Difference between revisions of "Comparison of pedagogical scenes"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{| class="sortable wikitable" | {| class="sortable wikitable" | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | ! Name !! Medium !! Gets to deep stuff?<ref group=note>Is the material comprehensive, and can it be used as a standalone resource? Or is it more of an auxiliary thing to make the topic more entertaining? Does the thing have exercises that really deepen understanding? Does it take [https://learning.subwiki.org/wiki/Importance_of_struggling_in_learning desirable difficulties] into account?</ref> !! Focus on explanation vs creating/doing? !! Focus on analyzing explanations? || Totally new stuff, or just "do more of the same, but faster and with more polish"? | + | ! Name !! Medium !! Gets to deep stuff?<ref group=note>Is the material comprehensive, and can it be used as a standalone resource? Or is it more of an auxiliary thing to make the topic more entertaining? Does the thing have exercises that really deepen understanding? Does it take [https://learning.subwiki.org/wiki/Importance_of_struggling_in_learning desirable difficulties] into account?</ref> !! Focus on explanation vs creating/doing?<ref group=note>Does the field or scene see the ''analysis of explanations'' as itself a topic of the work? Or is it more just a thing that happens outside of the public view? Is a discussion of a new technique to explain things seen as a contribution to the scene?</ref> !! Focus on analyzing explanations? || Totally new stuff, or just "do more of the same, but faster and with more polish"? |
|- | |- | ||
| Generic pedagogy, say "good" math books like Tao, Axler, Spivak || Text || Yes (but it's very difficult work!) || Explanation || No || same old | | Generic pedagogy, say "good" math books like Tao, Axler, Spivak || Text || Yes (but it's very difficult work!) || Explanation || No || same old | ||
Revision as of 12:48, 7 February 2022
| Name | Medium | Gets to deep stuff?[note 1] | Focus on explanation vs creating/doing?[note 2] | Focus on analyzing explanations? | Totally new stuff, or just "do more of the same, but faster and with more polish"? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Generic pedagogy, say "good" math books like Tao, Axler, Spivak | Text | Yes (but it's very difficult work!) | Explanation | No | same old |
| Tools for thought | The point is to create new mediums! | Yes? | Creating/doing | Yes | Totally new stuff! |
| Research distillation[1] | Mostly text, with some interactive widgets | Kinda (aspirational, but most online essays are still not so deep) | Explanation | No, or at least not in public | faster/more polish |
| Explorable explanations | Interactive widgets | Not really | Explanation | No | mix of both |
| 3Blue1Brown | Non-interactive video with visualizations | No | Explanation | No | mix of both |
| Khan Academy | Tutor-like videos and text | Explanation | Kinda, but it only targets "easy" topics | No | just cover all the high school topics |
| Asynchronous Discord severs | Chatroom | Kinda (not in a comprehensive way, but people who are asking their questions are actually asking about the stuff they are struggling with) | Explanation | No | The concept itself is new (as described in my LW post) but once it's been created, there is no drive to make it even better; instead, the drive has been to expand to more and more textbooks/subfields of math |
| Explanation science | Mostly text? | Yes (aspirational) | Explanation | Yes | Totally new stuff! |
Contents
See also
What links here
References
Notes
- ↑ Is the material comprehensive, and can it be used as a standalone resource? Or is it more of an auxiliary thing to make the topic more entertaining? Does the thing have exercises that really deepen understanding? Does it take desirable difficulties into account?
- ↑ Does the field or scene see the analysis of explanations as itself a topic of the work? Or is it more just a thing that happens outside of the public view? Is a discussion of a new technique to explain things seen as a contribution to the scene?
