workshop.  We arrived during Ben's talk on 'Doing a PhD: Managing Your Supervisor', and I quickly had to jump up again to make refreshments for the first tea-break.  The day was then split into alternating sessions; digital poster presentations by year, and practical sessions targeted to level. 

Dsc03455In my case:

  • Activity Session 1: Speed dating for the 3rd year doctoral students, elevator pitches for presenting your research.  In my case I repeated to each person I sat with: "I have no idea what I am doing!"  We then analysed the challenges and the shared positives. 
  • Activity Session 2: Drawing pie-charts of our work life balance, looking at the work we completed in the previous week.  Mine was depressing, but I expected no less having started to deliberately reflect on this anyway.  (Nothing like having to teach time-management to make you notice just how badly you are doing.)  We then drew out the drivers and some general tips for the group. 
  • Activity Session 3: Pairing up to sketch out our ideal thesis: type, contribution, thesis and structure.  I found this useful, even though it is a bit premature for me.  The shape could be anything at present.  Afterwards my supervisor happened by and commented that at least I knew I needed an abstract, introduction, literature review, discussion and conclusion!  Ho hum.

All in all a really useful day for me, and probably a good motivator for helping me to clarify just what I need to be doing at this stage in my game.

Challenges:

  • Thinking time / tangible output
  • Constraining the focus / area of study
  • Maintaining a focus on the positive / not beating yourself up
  • Barriers/difficulties (Technology, tools, pragmatics, financial)
  • Pathological patterns - hard to break
  • Theory
  • OOPB / Too much to do
  • Temporal and technical constraints
  • Transition between disciplines to make contributions

Positives:

  • Novelty
  • Freedom to explore
  • Found method to tell the story despite lack of clarity in literature
  • Knowing where you are going and what you are doing
  • Lots of potential

Drivers:

  • Self-pressure / last minute
  • Deadlines (internal/external)
  • Anxiety
  • Other people's agendas, requests and expectations
  • Structure
  • Priorities
  • Problem/Barrier
  • Boundaries
  • Urgent vs. important

Tips:

  • Explicit thinking time
  • Explicit downtime
  • Calming activities - i.e. list making
  • Assure yourself that you can do it
  • Talk about your problems
  • Breaking up big tasks

My photos of the day are here.

----

* Thankfully this year I was allowed to take a backseat organisational role and was only responsible for registrations, payments and receipts.

Agile 2008

I thought I should write a quick note to say how excited I am about the 'stage' concept at Agile 2008.

"Agile 2008 has adopted the metaphor of a music festival that provides multiple stages to attract audiences with common interests. The stages within our program are designed and organized by experts (acting as stage producers) who are truly passionate about their particular areas. Each stage will have a feel of a smaller, focused mini-conference whilst providing the conference attendee with a wide choice of stages to choose from."

I will be helping out with some small aspects of Brian Marick's Designing, Testing, and Thinking with Examples Stage. This particularly appealed to me after my experiences with teaching, and fits well with the model used at the Sussex Creativity Zone (CETL).

"...it won’t merely accept the need for examples, it will glory in them as one of the primary ways we learn, teach, communicate, test, design, code, and decide how to act in the world. The stage is therefore open to any kind of session that puts the concrete example front and center."
and
"We encourage risky sessions. If your session has a chance to succeed spectacularly, we won’t mind that it might fail disastrously. The success of the stage will be more about how high the peaks were than what the average session ratings were."

I am rather excited to see how well pushing for concrete examples, as the logical step beyond experience reports, works in practice.

I don't know yet whether or not I can attend, but I really hope so.

Hackday Dojo

The Brighton Farm organised Hackday at the Brighthelm Centre was a wonderful chance for the coding dojo group to get together to work on something different and fun.

We reserved six places for the dojo regulars and arrived with no idea what the group would be working on for the day.  Given the project-focus of the Hackday it wasn't run as a normal dojo session, we left the Randori behind in exchange for pair-development, stand-ups and iterations.  Using the 5 minutes before we started to get an idea for the resources available we came up with the idea for generating a real-world interactive game using Inform 7 and the many different sensors that had been brought by Thom Hopper. 

Hackdaydojo Tristan (from whom I stole the photo) has described the result as a "crazy Heath Robinson unholy mashup.  A text-based adventure game was enhanced to allow real-world interaction, such as pouring hot coffee on a temperature-sensing chip, or scanning cards embedded with RFID tags.  Extremely inventive and successfully delivered on time - a testament to Scrum and the the agile programming techniques that they used."

Tom describes it as "one of the most obscure combinations of technology I've ever been involved with: a text adventure game written for the day hooked up to a web server, a temperator sensor and RFID reader. Somehow we managed to balance a plot on top of all this and got the various bits of tech (Inform 7, web server, SFTP server, Java Robot classes, RFID reader, USB temperature sensor, a load of custom Java serial code and probably some other bits I've forgotten about) working towards a more-or-less-coherent goal... all run over 3-4 hours, obviously in an Agile fashion :)"

Jez gives a very detailed account of the day.  He summarises: "The eventual demo worked a treat. Thom had adapted the temperature sensor at the last minute to be embedded in the bottom of a cut off Coke can. Hot or cold liquid could be poured into this and be in direct contact with the sensor. This would post a message to a web server which the demo laptop was polling. The java Robot API was then used to write the appropriate command into the Inform game window at the prompt."

He rather interestingly comments on the two different focuses for the game-play development: "I was focussed on producing a single simplest interaction to prove that the system would work, whereas Simon was interested in the story as a whole (i.e. start with the solution and work backwards)."  The narrative game-play vs technical implementation should have been split into separate development groups sooner, but this dynamic for is an interesting issue for iterative text-adventure game development.

For my part, although starting with helping out with the game development, I ended up finding myself pulled into the facilitator role.  I'm not sure whether this helped the group retain focus, avoid obstacles, and coordinate - but I would like to think I wasn't just loitering around as this beautiful piece of madness was developed.

My sponsored fortune cookie said: "However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results" (Winston Churchill).  The result was crazy, but certainly did work!

Discussion:
http://www.farmhackday.com/2007/11/21/built-at-hack-day/
http://www.jroller.com/jnicho02/entry/fun_at_brighton_hack_day
http://www.tomhume.org/2007/11/brighton-digita.html
http://blog.cogapp.com/2007/11/22/hack-day-roundup/

Photos:
http://flickr.com/photos/tags/brightonhackday/

XPDay 2007

This year I helped out with the organisation of XPDay - I had hoped to talk myself into a student volunteer role, but sadly ended up doing some actual work in advance (poster chair and working on various tasks such as conference feedback, student volunteers, t-shirts, flyers etc.).

I helped Karl Scotland re-run the coding dojo session that I designed for the Brighton Festival Dojo.  It was interesting to return to this with a group of professional programmers  rather than a mixed skill group.

I also got to attend a number of fun talks and workshops.

