My cousin was a professor and I got to wondering if she had ever published anything pedagological. So I did a WorldCat search and then just Googled her. No textbooks I can find, but research citations galore. Alas, no text of her papers, but if you want to read an abstract on Implications of tick size on the quantifications of engorgement in female Dermacentor variabilis (and I know that you do) . . .. She's Leahy MG there. Otherwise known as Sister Mary Gerald Leahy.
I would talk some about death, but it's a cold winter night and I think instead I will turn my attention back to my own pedagological problem of my SuperCollider Tutorial Thesis Project of doom. My advisor wants it to be more hardcore and frighten away those who are not technically saavy. Only he didn't say it like that. I think I have an idea on how to make it fit within both of our requirements. Although maybe not. I'm kind of stuck.
What the hell would I tag this with? Celesteh, maybe. (What's a tag?)
2 comments:
What's your way to make it fit with both requirements? Talking with folks at RPI, a lot more people would be interested in learning SuperCollider if it had better documentation, and about half of those people aren't programmers... so I don't know.
Ron wants me to have something as condensed and evil as his docs, but have it so people can click on highlighted words to get more information. from a usability standpoint, people will do that exactly three times before they get way too frustrated and give up.
the way i can think of doing it is having an abbreviated version and then having beneath it a parallel track, following the same outline, but with a lot more detail and explanation. users could follow the abbreviated track, follow the hand-holding track without touching the abbreviated track. or mid-level power users could flip between them, getting more information when they need it.
however, that's impossible to publish.
Post a Comment