[REVIEW]: Teaching Python package development: A structured course with learning resources and an instructor's guide

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @geritwagner (Gerit Wagner)
Repository: https://github.com/digital-work-lab/open-source-project
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): jose
Version: v0.2.0
Editor: @ashleefv
Reviewers: @NickleDave, @ctb
Archive: Pending
Paper kind: learning module

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://jose.theoj.org/papers/cc49b9604b9fd10bc8524d1539620be6"><img src="https://jose.theoj.org/papers/cc49b9604b9fd10bc8524d1539620be6/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://jose.theoj.org/papers/cc49b9604b9fd10bc8524d1539620be6/status.svg)](https://jose.theoj.org/papers/cc49b9604b9fd10bc8524d1539620be6)

Reviewers and authors:

Please avoid lengthy details of difficulties in the review thread. Instead, please create a new issue in the target repository and link to those issues (especially acceptance-blockers) by leaving comments in the review thread below. (For completists: if the target issue tracker is also on GitHub, linking the review thread in the issue or vice versa will create corresponding breadcrumb trails in the link target.)

Reviewer instructions & questions

@NickleDave & @ctb, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review.
First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://openjournals.readthedocs.io/en/jose/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @ashleefv know.

✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨

Checklists

📝 Checklist for @NickleDave

📝 Checklist for @ctb

[editorialbot]

Hello humans, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.98  T=0.05 s (1652.0 files/s, 201760.6 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Markdown                        45           1804            248           3939
Text                             3              2              0           1013
XML                              1              0              0            685
TeX                              3             29             20            636
YAML                             9             51             15            382
Python                           2             50             40            127
make                             2             18              9             75
CSS                              1             19              5             58
SCSS                             1              7              0             41
SVG                              8              0              0              8
HTML                             1              1              0              0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            76           1981            337           6964
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   469	Gerit Wagner
    84	LaureenTh
    17	Links Fixer
    12	Carlo
     9	Laureen Thurner
     9	Stella1234-design
     7	dependabot[bot]
     3	github-actions[bot]

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.1073/PNAS.1319030111 is OK
- 10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5 is OK
- 10.5281/ZENODO.11668338 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: ...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Investigating flipped classroom and problem-based ...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Teaching Programming to Non-Programmers - The Case...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Rethinking How We Teach Git: Pedagogical Recommend...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Python Packages

❌ MISSING DOIs

- 10.1145/377435.377452 may be a valid DOI for title: Use of collaborative multimedia in computer scienc...

❌ INVALID DOIs

- 10.1145/3649217.36535670 is INVALID

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

🚨 Wordcount for paper.md is 2351

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

🟡 License found: Other (Check here for OSI approval)

[geritwagner]

Thank you for opening the issue and helping with the review of our work! I have just updated the references to fix the two DOI errors (missing/invalid).

[NickleDave]

Review checklist for @NickleDave

Conflict of interest

• As the reviewer I confirm that I have read the JOSE conflict of interest policy and that there are no conflicts of interest for me to review this work.

Code of Conduct

• I confirm that I read and will adhere to the JOSE code of conduct.

General checks

• Repository: Is the source for this learning module available at the https://github.com/digital-work-lab/open-source-project?
• License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of a standard license? (OSI-approved for code, Creative Commons for content)
• Version: Does the release version given match the repository release?
• Authorship: Has the submitting author (@geritwagner) made visible contributions to the module? Does the full list of authors seem appropriate and complete?

Documentation

• A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state the need for this module and who the target audience is?

  • Issue: JOSE[doc]: add statement of need digital-work-lab/open-source-project#238

• Installation instructions: Is there a clearly stated list of dependencies?

• Usage: Does the documentation explain how someone would adopt the module, and include examples of how to use it?

• Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the module 2) Report issues or problems with the module 3) Seek support

  • Issue: JOSE[doc]: add instructions for contributors, e.g. in CONTRIBUTING.md digital-work-lab/open-source-project#239

Pedagogy / Instructional design (Work-in-progress: reviewers, please comment!)

• Learning objectives: Does the module make the learning objectives plainly clear? (We don't require explicitly written learning objectives; only that they be evident from content and design.)
• Content scope and length: Is the content substantial for learning a given topic? Is the length of the module appropriate?
• Pedagogy: Does the module seem easy to follow? Does it observe guidance on cognitive load? (working memory limits of 7 +/- 2 chunks of information)
• Content quality: Is the writing of good quality, concise, engaging? Are the code components well crafted? Does the module seem complete?
• Instructional design: Is the instructional design deliberate and apparent? For example, exploit worked-example effects; effective multi-media use; low extraneous cognitive load.

I feel that the course as currently written is not quite substantial and appropriate for the target audience.
Issue discussing this here: digital-work-lab/open-source-project#241

JOSE paper

• Authors: Does the paper.md file include a list of authors with their affiliations?
• A statement of need: Does the paper clearly state the need for this module and who the target audience is?
• Description: Does the paper describe the learning materials and sequence?
• Does it describe how it has been used in the classroom or other settings, and how someone might adopt it?
  • Issue: JOSE[paper]: Describe how this class has been used in the classroom + how to adopt it digital-work-lab/open-source-project#236
• Could someone else teach with this module, given the right expertise?
• Does the paper tell the "story" of how the authors came to develop it, or what their expertise is?
  • Issue: JOSE[paper]: Tell "story" of how authors came to develop course + expertise digital-work-lab/open-source-project#237
• References: Do all archival references that should have a DOI list one (e.g., papers, datasets, software)?

[labarba]

@editorialbot remind @ctb in 3 weeks