I think XPDay was a success all in all, despite the split across two venues.  The feedback gathered was positive, and I had a great time.

Next year I may consider submitting a session of my own, we shall see.  Either way we'll need to order more small t-shirts next time...

My photos are here.

Scrum Gathering 2007

I was happy that I managed to 'student-volunteer' myself onto one day of the London Scrum Gathering 2007.

Glad I did, as it meant I got to see some very interesting talks in exchange for some passably awful speaker introductions on my part (for day one of the Human Side of Scrum talks).  I also got to sneak out to attend Joseph and Jiri's "Why Scrum Projects Fail" in advanced of the re-run at XPDay.

I have a lot of notes from the talks that I am still musing through.  Some of it may yet help me with context for some of my forthcoming analysis.

My photos are here.

Finding Feedback

Having found myself with the task of setting up a last minute conference feedback form for XPDay I went to do some research on varieties of feedback forms.  Or at least I tried.

It never occurred to me how little research has been done into conference feedback as opposed to teaching feedback.  (Or else I was just looking in all the wrong places!)

On the basis of not being able to find proved approaches that were still interesting, I developed my own.  I'm curious to see whether anyone will use it for more than just comments.

Feedback

Intrapreneurship

Intrapreneurism is working from within; "internalising the mission of an organization, absorbing your customer's problem, and driving a creative solution that matters."

  • Organisations rely on intrapreneurism and always have.
  • No one tells you to do it but they appreciate the results.
  • Create an energy and feeling that it will happen and it will.
  • When you hear people articulate the mission then momentum has caught on.
  • Sell, sell, sell.

Her advice was to show that you are competent and deliver so that people trust you. Do this above all.  She ran through a further series of lessons:

Lesson 1: Understand the organisational landscape and politics.
Lesson 2: You can make something GREAT happen.
Lesson 3: Don't assume anything... what appears obvious may not be.
Lesson 4: Make your stakeholders look good.
Lesson 5: Don't be intimidated... and don't give up.
Lesson 6: Bigger effects require teams... but with bigger results.
Lesson 7: Be fearless and keep the faith.

Intrapreneurship Nina gave a really interesting talk about her work at HP developing a way to use mms camera phone pictures to help girls select the right shades of make-up.  I was fascinated to learn about image processing and colour correction and calibration on camera phones for this project, and the work -arounds that they created to get this to work as a fully functioning prototype.

In her case, being a girl helped her to innovate and push for a project that the male engineers just did not understand.

It was a lovely, interesting, relevant and stimulating talk with which to end my time at GHC.

---

Johanna Hunt
Official GHC 2007 Blogger
You may comment on this blog by visiting the GHC Forum

Sponsors Night

"Oh yes it's [sponsors] night
And the feeling's right
Oh yes it's [sponsors] night
Oh what a night (oh what a night)"

Sponsors_night_1

So I didn't know what to expect from the platinum sponsors evening, beyond a networking night that was hosted by a lot of big companies:  Cisco, Google, IBM, Intel, HP, Microsoft, and Sun.

At ten past six, straight after the last session of the day, we all hopped on buses going to Universal Studio's CityWalk. After following sign after sign, kindly waved by stewards, we came to the large dedicated area set aside for

Sponsors_night_8_2

the mass of women

from GHC.

There was a lovely buffet, some free drinks, entertainment, and a good game of 'find the company.'  It somehow reminded me of the promenade plays by punchdrunk - each company was in a different room, building and level offering treats and raffle tickets to those that found them.  The challenge was to collect a raffle ticket from each sponsor; while also interacting with the great diversity of things that each company had set up for everyone to play with.  Each room was different and tailored to each company, and the

cocktails were great. 

Sponsors_night_10_2The venue was brilliant for the 1000+ women to explore, drink and converse - as well as for me to be utterly mercenary.

There were 7 raffle tickets to collect for the big prize raffle, one from each sponsor.  Even though I didn't win the raffle I left at the end holding a boa, two lei, an astronaut toy, usb lamp, travel mug, photo, bag, plastic mug, notebook, t-shirt, flashing badge, headphones and more.  My major regret was that I did not manage to find the Sun room in time to acquire one of the limited number of lovely rucksacks that they were distributing. 

Sponsors_night_14

(I took a photo of one of the bags I didn't acquire in envy.) 

 

There were only two drawbacks to the night as a wonderful closing party for the conference.  Firstly we were whisked away so quickly after the raffle, back to the hotel, that there was no chance to dance, socialise and relax.  I think everyone would have loved to stay and celebrate all their new friends for longer.  Secondly I woke up in the morning with 'Ladies Night' stuck in my head, and it sill hasn't gone! 

"Come on let's all celebrate
Oh [sponsors]  night and the feeling's right
Come on let's all celebrate"

---

Johanna Hunt
Official GHC 2007 Blogger
You may comment on this blog by visiting the GHC Forum

Storytelling as Role Modeling: Collecting Oral Histories

Storytelling_as_role_modelling I had been awaiting this one session ever since the programme was first published.  Happily I was not disappointed.

Barbara Boucher Owens (Southwestern University), Vicki L. Almstrum (The University of Texas at Austin), Lecia J. Barker (ATLAS Assessment and Research Center), and E. Anne Gates Applin (Ithaca College) spoke about their in-progress work with the Computing Educators Oral History Project (CEOHP).

The rationale for the project is to collect narratives and oral histories from women educators in computing, to provide the basis for exploring how they could be used to support mentoring. We were introduced to the project, some sample interviews and looked at their early stage indexing system. 

What interested me was the similarities in the issues they were addressing with our own on the (slightly less ambitious) Agile Narratives Project.  Their talk gave me plenty to think about and implement, further references for reading, and the potential promise of a support network for people working in this field in the future.  This connection alone would have made the entire conference invaluable for me.   I left with a spring in my step, and a gladness in my heart, knowing that I was not alone and had just met some lovely people who were working in the same area.

---

Johanna Hunt
Official GHC 2007 Blogger
You may comment on this blog by visiting the GHC Forum

GHC Scholarship Reunion Lunch

After an unpleasant dash in the midday sun, sweltering as I tried to navigate out from Downtown Disney, I made it to the GHC Scholarship  lunch.  (I swore to myself never-ever to try to take a short-cut out of there ever again.)

Attending the GHC lunch was very important for me, I was eager to attend to show just how much this scholarship meant to me; providing me with the finances and support to come to Orlando to attend the Grace Hopper Celebration (something I could never have done otherwise).

Once I had gathered myself, and cooled down, I got to have some interesting chats with other scholarship recipients, discussions about the future, and debate about what was wonderful and what could be improved further next time.

Scholarship_lunch_0

Scholarship_lunch_1

Thanks to the Anita Borg Institute for making this possible and giving me such a lovely opportunity!

