[Tutor] louis renton

Sun Jan 22 21:22:44 EST 2023

After reading several messages here that suggest that not liking Calculus 101 is a required pre-requisite for learning Python, I must bow out of this conversation. 

Actually, my college did not use that numbering scheme and my calculus courses were called 3.2, 4.2, 5.2 and 10.1 and in later schools my courses tended to be at least 500 level, so I cannot say I liked, or disliked anything labeled 101.

Now that the necessary humor has been attempted, and failed, may I ask a blindingly annoying question? Why among the many messages on the non-informative subject of "Louis Renton" have we not seen any messages from this aforementioned person who started this and has not yet replied in any way?

I personally suggest the possibility we are once again being used by some party who sits back and watches endless uneducated debate after an overly broad question for whatever reasons appeal to them. 

Another good reason for me to bow out. No need to help anyone who does not participate in the process.

Q-uit

Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

------- Original Message -------
On Sunday, January 22nd, 2023 at 7:17 PM, dn via Tutor <tutor at python.org> wrote:

> On 22/01/2023 15.05, paulf at quillandmouse.com wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 22 Jan 2023 14:43:27 +1300
> > dn via Tutor tutor at python.org wrote:
> > 
> > [snip]
> > 
> > > > A good and simple reference is important. Matter of fact, I've found
> > > > Google to be invaluable. If you can't find it in your reference
> > > > easily, Google it, and you'll find explanations and simple code
> > > > examples. I'm relatively new to Python, and that's how I've done
> > > > it. Also, there is a good reference for Python and its libraries on
> > > > line. Look for it.
> > > 
> > > Google is NOT a reference. What you will find listed is a collection
> > > of web-pages. Whether they are accurate or otherwise good or bad is
> > > open to question! See also: copying code from StackOverflow.
> > 
> > Opinions apparently vary. I've found tons of useful explanations and
> > working code from Google and Stackoverflow. "How to fetch a string from
> > the user in Python" on Google yields useful help. Obviously, you have
> > to copy or mimic and test to make sure stuff works.
> 
> 
> +1 but.........
> in order to decide if it is worth copying in the first place, and later
> to "test", one first needs a basis of knowledge.
> 
> Some dispute this, saying that as long as they know where to find facts
> (Google?) why bother to learn them. However, learning is more than
> "facts". Per the OP's "hands on", it is knowing how to use what you
> know/can find-out, and actually proving that by doing-so.
> 
> Question: if needed an operation, would you prefer a graduate of
> Med.School, or someone who is picking-up brain-surgery from different
> web-sites recommended by the GOOG?
> 
> 
> Learning to fetch a string is a great illustration of two aspects:
> 
> 1 it is an isolated fact, ie input(); and being told, use:
> 
> result = input( "prompt" )
> 
> doesn't teach much about strings or the likely constructs to do with and
> 'around' the uses of input(). Thus, isolated cf cohesive leads into
> asking: "what if I want to fetch an integer?". 'Stack-Overflow Driven
> Development' requires another search. Agreed, some answers do provide
> width and depth, but others stick strictly to the narrow question. If it
> were a cohesive lesson on terminal-input (as was one of my
> coaching-sessions at the local-PUG a few months back) then it would
> cover the above, including an explanation of the word "prompt", the
> building of a loop to cover mistakes in input (eg "ten" instead of a
> number), and what is/how to handle EOD through semaphore-values or the
> use of control-keys (which vary by OpSys). Chalk and cheese!
> 
> 2 having completed a structured course, few of us remember everything -
> and few courses cover 'everything'. In addition, it may be that we work
> on Python, but don't use specific facilities for a long period. So, it
> IS useful to have a reminder: 'how do I use range() but not starting
> from zero?'. This is where having your own study notes, downloading
> "cheat sheets", or using Stack-Overflow (or this Mailing List's
> Archives) can be a 'treasure trove' (of knowledge) - and all without
> disturbing one's colleagues' concentration/"flow"!
> 
> Have a look through some of my posts here. Partially because many don't
> know 'enough' to be able to frame a question without leaving-out
> necessary facts or leaving things open-ended; you will see that I
> frequently add reading references. Something to use to answer the
> question-posed, something for later, or something that is irrelevant to
> the poster's needs. Who knows? How to tell in-advance?
> (same conundrum faces courseware and book-authors!)
> 
> > > A formal curriculum such as an on-line course or even a text-book has
> > > been designed to introduce topics in manageable chunks, to build upon
> > > existing knowledge, and thus to show how 'it all' hangs-together.
> > 
> > Doubtless a formal course of study is useful. However, my experience
> > with academic texts (including those from my college years) has been
