Comparison of pedagogical scenes

From Issawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Name Medium Aiming to be comprehensive?[note 1] Gets to deep/hard stuff, and forces people to think?[note 2] Focus on explanation vs creating/doing? Focus on analyzing explanations?[note 3] 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 Yes (but it's very difficult work!) Explanation No same old
Tools for thought The point is to create new mediums! Yes? Yes? Creating/doing Yes Totally new stuff!
Research distillation[1] Mostly text, with some interactive widgets No 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 Not really Explanation No mix of both
3Blue1Brown Non-interactive video with visualizations No No Explanation No mix of both
Khan Academy Tutor-like videos and text Explanation Yes, but it only targets "easy" topics Kinda, but it only targets "easy" topics No just cover all the high school topics
Spaced repetition and "learning how to learn" Flashcards, notes Yes Yes (but you do all the work!) Creating/doing Yes Yes; people talk about how to write better prompts and come up with new learning techniques
Asynchronous Discord severs Chatroom Kinda (not intended to be a standalone resource, but a good server will cover all the chapters and be able to help at any stage of learning) Yes (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) Yes Explanation Yes Totally new stuff!
puzzle video games community (e.g. Jonathan Blow)

See also

What links here



  1. 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?
  2. Does the thing have exercises that really deepen understanding? Does it take desirable difficulties into account?
  3. 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? Is the scene open to "meta" things?