---

Johanna Hunt
Official GHC 2007 Blogger
You may comment on this blog by visiting the GHC Forum

PhD Forum: HCI Applications (paper 2)

I popped in for one talk in the PhD Forum (HCI Applications).  Petra Isenberg (University of Calgary) was giving a paper called 'Information Visualization in Co-located Collaborative Environments', which I did not feel I could miss as I am currently very curious about collaborative information visualisation.

Her research has three main problems she is trying to address:

  • We don't really know how the collaborative information analysis process works
  • We don't really know what the design guidelines for digital tools of this type are
  • We don't really know how such things would be used in the real world

She found 8 distinct processes used by groups to work with data and decide strategy (selection, operation, strategizing) - and I must find a paper on this.  Really interesting was the finding that there was a lack of common temporal order for these processes.  She went on to describe her work on looking at design guidelines for digital tools, and considering how a visualisation system could be generated in a real world setting to support such work.

---

Johanna Hunt
Official GHC 2007 Blogger
You may comment on this blog by visiting the GHC Forum

New Investigators: Artificial Intelligence

'Efficient Plan Recognition for Dynamic Multi-agent Teams'
Gita Sukthankar (University of Central Florida), Katia Sycara (Carnegie Mellon University)

Gita kicked off the New Investigators in AI session this Friday morning by addressing the problem of multi-agent plan recognition.  It wasn't an area I knew anything about, but to my mind team dynamics is generally an interesting topic.   

She spoke about multi-agent plan recognition, using spatial, temporal and coordination data for understanding dynamic team plans. Plan recognition is understood through observations, prior knowledge, and closed world observation, but there are problems with understanding dynamic membership, especially when there is team change or subteams.  She mentioned that sub-team creation and destruction are important cues and spoke about ways to leverage temporal, spatial and coordination cues for understanding dynamic team membership.   

She took advantage of her phone ringing partway through her talk to prompt for questions, which was skilfully managed, and won my respect for her presentation skills. 

----

'Simplifying Sketch Recognition UI Development '
Tracy Hammond (Texas A&M University)

Tracy gave a lovely and engaging presentation.  As she pointed out sketching is engaging, creative and involves active learning.  Sadly sketching is generally dropped from the curriculum as hard to test and correct.  Sketch-recognition systems are a way to bridge this gap - by looking at the identification of hand-drawn shapes. 

Sketching Tracy gave a really interesting demo of sketching to create moving demos using LADDER Domain builder (LADDER is a sketch recognition language).  Such systems are quick and fun ways to create natural design animations, give immediate feedback, reduce teacher time and enhance teacher feedback.  Systems like this are very hard to build.  It is impractical for instructors to build such systems, so her work has been looking at ways to simplify this process.

I had never really focussed on how hard stroke and shape recognition could be, especially for arcs, but the demo and videos she gave were really impressive.  She mentioned her student's poster on recognising scribble types (for filling vs. deleting scribbles), research on natural shape descriptions, and showed videos using sketch recognition.

The GUILD system has been created to generate user interfaces using LADDER descriptions and Tracy went on to demonstrate how it could be used to create a tic-tac-toe sketch recognition board game.  So far 30 systems have been built using this system across many domains, and has been used for student prototyping.

I really enjoyed this talk and it really helped me understand both the problems with, and potential uses for, such systems and I hope to read more about this on the Sketch Recognition Lab site later.

----

Johanna Hunt
Official GHC 2007 Blogger
You may comment on this blog by visiting the GHC Forum

Survival Skills for the Graduate Student

Survival_skillsI'll love any talk that opens with quoted music (Making it up as I go along) and some really astounding figures, this held very true for this session.

Shannon Duvall (Elon University) and Michele Pagnotta (Licensed Clinical Social Worker) ran a really interesting session on 'Survival Skills for the Graduate Student' aiming to give hints and tips to help improve mental well-being during graduate school.

The statistics are impressive.  From the 2004 Berkeley Graduate Student Mental Health Survey:

  • 50% of graduate* students suffer from emotional or stress-related issues
  • 10% seriously considered suicide
  • 1 in 20 considered it

I plan to delve into those figures later (might be interesting for stimulating discussion with the first year PhD class I lead), but that is an amazing and worrying finding.

They started by talking through Michele's Top Tips:

  • Wise Mind (make decisions you are really happy with, by keeping a balance in your mind between emotion and reason)
  • Acting Effectively (do things that will work, most effective.  Don't use SHOULD.)
  • Don't Worry, be happy (worrying is not problem solving)

And then Shannon's Top Tips:

  • Focus on the Facts (don't worry about Imposter Syndrome, not provable, not a fact)
  • Advisor Relations (ever-evolving, professional, vital to your happiness and success)
  • Be Professional (it's ok to have worries and doubts, but don't forget to keep your academic relationships professional)

Further advice:

  • Set Your Goals and document your activities and meetings
  • How to Ask for things (Describe, Express, Assert, Reinforce)
  • Communication with advisors (ask directly for positive feedback)
  • (Everyone was told to write down) MAKE NO ASSUMPTIONS (ask, ask, ask)
  • Act Confident (you don't need to be confident, you just need to 'act' confident)
  • Getting Motivated (remember that progress comes in waves, intentionally take breaks)
  • Get Going Again (clarify goals, prioritise and break down)
  • Review your Work Schedule
  • Gaining Motivation (develop small, medium and large rewards, guild-free breaks and cheerleading statements)

They gave an interesting introduction to the five areas involved in keeping your vital life balance (in order of importance):

  • Personal Growth / Care
  • Relational Growth
  • Community Growth
  • Spiritual Growth
  • Professional Growth

You don't have time not to take these things not into account - they are critical to your mental health.  Keep yourself physically healthy and relax to reduce stress.  Make sure to attend to current relationships, it is a priority goal.

All in all, sensible and useful advice.  It is really worth visiting the Mental Makeover website, where they have a downloadable handout related to the session.

A lot of people rushed to queue to ask questions when they opened the floor, with more eagerness than I had seen in any other session so far.  What they spoke about had related in some way to everyone in the audience.

----

* The term graduate is equivalent to post-graduate in the UK - an interesting difference and a grammatical mystery worth pondering at another time.

----

Johanna Hunt
Official GHC 2007 Blogger
You may comment on this blog by visiting the GHC Forum

Real Teamwork in the Virtual World

Real_teamworkNot having any experience of working with distributed or virtual teams I thought I would head along to this session to find out what some of the common problems and solutions are for dealing with building teams under such circumstances.  The straw poll suggested that I was one of very few in the room that did not have direct experience of working in this way, although I think this did not greatly stop me from finding the discussion interesting.

There are several factors which contribute to a virtual team's success:

  • Make sure you have a good team leader with an openness to share
  • Try to meet people at least once in person if possible
  • Inter-team communication is vital and important to build on - technology can be used to leverage this
  • Try to help everyone overcome language and cultural differences early on
  • Have a clear and shared vision
  • Keep a clear meeting schedule so everyone is on the same page
  • Reach out to those who may not speak so much in conference calls
  • Speak to people outside of conference calls to address issues early - use the phone!  This avoids broadsiding and potential embarrassing moments in group calls
  • Draw others out by sharing something of yourself
  • Remember to work the relationship before the issue - Work on relationship building above all

Communication over distances / conference calls:

  • Make sure you clarify turn-taking in conference calls
  • Remember to speak slowly to avoid any language or accent issues
  • Allow pauses so that people have the chance to speak up
  • Create signals that people can use when they have something to say or add

Interestingly all of these things hold true for collocated teams as well.

