[R] Input appreciated: R teaching idea + a way to improve R-wiki

[John Kane]

--- Philippe Grosjean <phgrosjean at sciviews.org> wrote:


-----clip-----

> 
> I tend to give a lot of attention to documents
> written by "beginners", 
> because they are the best people to tell what is
> difficult and what is 
> not in R! It is the starting motivation for the R
> Wiki, indeed.

Might it be a useful idea to ask for some of the most
egregious errors to be collected in a worst practice
area to illustrate the difference between good and bad
practice?  



> 
> Philippe Grosjean
> 
>
..............................................<°}))><........
>   ) ) ) ) )
> ( ( ( ( (    Prof. Philippe Grosjean
>   ) ) ) ) )
> ( ( ( ( (    Numerical Ecology of Aquatic Systems
>   ) ) ) ) )   Mons-Hainaut University, Belgium
> ( ( ( ( (
>
..............................................................
> 
> Matthew Keller wrote:
> > I appreciate the input. Off-list, someone
> suggested that I set up a
> > class wiki, and have this be the first sieve. I
> could do some quality
> > control there first (perhaps sending the link to
> this list serve at
> > the end of the semester for others to check over),
> and then post the
> > final manuals on the R wiki. I think its a good
> idea and am mulling
> > it, but part of me asks: why not just post the
> (perhaps imperfect)
> > manuals on the wiki and allow the wiki to do what
> wikis are supposed
> > to do?
> > 
> > I guess I resonated with Ricardo Pietrobon's
> point: the essence of a
> > wiki is that it is evolving and self-correcting.
> Even to get something
> > started over there would be an improvement. If
> people wait until they
> > are 100% certain that everything is 100% accurate,
> a much diminished
> > pool of people would post... The accuracy of wikis
> improves as more
> > people post. In other words, I think that it is
> the number of posters,
> > and not necessarily the signal:noise ratio, that
> drives wiki
> > accuracy...
> > 
> > Matt
> > 
> > 
>