foundations/advanced vs full course split

[lachlandeer]

We are potentially facing two sets of students (from UZH)

• those that took JL and I's 'foundation course' in 2019
• first years that didnt do the above

Question is how we want to set up syllabus etc to deal with this and make it clear which parts of the course are relevant to each set of people.

Two immediate thoughts emerge

1. bold face (or similar) the material that is similar so that those who did the foundations stuff don't need to attend
2. separate syllabi for each group
   • there's a stack of overlap if we go this way which is frustrating

@lachlandeer prefers route 1.

[bergmul]

@lachlandeer bolding the similar material would be good even as a first step for me to see the overlap / get a feeling for updated on the structure.

@bergmul prefers route 1 (at least for now)

[lachlandeer]

Here's the 2019 schedule from JL and I

	Day 1	Day 2	Day 3	Day 4
Morning	Terminal	Version Control	R: Data Explor.	Build Tools
Afternoon	Version Control	R: Basics	R: Econometrics	Build Tools

[bergmul]

• Did they get credits for the original course?
• Would they still get full credits for the new course?

From a practical standpoint, we have 2 types of overlap:

1. The course covered a shorter version of the same topic, e.g.
   • Terminal, Version Control, Build Tools
2. The course covered a specialized block, e.g.
   • R Basics, Data Exploration, Econometrics

I think for 1 it's tough to flesh out exactly what overlaps or to tell them to attend everything after the n+1th session. It's unclear how far one gets in the first n sessions etc. Unclear if skipping parts is really an option here.

For 2 it seems doable.