Ways to make sure technology supports teams:

  • Leverage communication by using IM alongside conference calls
  • Real-time collaboration allows everyone to be working on the same page, and generates a better shared understanding.
  • Be aware that video conferencing isn't always the best method
  • Remember to have bios and photos, so everyone has a mental image of each other
  • Remember that there may be security issues with using more social media like Second Life or Facebook.

Time issues:

  • Many of the larger companies allow for flexible working (time and location), this is especially useful for working mothers
  • You should still make sure you know your boundaries
  • You should accept that sometimes there will just not be a good time for everyone

It was mooted that a lot of the communication issues that arise from not being able to communicate face-to-face may not be such a problem for the next generation.  The culture of how we interact with each other is changing, and lack of body language may not be such an issue in the future for those who have grown up with such technologies (cf. texting).  This flashed my mind in fear to the Asimov book The Naked Sun where the culture was almost unable to deal with face-to-face relationships, and all communication was mediated by technology.

For me, the most interesting point was made right at the end.  Listen to people's stories to understand team dynamics and potential issues (oh how true!).  The example was given of a team who all shared stories about how they had learned to be self-reliant - an understanding that they were all lone cowboys would have been useful earlier on in the project!

The conversation was set to continue in the following session, which I am sad I was not able to follow.

----

Johanna Hunt
Official GHC 2007 Blogger
You may comment on this blog by visiting the GHC Forum

We Invent the Future of Interdisciplinary Research

InterdisciplinaryI was annoyed with myself for being late to this session, as it was one I had been anticipating for a while. 

As my research is (rather wildly) interdisciplinary, and I lead a graduate class in interdisciplinary and group processes, it was certainly set to be of value to me.  Sadly the second half of the talk, the bit I made it to, didn't solve my problems with my research not being “computer science-y” enough, but then I think that is something I need to resolve through my own hard work. 

There were several interesting points that I leapt on however.

  • You need to be stubborn.  To push a new field forward you need to be willing to go against the grain and not take things, or others opinions, as given truths.  Be willing to push for what you believe in.
  • Fields move from 'out there' to interdisciplinary to accepted; cognitive science, HCI, AI, Gaming, Ubiquitous Computing, Bio-Informatics.
  • It will always be hard to keep up with two fields at the same time.  This is never an easy path.
  • Consider what your field is - how do the disciplines you work in contribute to this field?  How do they change perspective on the field?
  • Read broadly, and remember to cultivate a network of people who can support you.

Some useful places to start:

----

Johanna Hunt
Official GHC 2007 Blogger
You may comment on this blog by visiting the GHC Forum

Now You are an Associate Professor

This panel session was run by Tracy Camp (Colorado School of Mines), Joan Francioni (Winona State University), Mary Lou Soffa (University of Virginia) and Mary Jane Irwin (Penn State).

This was an odd session for me to attend.  I am not, and I probably never will be an Associate Professor.  This role doesn't exist in the same way in the UK, and so knowing what to do after I became one was perhaps a little unnecessary for me.   In an odd way everything under discussion was alien to me, and I had to work my head round the differences in the English and American Academic systems.  However, the talk was still interesting and there were many commonalities between the responsibilities of an academic in the UK and the US. I found myself taking copious notes.

Associate_professor_0 The talk was split into three main sections 'Activities towards Promotion' (Mary Lou), 'Undergraduate Institutions' (Joan), and 'Achieving Leadership' (Mary Jane).

Mary Lou talked about role progression, and the responsibilities of teaching, research and scholarship and service and leadership once you have tenure.  I found myself fighting with two terms 'tenure' and 'service', both of which are established in the American academic lexicon but not in mine (I heard 'tenure' mentioned on House once, but I don't think that counts).  'Service' I established was just a term for administration, just more formally labelled and acknowledged.   I quite approve, as admin is a major part of any academics role. 

I vowed to look up tenure as soon as the lovely GHC-Juniper network connection started back up again, as I was struggling to understand what it meant beyond just being permanently employed by an institution.  Somehow your job is more secure?   I still fail to fully grasp it, and would love to have someone explain the underlying premise to me!  It seems like the concept of tenure would reduce movement of faculty between institutions, and leave departments somewhat stale.  (I am happy to be wrong on this point!)

Once you have Associate Professor status (and thereby tenure) you are free to do the things you would like to do.  You must be careful to:

  • Balance teaching and research
  • Not switch research areas
  • Not take on too much admin and organisational work

Joan spoke about the differences in the skills needed to progress in research vs. undergraduate institutions.  This parallels the differences in the UK between teaching and research focussed universities.  In undergraduate institutions the focus is on excellence in teaching and scholarly activity as well as leadership.   I found it interesting that she noted that many undergraduate institutions tended to be more closely linked to the local community, and wondered whether this was true back home.  Is Brighton Uni more closely tied to the city than Sussex University?

Mary Jane spoke (and she admitted it was very US-centric) about leadership roles in research institutions.  It is worth watching out for roles which are too demanding, or might pull your focus.  After a detailed look at someone of the professional roles you could take on she made some clear points of advice, which I am sure are true everywhere:

  • Be proactive
    • Let people know who you are and what you are doing
    • Be positive and confident
    • Prepare an elevator talk
    • Go after awards
  • Make sure your webpage is up-to-date and professional!
  • Stay focussed and keep your balance
  • Don't forget to have a life
  • And, afterwards, don't forget to pay it forward.

In the questions session, after a discussion around being explicit about your contribution in any collaboration, the topic was raised of saying 'no' (a common discussion point in my research group, and something I am notoriously bad at).

Saying no is important:

  • Be clear
  • Don't feel you have to
  • Point out things you already do or suggest alternatives that would help your career
  • Possibly show that you are willing to consider it for a few days before saying no.

All in all a very interesting talk, even for someone who is not an associate professor!

----

Johanna Hunt
Official GHC 2007 Blogger
You may comment on this blog by visiting the GHC Forum

Bringing Women into the World of Games

Women_in_games_0

Joining The Game was a panel session I slipped along to, and my first full session of the conference.  The panel was run by representatives of UNC Chapel Hill, UNC Charlotte and EA Games.  By the time I found the room it had already started, but I still managed to secure myself a good seat at the back.

I took brief notes, but found the many things being discussed interesting:

Why games? They can be used as both a way of teaching computer science and as a means to attract women into the field.  As per good ole Wittgenstein, we were asked to consider what defined our notion of a game, considering the (now classic) example of second life as still constituting a game. 