> > less than stellar. My college calculus text was nearly unreadable, and
> > I did well in high school math up through analytic geometry. This is
> > partly why Amazon allows you a look into the book before you buy it,
> > because a lot of them are just garbage. I've known plenty of academics
> > who couldn't think their way out of a crossword puzzle.
> 
> 
> +1
> FWIW, I completely agree with you: some academics have no idea how to
> teach - and I had trouble with Calculus 101, too.
> 
> You'll be familiar with the old adage: "you can't judge a book by its
> cover". Your local Librarian (note the title-case, and please be aware
> that some staff in a library are "Library Assistants") will be happy to
> discuss exactly this point: how readable is this book (for my level of
> expertise in the topic); and its related consideration: how applicable
> is this book to my own intentions, eg 'Python for Network Admin' cf
> 'Python for Machine Learning'.
> 
> With books, courses, etc (including YouTube 'training videos'), just as
> with so many other aspects of life, there is no such thing as a "silver
> bullet"! One of the (possibly 'the') most popular Internet courses for
> learning to program[me] is offered by a 'top' US institution, but I look
> at the antiquated training techniques they use and wonder where the last
> fifty (or more) years went? Yet, they have higher (since first offered
> to-date total) attendance (- haven't compared success/pass-rates though
> - aspects of high drop-out rates, and attempting to counter same, a
> current research effort to which @Leam alludes, elsewhere).
> 
> 
> The yawning gulf in the above observations, is that if "academics"
> produce a range of work varying from 'impenetrable' to 'made it so
> easy', what is the equivalent success/failure measure for YouTube videos
> or web-posts? There are many 'experts' (largely self-appointed, ie no
> job application to an institution's employment panel, and with no
> editorial oversight or even a colleague's advice like a 'code review')
> who post material which seems to say far more about them than it does
> about Python (and not always in a good way, if we are judging an ability
> to impart information, use time efficiently, whilst also enthusing, etc,
> etc).
> 
> There are some which are downright wrong - and therefore damaging. There
> are some which are truly excellent.
> (next proverb: sorting the wheat from the chaff!)
> 
> Knowing something, and then being able to impart such knowledge to
> others, are quite different things!
> 
> 
> In short, we're back to the curation of material, firstly to assure
> quality, and secondly, to assemble some applicable sequence of 'chunks'
> of coverage to facilitate learning and ensure a reasonably/practically
> cohesive pattern of knowledge. Followed by an assessment of the material
> vis-a-vis one's personal needs and interests.
> 
> In the case of complete ignorance about Python, pretty much any course
> or book which 'looks good' (per above, see also @Leam's list of
> reputable publishers from his experience) is a place to start. Once the
> new-learner has picked-up built-in types, functions, loops, etc (the
> 'core' of the language if you will*; (s)he is much better-equipped to
> review alternate materials - even to the point of 'dropping' the first
> and promoting him-/her-self to something heading-off in a more
> appropriate application of the language (for example).
> 
> * and the subject of another local initiative called: "The When of Python"
> 
> 
> In the case of the OP:
> - proving one's learning by challenging yourself to produce some "hands
> on" application of new-knowledge is by-far the best way to
> learn/re-inforce new-knowledge
> - the phrase "learn to code" seems wider than "Python". Perhaps then,
> something which introduces computing or computer science may be more
> appropriate, eg Harvard CS50 (https://cs50.harvard.edu/x/2023/) which
> introduces ComSc "(Two thirds of CS50 students have never taken CS
> before.)" and in terms of programming languages introduces C, Python,
> SQL, and HTML5 with the aim of providing just-enough knowledge to
> facilitate a person's (deliberate choice of) next steps - and note how
> they list 'choices' of learning-path based upon different peoples'
> intentions and expectations!
> - as far as Python is concerned, two good starting places are:
> - The (official) Python Tutorial
> (https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/index.html) which we (list members)
> have all used (or at least scanned), right?
> - @Alan's (our ListAdmin) own course, with the added advantage of
> being able to pose any follow-up questions 'here' and hear-back (content
> warning: another old adage) "straight from the horse's mouth". (when he
> gets back from holidays/vacation)
> (sorry Alan, please don't be an old nag at me...)
> 
> 
> Disclaimer:
> Harvard was one of the founding institutions for edX, since sold to 2U,
> but with the retention of (some) managerial oversight. I use the edX
> platform, but not for Python training.
> 
> --
> Regards,
> =dn
> _______________________________________________
> Tutor maillist - Tutor at python.org
> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor