We started today at 9:00 AM, and I am taking a little time to discuss how an open space conference works. Unlike a traditional conference where sessions and topics are specifically defined, there are some simple "rules":
Everyone comes up with two topics.
We "dot vote" the sessions, and those that get the most votes become the session content.
What are our goals? We had a quick discussion around our table:
Markus Gaertner: How can we help train testers.
Ben Kelly: Good Testers don't necessarily make good coaches.
Dave Liebreich: How can I help mentor younger testers.
Iain McCowatt: How can we context switch between testing, management and coaching.
Ilari Henrik Aegerter: How can I help to build trust with my team and with coaching people so that they can advance.
Cem Kaner: As a University professor, I've seen that most testing training is ineffective. I think that the key is to design experiences and feedback for testers.
As for me, I'm focused on three primary areas. Since I'm a lone tester, I mostly manage myself and my own efforts in my day to day work. I don't actively coach in my day to day work. I do, however, coach in my role as a facilitator in Weekend Testing, as an instructor in BBST, and as a content curator for SummerQAmp. My goal, to gain from this conference, is to learn and talk about some of the challenges I have with these three spheres.
The past hour we have pitched our ideas, and there have been a number of variations on themes. Topics like giving feedback, auto didactic learning, and mentoring younger testers. I've proposed two topics myself. We shall see if they make the cut:
1. Having been involved in Weekend Testing now for two years, and facilitating for almost the same amount of time, I have seen both the benefits and the limits of the Weekend Testing model. To add a little controversy, and to consider different approaches... what if we were to rip the current model of Weekend Testing out by its roots and start again? What could we do to redesign how we deliver it and our goals in coaching other testers?
2. Since becoming involved in SummerQAmp, I've been asking a question often: how do we change our approach when we are discussing Software Testing with teenagers and young adults, people who are still very much trying to figure out what they want to be when they grow up? Even if they decide not to be software testers when they grow up, they can learn about the field and get an appreciation of it that they can carry with them in whatever endeavors they pursue. In short: how can we teach this topic to what is a young and impressionable audience?
With the votes cast, and a schedule established, we had way more topics than we could cover, but some of the topics had common themes and we constructed sessions based around the comments everybody pitched. My proposed topic #1 didn't get enough votes (probably too specific), but proposition #2 blended in with several other ideas, and thus we will be doing a session on mentoring younger testers and those looking to consider testing as a career. More when we do that session.
The sessions themselves are self organizing; go where you want to go, as long as you want to go, and move over somewhere else if you feel you are not getting the value out of the session you think that you should.
Being a role model does not mean that we are an expert, it means that we show where we can learn, where we can teach, and where we can admit our ignorance (because we are all ignorant about *something*). As an added bonus, I've been recording this session, so it's very likely this will become a podcast in the not too distant future :).
My focus was to talk about the SummerQAmp initiative, and I shared some of the content that we had developed and structured for the "What Is Testing?" module (the introductory module for the SummerQAmp curriculum).
What was also cool was that I had a chance to get some peer review on the topics and concepts I was presenting, and got some neat feedback on how to present some of the ideas. Paul Carvahlo discussed an option about how I could use an open space model to teach programming, without having to actually open the game that I was planning on presenting (Lightbot 2.0). My thanks to everyone for the feedback and suggestions.
We went through a variety of options, such as being able to have testers provide experience reports and give some indication as to how they have developed their ideas. In addition, providing exposure to other teams and giving them a chance to see a variety of contexts and approaches will help them to develop their ideas and approaches to problems.
A focus on professionalism was also discussed, and to help them discover and see opportunities and encouraging them to embrace them.
After lunch, we held a plenary session on tester games and using them as coaching tools. Here's some pictures. I can't talk about the games themselves (well, I could, but then I'd have to kill you ;) ).
The last segment I decided to record for today was a talk by Wade Wachs called "Auto Didactics Unite". It was based on the idea that we need to have the ability to teach ourselves before we are able to teach others. Wade was kind enough to let me record the conversations, so this will likely also become a podcast as well.
And with that, we are bringing the fun for the day to a close. We have a dinner date in Saratoga, so with that, TESTHEAD is signing off for the day. We'll see what tomorrow brings for Day 2.
I know my vote doesn't count but still.
Both of the topics seems appealing
1) being more directed toward the current testers and a global community participating in Weekend Testing, it will have more immediate effects.
2) seems more interesting to me (I'll vote for it if I had the opportunity :)) I would love to (hear- Podcast :D) read more about it, what are the current approaches and what other ideas these Awesome group of people have about "discussing Software Testing with teenagers and young adults".
I didn't even know that Software Testing can be adopted as a profession when I was doing my Bachelor of Science back in 2001-5 we only had a lecture or two about it and that's it. It would be great to learn all about it and eventually using that learning to tell students about it.
I agree with Ahmed here. When I was taking CS and Software Engineering Courses, one course covered testing at all, and I don't even believe we spent more than 6 1 hour sessions upon it. As long as educators push the myth that testing is 'easy' and not worth their time, then young college students coming up will continue to be presented the same myths that some of us were back then.
I don't know, and maybe you can ask Cem Kaner this, but does seeing a push or actual coursework or electives in testing at the college level really help much at all? Or could this be an area where we have to find other ways to spread the knowledge?
Post a Comment