The panellists introduced the nature of working in the games industry; interdisciplinary and well-rounded experience with a strong need to be able to communicate both technically and non-technically.  To get into the industry you really need to be well rounded (as it is potentially the hardest area in computer science); able to create fun games and ideas, strong C or C++ programming skills, memory management, architecture, networking, game AI all being useful.

Wu's Castle sounded like an interesting example of using a game to teach for loops in programming, and it was mentioned to have proven significant learning games.  I am looking forward to hearing more about this in the future, as my department is keenly interested in games for teaching programming.

The future of gaming using pervasive technologies was briefly mentioned, especially for GPS on mobile devices.  I wish more had been said on this topic, beyond mention that there was currently only really one game of this type (possibly in Italy) so far.  It had me wanting to leap out of my seat and mention  the exciting possibilities with Loco...  But I refrained, as the queue for questions was longer than the time available.

---

Johanna Hunt
Official GHC 2007 Blogger
You may comment on this blog by visiting the GHC Forum

Bridge Day

...and so we left Backstage Disney and headed back with weary feet.

Or is that the end?

My, this will be a long tale.

In the beginning there was Bridge Day, this magical thing that was given to us lucky few.  At least that was how I, and I'm fairly sure we, all felt.  It really had sounded like a gift of a day from the start, and with the scholarship having allowed me to even attend at all, it was the icing on the cake. 

Post jetlag and ready for Bridge Day I set off. We were divided into groups, A, B, C, Pink, Blue, Green.   By happy coincidence I was shipped out with the blue group....

----

Our first stop was to listen to a Disney Logistics talk from three Disney developers entitled 'A Day in the Life of a Disney Developer'. 

First up we learned about the IT structure of Disney IT, about the Business Technology Partners and job roles and progressions.  I mused to myself that it was interesting they viewed IT development careers as leading to increasing mentoring roles to support those newer or less experienced.   This was a nice way to view senior roles; mentoring not managing.   I was not so pleasantly struck by the discovery that all Disney staff are called 'cast members', this was a new concept for me, but clearly one entrenched in the Disney culture. 

We then heard more about the Disney development lifecycle (a topic which fascinated me but I'll not blather on about it here) and this was followed by a series of short demos.

----

Sandtrap_1 Then lunch, which I would have enjoyed more had it not been tempered by my realisation I had lost my phone.  It isn't just needed for twitter; it is my camera, alarm clock and back-up email reader.  Mid-way through the talk on Disney Imagineering, and the excellent sounding ImagiNations competition (which I wish I had known about while I still qualified), I realised where my phone must be.  Under that table, over there.  I admit I was distracted, biding my time until I could cross the room, whip up the tablecloth and look under.

Fortunately by the time the talk finished and I fought my way against the tide over there it had been discovered and placed on the table.  It was a quick find and my peace of mind was saved for a brief while.

Fortunately I found it just in time to take photos of our traipsing out for the group photo.

----

Epcot_6 Then we were whisked off to Epcot (my first time!) where we got to hear all about the little exciting things they do with technology.  I'm a fan of ubiquitous computing, so became quite excited when they moved on from talking about the biometrics they use for ticket verification to ways they are using infrared and wifi technology to create a more interactive environment. Epcot has 90% wifi coverage which makes POS systems which can be linked up to your room card, or cameras which can upload images to a central store accessible to all, possible and usable.  They use RFID tagged cards to monitor queue times, and infra redEpcot_7 ipods, headphones, and 'Pal Mickey' plush speaking toys to create an interactive experience (language options available) around the site.

And then we got to go on Mission: Space.  I bypassed all the repeated and repeated warnings about motion sickness etc, and went for the orange 'more intense' version.  On getting in I realised I was afraid.  Not for me you understand, but for the precious thing in my bag, my laptop.  I'd taken my laptop on the ride with me.  Oops.  All the warnings flashed back through my mind.   ...and we were off.

(Thankfully, and I'm ruining the story here, I'm now typing on it perfectly well and all is fine.).

It was a good ride, not the most stressful or scary, just pleasant.

----

Magic_kingdom_0 The final stage of our journey was to the Magic Kingdom. I loved the opportunity to go on the Haunted Mansion ride and see the Disney that I had heard about since I was a child. 

I also really enjoyed the chance to go backstage but, as they say, what happens at Backstage Disney stays at Backstage Disney. 

(Either my lips are sealed, or I have just written much too much about Disney for now.)

...and so we left Backstage Disney and headed back with weary feet.

----

After arriving back late, we rushed into the introductory talk then on to the reception and posters.  Phew, what a day!

And well worth it.  It was a lovely opportunity and lovely to have been allowed to participate.

 

The day is done.  Now I just need to find time to go through all the photos I took!

----

Johanna Hunt
Official GHC 2007 Blogger
You may comment on this blog by visiting the GHC Forum

Lacking Initiative but Inventing the Future

6. Give the female employee a definite daylong schedule of duties so that they will keep busy without bothering the management for instructions every few minutes. Numerous properties say that women make excellent workers when they have their jobs cut out for them, but that they lack initiative in finding work themselves.

11 Tips on How to Handle Women Employees taken from the 1943 issue of Transportation Magazine (Via The Presurfer)

---

I'm getting quite excited in the run up to the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing.  I am so glad I got a full scholarship to attend.  I admit I'm a bit nervous about being one of their official bloggers, but that just means it is tIme to polish my words, develop some opinions and confirm my daylong schedule of duties so I can do some thinking in advance. (Although I may lack the initiative for the latter, or so I understand from the above.)   

Ghc468x60

Agile 2007

Agile 2007 in Washington D.C. marked my first international conference and my first time out of Europe.  It therefore could not be anything but an experience.

I was signed up as a student volunteer (again, I just can't seem to not), had a research in progress paper for Agile Narratives and an experience report on informative workspaces so it was set to be a busy conference.  I thoroughly enjoyed myself.

Icebreaking_2 Workspace

My photos are available here.

XPDay 7

And so registration for XPDay 2007 in London on 19-20 November 2007 is now open. 

The programme is interesting and lively, and the conference is great fun. 

Don’t forget you can also submit a poster session if you want to interact even further with the conference!

d.Construct

In trying to reflect on d.Construct 2007 I fear I have less to say than I would like.

From the volunteer’s perspective, a role I have filled many times at many other conferences, it was by far the slickest organised conference I have ever attended.  Smoother even than the ones I used to organise back in the day.  I’m glad to have helped for the little I could.

As a conference it also had the nicest T-shirts.  This must be true as I actually plan to wear mine again.  The gift bag was also darned good.  These things so often get overlooked.

I remember that I was on a high from having my first pint of cider in a month the night before.

I remember I was jet-lagged, having flown back from the states and burning man the day before.

I remember the microphone not working just when I needed it to. 

I remember really enjoying the talks.*

I remember drinking afterwards.

I remember drinking some more.

I remember wondering if I should have had some dinner.

