Some people don’t want to learn new things, at least not right now. Save yourself the stress and don’t try to force the issue. I should do a followup on this. There are ways to break down that barrier if you are determined, but you have to take the right tack and you have to be prepared to be turned away. It happens. You can’t save everyone.

You are right about working the value angle. Nobody is going to care about SOLID (for example) for the sake of SOLID. There has to be a reason.

Yes I’m only beginning to understand myself

I think I have confused teaching with justifying.

Trying to encourage others to engage a newly minted (at a personal level) idea of professionalism (TDD/SOLID) is easy when the desire is there. Expectations align; disparities in Dreyfus position are more easily acknowledged and less intimidating.

When there is no desire then your “…some people don’t want to be taught, so don’t bother until they are ready”. This is what I have been grappling with. The dissonance produced when I am unable to convince someone of the value of TDD (Testing in general) leaves me searching for a silver bullet of justification. But then I must admit some people don’t want to be taught the value of TDD.

Most of what you outline above applies and my answer lies in identifying the right thing to teach (i.e The VALUE of SOLID/Repeatability/TDD not the disciplines themselves); and only for those open to the suggestion.

What remains is maintaining sanity on collaborative efforts with those who are ambivalent or hostile to practices I value greatly and mitigating the friction such a disparity often produces.

I’m not sure exactly where you are going there, but I’ll attempt to break it down as best I can.

Yes, there are points between beginner and expert, that’s both implied here and noted in the Dreyfus model. Different techniques are used to teach a person at each level, and different degrees of skill can be acquired at that level.

One does not, in fact, need an immediate expert around to pursue learning. I think I made that abundantly clear, but if not, I’ll restate it here.

As to “authoritative” sources, yes, that’s an excellent place from which to pursue further learning, providing the authoritative source is an actual authority versus a perceived one (see guidance via Oxite).

- Scott

I would like to see the Alt.Net community explore the other spaces of this continuum as many contexts provide neither extreme; even with consideration of Dreyfus and the skill under “learn”. What precepts will best govern skill refinement in a group of non-beginners and non-experts? On a day-to-day basis I imagine there is a swell of these contexts where advancing the state-of-the-art is short-circuited because a non-expert is unable to gain traction for pursuit of a skill; easily dismissed as a non-authority. You don’t necessarily need to be an expert to understand the value of a principle or tool.

Objective (authoritative) sources of information seem a start. Like Scott B’s, Chad M’s, Rod P’s recent posts on TDD/Repeatability/SOLID and Hanselminutes w/Uncle Bob (SOLID) & Hanselminutes Scott Bellware. Those are excellent IMHO for making the case, that regardless of immediate expert availability, incremental and judicious pursuit of a skill has a high probability of enhancing design, maintenance prospects and quality.

We may not be TDD experts but a collection of TDD noobs, TDD mediums and so on; but our organization might still cry out for an infusion of professionalism and TDD can be a vehicle upon with that professionalism is borne. However, without an expert (and assuming no immediate avenue to one), should we just give up on TDD/SOLID/REPEATABILITY/UBIQUITY/TRANSPARENCY? Or is there a path where objections to skill acquisition/method introduction can be navigated with humility, cooperation and a conscious/relentless attention to reason and exploration; as opposed to ego.

Perhaps what I have rambled on about is not much teaching but championing.

Along the lines of beginner vs expert vs other label:

I know of a very skilled classical pianist who decided to learn trumpet once. He had all the advanced knowledge of music theory, performance art, discipline., etc. But, he was truly a beginner when it came to learning the mechanics of making music with a trumpet. He even had to learn how to tune an instrument for the first time.

In this case the expert became a beginner and it humbled him. He admits it was tough for a while. But, he says it made him a better person because it reminded him of what others feel like when they come to that huge piano keyboard for the first time.

I think software professionals would do well to remember we all have strengths and weaknesses, things we know well and things we could use some assistance with. If we remember this, and internalize that reality, we might have more patience with those who don’t have the level of mastery, talent or skill we have in a particular subject. We might also remember that very person who doesn’t know much about SOLID might know a whole bunch about something else that we could learn from. And if we have a mentor’s heart, a teachable spirit and practice genuine humility, our lives and our profession will be that much richer for it.

IMHO.