This is a followup on my previous post about the challenges of open educational resources (OER) production and adoption. I’ve come to the conclusion that the key aspect holding back the “OER dream” is not the lack of collaboration tools or the ability for teachers to discover material, but the quality of the content. You can’t write a textbook by committee. It’s as simple as that!
I spend the last couple of weeks exploring the open educational resources (OER) landscape and wanted to write down my thoughts and observations about the field. The promise of an OER “revolution” that will put quality learning material into the hands of every student has been around for several decades, but we are yet to see OER displace the established publishers. Why is it that “open content” hasn’t taken off more, and what can we do to make things happen in the coming decade?
Last week was a watershed moment for the linear algebra book. My editor finished her final pass of edits to the text and passed the ball back to me for the final touches. All the remaining tasks have been placed in a Trello board and now all I have to do is act on them to finally get the job finished.
The goal for the NO BULLSHIT guide to MATH & PHYSICS was to make a concise textbook that teaches university-level calculus and mechanics in a nice “combined package.” The math fundamentals chapter grew out of the need to introduce the prerequisite material that many students often lack. I didn’t want to be like “y’all should remember this math from high school,” because if you don’t remember the material such comments would not be very helpful. A review of high school math would be more helpful.
A reader recently suggested I should write more articles that introduce math specifically for different audiences. Math for doctors (although I’d hope they already know math!), math for artists, math for musicians, etc. I like this idea.
I’ve been working on the problem sets for the linear algebra book non-stop for the past month. It’s a lot of work, but also very rewarding. I’m going through online resources and looking for inspiration by reading exams and books to find illustrative exercises and challenging problems. This leads to a lot of learning and reviewing of ideas along the way…
The No bullshit guide to linear algebra files on gumroad were updated. The book is now v2 beta 2, and scheduled for release in early January 2017.
If you’re taking a linear algebra class this term, or need to know linear algebra for a more advanced class, this will be the best money you spend this semester.
Over the last years, several readers uncovered mistakes in the No bullshit guide to math & physics, which I immediately fixed in the source. The errors were mostly minor, so they didn’t warrant a new edition, but once I reached a threshold of six errata, I decided it’s time to release a v5.1 update. With this bugfix update, I took the time to make some other minor improvements described below.
Yesterday I read the fascinating essay titled The Aims of Education by Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947). It was written 100 years ago, but every line of it rings true in the modern context. Below I’ve extracted the best quotes from the essay and added some personal comments.
The OP gives a detailed blueprint of how to structure formal education, making a distinction between “general education” (primary school and middle school) and “specialized training” (high school and college). The essay discusses learner psychology, learner user experience, curriculum customization, student assessment, and even proposes a new structure for the educational system. The essay is so full of good stuff that nearly all of it is worth quoting.
I just read this excellent article Pragmatic Learning: It’s not “fun” on Roger Schank’s blog. It’s a very good post that calls bullshit on the “gamification” cargo cult which is widespread in the edtech and corporate training world. Just adding points, badges, and levels to a corporate training program that teaches you something boring is not going to suddenly make it fun. The author’s main observation is that forced learning is not fun and we need not pretend it is. Consider an employer who wants their employees to know X because it is required by law, or a bunch of students forced to learn Y or else they’ll fail. These “forced” trainings are not fun, and gamifying them is akin to putting lipstick on a pig.