And now I seem to have a notepad full of drawn faces, but I don’t recall who drew them.

This probably all summates to a very good conference (v.g.c.).  Shame I don’t seem to have much in the way of notes.

---

* I unfortunately clashed slightly with the talk that related to my research area, which somewhat wound me up through not mentioning all the masses of work being done in the area.  It wasn’t a bad talk, in fact it had incredibly well-done slides, just not for me.  Couldn’t be helped.

I did however develop an instant crush on Matt Webb for being the first person in my recollection to ever mention Grice in a presentation.   I wish I had not just hit jetlag nap-time so I could have focussed more on the talk overall as it seemed potentially really fascinating; sadly sleep was battering at my concentration.

PPIG 2007 - When PPIG met Wagner

I was luckily funded (after winning the draw at WIP-PPIG 07) to attend the Psychology of Programming Workshop 2007 in Joensuu in the Lake District area of Finland on 2-6 July 2007.  The programme was the most ambitious yet; featuring keynote talks through technical papers, a doctorial consortium, tutorials, and a wide range of evening activities.  I have written a full review for the PPIG Newsletter but here are some of my highlights:

The workshop opened quietly on the Monday with the Doctoral Consortium, allowing us early-days researchers the chance to chat about our research and build up our confidence for the main conference.  Discussions were focussed on research methods and approaches and detailed and interesting questions were asked after each presentation.  Most importantly we were reminded to never start with a research method, but instead a theory or question that needs to be evaluated: What’s my question?  What evidence will satisfy?  How will I collect the evidence?  And the interesting questions: What do people say they do?  What do they actually do?  We also received good advice on how to read research papers, some ideas I intend to share with the Research Methods class.

There were two great tutorial sessions I attended:

  • An informal tutorial on eye-tracking and potential application when researching programming.  We were taught about visual attention and Fovea cones, the history of eye-tracking systems from 1898 through to modern eye-tracking systems, and potentials and challenges for such systems in the context of studies of programming.  The main focus of the tutorial was a hands-on experience using an eye-tracking system to conduct research. 
  • A tutorial introducing phenomenography (about which I knew nothing) and grounded theory.  We were given real data we could use to practice the two types of analysis, and I was extremely comforted to find that  I seemed to have a high level of inter-rater agreement with the original researchers using both approaches.  This gave me significantly more confidence that I have it in me to complete my own research. 

Tuesday-Thursday were dedicated to paper presentations:

  • On the Wednesday I enjoyed hearing about follower and gatherer roles in role based programming, particularly entertained by the speculative language presented which was called ROTFL (Role-Oriented Titillating but Fictional Language). 
  • The ‘Experiential Report on the Limitations of Experimentation as a Means of Empirical Investigation’ advised us not to rush empirical studies with software organisations, and to remember that the controlled experiment route is not always optimal.  We were encouraged to consider how such data can still be rigorous and potentially useful. 
  • On the Thursday I was intrigued by two of the closing presentations. Sue Jones' research showing that more experienced students have higher mental rotation ability - she wondered whether mental rotation could be improved. 
  • Stuart Wray presented an analysis of SQ and EQ (Systemizing and Emotional Quotients) correlated against programmer aptitude.

On the Wednesday was the interesting discussion on ‘Children's mental/operational models of programming—Do children's programming tools miss something?’  We discussed the activities performed by children, mostly on the internet, which involve programming activity without being explicitly recognised as such; parameter tweaking, optimisation, variation and composition of components (e.g. skins), and the creation of simulations, animations and games.  A variety of questions were approached:  Is it programming if it is fun, simple, socially-led?  Are there generational differences in the mental models being developed?  Do these ‘play’ experiences generalise or lead to correct abstractions for developing programming skills?  Where does algorithmic theory fit in these experiences?  If there is a difference what does it look like and what are the implications?  Should more formal programming be taught earlier in the curriculum?

The trip to the Orthodox Monastery of New Valamo provided us with an interesting tour of the attractive monastery grounds and learned of the history of the monks who live there.  The Byzantine conference dinner was a lovely affair and I admit to being very taken by the Valamo-made berry wines, which were delicious.  I just wish I could buy it in Brighton...

As ever the best bit of the workshop was the number of humorous awards awarded at the end.  These included:

  • ‘Most Desperate Attempt to Win a Prize with a Ridiculous Prize Suggestion’
  • ‘The ‘p-word Prize’ (For yet another paradigm)’
  • ‘Prize for the Largest Number of (Childhood) Stories’
  • ‘Philosophy of Methodology Prize’ (for articulating when grounded theory is grounded theory)
  • ‘Prize for ‘Running out of Time’ the Greatest Number of Times’
  • ‘Prize for Conducting a Discussion with Himself in Public’
  • ‘Prize for the Clearest Bottom Line’
  • ‘Best Look-Alike Prize’
  • ‘Most Stoical Scapegoat Prize’
  • ‘Prize for Well-Formed Questions’
  • ‘Most Invisible Session Chair Prize’

All in all PPIG 2007 was a wonderfully organised and varied workshop.  There was no shortage of interesting things planned, which helped to create an amazing environment.  I just wish my luggage hadn't been delayed in both directions...

My photos of this enjoyable trip to Finland are available here.

GHC

I have been awarded a full scholarship to travel and attend the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing 2007!

This trip to Orlando will mark my second-ever trip to the states and my first to Florida.  I fear Disney, but am greatly looking forward to the conference. 

The Narrative Practitioner

I wasn’t sure what to expect when I found I was presenting at the Narrative Practitioner conference in Wrexham in Wales.  It turned out to be a very enjoyable and interesting experience, with an impressive number and mix of keynote speakers.


Day One:

By the time I had conquered the long drive up from Brighton, and navigated the Wrexham roads, I found myself sadly late for Donald Polkinghorne’s keynote talk ‘The narrativity of practice’.  What little I did catch was interesting and more than set the tone for the rest of the conference. 

Notes:

  • If only the observable is real, we should talk about humans as we talk about objects.  Things are lost if we do this.
  • Being human is temporal, we have a beginning, middle and end.
  • Ricoeur, humans as actors
  • Story helps us to understand and inform our next actions.
  • There is something expressed in narrative about being human which is not expressed elsewhere.
  • Pragmatism – Doing things moving through life as actors/practitioners
  • Goals are contextualised  - not just out there
  • Practice goals: ethical, life, means, conflicts
  • Retrospective narratives: novice -> expert
  • Can be used to invent prospective narratives

I generated a list of types of stories, which I shall have to revisit and revise in future:

  • Retrospective stories
  • Research articles
  • Past experiences
  • Oral tradition
  • Prospective stories
  • Designs (proposals and ‘method sections’)
  • Qualitative + Quantitative designs
  • Personal stories
  • Vicarious (Oral, colleagues, research)
  • Authorities (government, empirically based practice)
  • Schonn’s thinking in action / walkthroughs

This keynote was followed by another keynote from Didier Danthois (School of Sacred Clowning) with a performance entitled ‘The wisdom of innocence’.  I twittered about how there was a clown on the lecturn, there really was.  After his performance he spoke about how the unknown leads to fear, so we need to learn to play instead.  He felt sad that you leave innocence behind as you grow up.

The afternoon sessions were all interesting, but my notes are sparse so apologies for omissions or inaccuracies. 

Narratives of Action Research (Melissa Sevista Nolas):

  • Action research is a relational methodology
  • Gergen 1997, Bowen 1998, Jovchelovitch 2007
  • Working with groups, communities and organisations
  • Dialogue (Levin 1946, 1958, Freire 1970)
  • However, little research on action research.
  • Bowen 1998 – Context in action research is emergent
  • Roth 2006 – Action research methodology books should come with warning stickers
  • Ways to learn:
    • Didactic model – inadequate
    • Apprenticeship model – Determined by opportunity
    • Stories – Sharing experiences of Action Research projects
      • Shareable world (Kearney 2002:3)
      • Riessman Organising Experience
      • Schonn Reflecting on Practice
      • Polkinghorne (1998) Practitioners work with narrative knowledge
      • Rappaport (1995) Narrative as a resource
  • Stories were supportive in terms of sensemaking, identity, construction and communication
  • Support roles and retelling to elicit responses
  • Can methodological narratives still be considered stories?
  • Are they asking for more stories or just different types?
  • Making scientific research messy.
  • Does technical rationality exclude storytelling?
  • People who work in industry are doing action research.

Taking Risks: an exploration into women’s perceptions of ante natal risk in pregnancy’ (Dawn Jones):

  • Beck 2004:203
  • Late modernity
  • Scientific narratives – rational response to problem solving
  • Ontological security
  • Now we have a need to know the risk.
  • Risks are socially constructed sources of danger, are ‘knowledge’ and not ‘ignorance’
  • Overt vs. Covert research

I ended the day with a clear task for myself: distinguish discourse, story and narrative in my research and make sure I keep to the distinction.

The day concluded with  exemplary music from Liam Robinson and Thomas Fairbairn and dancing at the conference dinner.

I then had to face the horror which was the student halls, but the less said about them the better.


Day Two:

The morning keynote was from Roshan Doug who spoke on ‘The business of poetry’.  Some interesting points I noted:

  • As researchers we are Faust.
  • If we look to Milton – we are all Satan, we all want to set up on our own
  • The purpose of a poet is to defamiliarise our familiarity
  • Hermes leads to hermeneutic
  • James Gee
  • Kirkegaard – Lived forwards and understood backwards

The following session I presented, so I have no notes from the other talks as I was immersed in re-reading my own slides.    I know I came away convinced I need to look further into space and the narratives of objects: space of bodies, space of objects.

The afternoon keynote was from Gavin J. Fairbairn (I never asked whether he was related to the previous evening’s entertainment) on ‘Storytelling, Ethics and Academic Writing’. 

Rough notes:

  • Real – Biographic Experience <-case studies
  • Vs
  • True – True to life (not ncy factual)
  • Scientific labelling for remoteness
  • Storytelling for closeness and empathy
  • Hypothetical stories are the moral philosophers tool
  • Weingartner – ‘Teaching as a subversive activity’
  • Crap detecting, learning value or lack of
  • Researchers should write so that as many people as possible are able to understand their work.
  • Clarity of writing
  • Tools for Obfuscation
    • Big words
    • Difficult ones
    • No explanation
    • Jargon (best from other fields)
    • Liberal use of citation
    • Obscure citation better
    • Always cite the greats (name drop, esp. philosophers and social scientists)
    • More refs mean more ‘academic’
    • Circular arguments
    • Difficult prose
  • Ask yourself:
    • Is this clear?
    • Is this free from jargon?
    • Is the structure helpful?
    • Are the citations needed?
  • Academic writing should be like storytelling
  • They should tell their tales and make their research into a narrative

In the afternoon I chose to attend a workshop by Robin Williamson (who also provided the evening entertainment over dinner).  This was followed by a small student dramatisation of a teaching play for encouraging discussions about the difficulties faced by new students. 


Day Three:

The final day was short but no less interesting.

Dr Alex Carson gave a fascinating keynote talk entitled ‘The Narrative Practitioner’.  Again my notes are rough, but I think they serve my purpose:

  • “man is in his actions and practice, as well as in his fictions, essentially a storytelling animal”   1985:216
  • Narratives are the practice not measurable against the practice
  • Polkinghorne 1988:13: organisational scheme expressed in story form.
  • Intelligibility
  • Form of life
  • Shared culture, understanding, social bonding
  • Develops our tradition
  • Max Weber
  • Disenchantment of the world after the enlightenment
  • Subject vs object divide
  • Assumption that our ordinary perceptions are faulty
  • Thick description, Geertz
  • Fundamentally, the researcher makes the choices.  You can’t hide behind approach.  Research is value-laden and unbiased.
  • The concepts of quantitative and qualitative research are just grand narratives (a la Foucault).  They structure your perceptions, don’t validate according to them.
  • You should own up to reflexivity in research project
  • Narrative Analysis:
    • “all practices aim at some good” (Aristotle)
    • Deconstruction
    • Critical Conversation
    • Reconstruction (stronger)
    • Holistic
    • Developmental
    • (Demosthenes “I suffered nothing”)
  • Narrative Practitioner:
    • Fired with passion (Hegel)
    • Knows he/she doesn’t know
    • Open to further conversations
    • Reflective critical phenomenology
    • Says more about who we are, what we do (not reductionist)
    • Develops our self understanding

All in all a very good conference, one I look forward to attending again despite the student halls.  Now I just need to write the associated paper.

The Story of Research

At the end of May I presented at a one-day symposium on reading and writing research at the Sussex Institute at the University of Sussex called ‘The Story of Research’. 

The first keynote ‘Representing Lived Experience: Making Principled Decisions’ by Professor Andrew Sparkes, was interesting and relieving in equal measure. 

The questions he posed which I particularly noted:

  • How are you going to write it?
  • How are you going to represent it?
  • Be explicit about what you are doing and why!
    • Scientific / Realist / Confessional / Autoethnography / Poetic / Ethnodrama / Ethnographic fiction / Creative fiction/mixed genres
  • How do you judge them?
  • Narrative Poetry – Learning through the power of language
  • Who do you want legitimacy from?
  • (RAE as farce)
  • Think about who we are when we are writing.

The talks were fun, although I regretted attending the second keynote as it resulted in an unfortunate coffee-spilling incident.   (Yes, I knocked it everywhere and over others.) 

On Rabbits, Space and Cards

I have finally got my act together and finished off my experience report for Agile 2007.  It is called 'On Rabbits, Space and Cards: Moving Towards an Informative Workspace' and I will be presenting it later this summer in Washington D.C.

I'm excited, as not only will this be my first time out of Europe, but it is also conveniently timed for leaving me in the states in time for Burning Man.  It is also a nice paper, and the only one I had time to produce properly* for the full IEEE proceedings.

It will be nice to finally have something published which focusses on the Nabaztag, Radio 2 and the joy of open-plan offices.

That will be the final of three conferences I will be attending (for talking about my research) this year: The Narrative Practitioner in Wales in June, PPIG'07 in Finland in July, and Agile 2007 in Washington D.C. in August.   Returning from that will also mark the time when I move into the depths of deepest-darkest data analysis - and will mark the start of movement towards the end of my PhD.  (Eek.)

---

* I have two more papers submitted for the Research-In-Progress workshop, one of which is about the work I have been doing for the Agile Narratives Project.

XPDay 7 Call

XP Day 7 is a two day international conference for anyone who wants to create software better. XP Day focuses on practical knowledge, real-world experience and active participation of all attendees. We welcome submissions from anyone involved in creating software, whatever your role.

That means you.

See more at the XP Day 7 Call for Proposals.

QCon - Post Conference Info

Post conference Info:

QCon wiki

QCon slides
QCon Flickr Pool

Key Takeaway Points and Lessons Learned from QCon 2007 - summary article based on blog posts about QCon, nice to be quoted.

Retrospective Loss

Very sad to have missed a workshop on Retrospective techniques being run by Diana Larsen and Rachel Davies - Had place, had train ticket, had directions, had to be ill all night.  Such is the way.

Sad to have been so ill I ended up in bed for two days - also missing XtC and an XPDay meeting.

QCon - Friday

It being my birthday I only stayed at QCon for the morning.  This was a shame in a way as this day had some of the most interesting talks of the three days.  It also ended up being one of my busiest as a student helper (although I did not get the chance to use the video camera again).

I got to run about and help with the Open Space Sessions being run by Diana Larsen - but sadly had no time to attend.  I got to see some very interesting talks from Joseph Pelrine and Dave Thomas (although given the numbers of people I ended up sat on the floor!).

I also had a 'twitter moment' - as I was asked what my twitter id was just as the lift doors closed on my way out back to Brighton.  I never had the chance to answer but I did get the chance to twitter it. Such is life.

---

Notes from talks (hoping I have them right now):

Joseph Pelrine:

  • (Sad to miss most of this talk - given he had props.)
  • Every time you put a team together they will organise in a different way.
  • Sensemaking involves Observation, Interpretations and Conclusion.
  • People may not even be playing the same game, let alone speaking the same language.
  • If you are doing Agile by the book you are not doing Agile.
  • Humans don't like to deal with rules - they don't do best fit but first fit pattern matching followed by some subconscious post-rationalising.
  • Process, Protocols, Ritual and Ceremonies can be both a reflection of culture and a buffer to human interaction.

---

Dave Thomas:

  • Novice - Needs to know when they are done.  Experts  use different language, they use metaphor and story.   Using Drefus Model to look at programmers.
  • You cannot treat people uniformly, different people have different needs.  There is no such thing as a 6-pack of developers.

QCon - Thursday

User Stories - Rachel Davies

Philosophy, stories and lifecycle of agile covered as an introductory session.

Agile aims to satisfy the customer - this does not mean that it is somehow cheaper or needs less developers.

Rachel made a very interesting point that traditional requirements documents are based on the traditional model of knowledge transfer - a model which was exemplified in teaching with lectures where the expert can pass knowledge directly to a student (who will then retain it).  The view is that knowledge can be poured out, captured, recorded and then delivered on to other people without a loss.  This view has changed, with increasing education activities focussing on reflection, group activity and tacit knowledge.  The same change could be seen in the shift from requirements capture to user stories. 

User stories are a way to work with other people, and to encourage communication.  If you haven't had a conversation about the contents of the cards then something has gone wrong - they are promises for discussions.

The Ron Jeffries three C's:
Card - Facilitate
Conversation - Discuss using agreed language
Confirmation - Acceptance Test

Traditional Form:
"As a <User Role> I need <Capability> so that <Business Benefit>"

It also helps when the story has a name.

Development Cycle:
Exploration -> Release Planning -> Iterations to Release -> Production

Create a roadmap of deployable releases - all iterations should be deployable but it may not be possible in the business case that it can be deployed each time.

Each iteration has the stories and features planned - generally estimated in story points.  There is normally more detail in the plan for the closer iterations.  At the end of each you review and refine the plan, adjusting and adding detail accordingly.  However the release dates are always fixed.

Generally in an initial planning meeting the business sponsor will present the case, allowing the development team to ask questions.  The development team can then go on to have a more detailed technical conversation.

Business people and developers must work together - and welcome changing requirements.

---

Steve Freeman - Test Driven Development

The motivation for the talk was to encourage people to go away and try it out.

So, why use TDD? - arguably because you end up with half the defects but similar productivity.  It helps to give the confidence to get the job done, and you don't need to worry so much about side-effects.

"    Write a test
"    Make it pass
"    Refactor

Tests are best named after what they will do for us and not the methods that they are testing.

Never stray far from the green bar.  This ensures steady continual progress (real not illusory), focussing on one thing at a time.   It also encourages neat, clean simple code and modular design.

Listen to the tests, analysis effort can be put into tests.  Refactoring supports design aspect by removing duplication and helping to express intent.

Code is more reliable, needs less debugging - and shorter!

Encourages test-driven management.

---

Boris Gloger - Heartbeat Retrospectives to Amplify Team Effectiveness

The idea of a retrospective is to tell a tale - the history of the team or a project.

Why retrospectives? We would like to improve what we have done in the past.

Disappointment of expectations stops learning.  Retrospectives need to occur after events to encourage learning.

6 step process
- security first
- collect facts
- ask: what went well?
- ask: what could be improved?
- who is in control?
- Prioritise activities

Security first: Prime directive - everyone has done the best job they can given their knowledge of the situation at the time.  What happened was the only thing that could have happened.

Collect Facts: Create shared team history or story.  Each person writes important event on post-it and adds to timeline on the wall, while briefly talking about it.  Only tell about your own story when you put it up, but once it is up there it becomes a team event and part of the team story.

What went well? (Creates positivity)

What could be improved?  (no manager enforcement, all ideas come from the team)

Who is in control? (who can make this happen?  The team?  The organisation?)

Prioritise activities: Create team backlog and impediment backlog.  The latter is hard, but important to make visible.  Important but hard to do and takes bravery.

Heartbeat retrospective can last 10 to 90 minutes. Use a dedicated room, not a project room, preferably in a secure environment that is not the team work area.

Some say project retrospectives should take at least 3 days - these are longer, more details as they cover a longer project in its entire history.  They also try to create solutions.  Heartbeat retrospectives are more designed for iterations.

Make conflicts visible, don't try to hide them.  However, safety is built over time as the team is built.  Hard to deal with highly charged situations in such a short time frame.  Talk about things on wall and not about each others.

By telling the story you