6 ms·

Can you expand on why adding a narrative would amplify the effectiveness of these explorable explanations by so much? The whole core of explorable explanations

by azeirah 10y ago

Can you expand on why adding a narrative would amplify the effectiveness of these explorable explanations by so much? The whole core of explorable explanations is that you can play with the models yourself to gain insights and reach conclusions the author may not have come to herself, to me, adding a narrative would only add to the linearity of the text itself, and therefor take away some of the "exploration" part

gavinpc 10y ago
Glad you asked. First, consider the difference between two people reading aloud: one is new to the material, concepts, and associated vocabulary, and the other is the author. They are reading the same text, but the author's rendition will carry an understanding of the material that is absent in the other one—and not found in the text, either. Doesn't that difference comprise relevant information? Shakespearean actors do this for a living: they stick to the words on the page, but they add another layer of signals to help unlock them for people. Technical and expository writing can benefit from this effect as well. Don Norman argues, for example, that thinking requires emotion, and the voice is an easy way to add an emotional connection.[0] So I believe that any document, explorable or otherwise, is amplified by a human reading, when that human really understands and cares about the material. And again, for subjects that warrant these specialized explanations—which tend to require some specialized language—the value added is particularly great, because it teaches people how to read something new. Second, I strongly believe in an "all-in" approach for things that you care about. Clearly these authors care about reaching people, and I think there can be no doubt that the ability to click "play" brings in listeners who would never have been readers. And by giving a passive "flow" to the presentation, it helps sustain many readers who would have given up. Adding a channel does not "take away" anything. Everything, including the interactivity and the opportunity for non-linear reading, is still there. (And note that the recording doesn't have to be linear, anyway.) The authors are not competing with themselves, they're competing with YouTube and notifications and other low-friction distractions. So I'm excited about the OP. I would like this community—mature, passionate thinkers and teachers—to be the avant garde of future media. [0] Emotional Design, Don Norman
- pavel_lishin 10y ago
  > They are reading the same text, but the author's rendition will carry an understanding of the material that is absent in the other one—and not found in the text, either. Doesn't that difference comprise relevant information? Not to me, as someone who's never run into the material before. There's no knowledge-carrying particle that's transmitted vocally. In fact, to me it would be a distraction. I learn better visually; I can stop reading, and start again, and quickly re-scan what I'd read before to catch up. It's harder to do that with a recording of a voice, and takes longer.
  - gavinpc 10y ago
    > Not to me... to me it would be a distraction Other people might say the same about the graphics, or the interactions. The point is that it's not zero-sum—no one loses out by the presence of other channels, if the document is dynamic. But if some people do benefit, then there's a value proposition.
dyarosla 10y ago
I imagine that the reason for adding narrative is to add another dimension that's proven to be engaging in other mediums; one akin to explanation videos like those found on Khan Academy or the educational sections of YouTube. Sometimes jumping into an explorable explanation without some guide to begin with (outside of text) may be overwhelming. That being said, I don't know how a spoken narrative would integrate into a piece of text. You would likely not want someone to read through the text as written because a spoken explanation will generally differ in phrase structure (shorter, less verbose) than written text.

by azeirah 10y ago

gavinpc 10y ago

Glad you asked. First, consider the difference between two people reading aloud: one is new to the material, concepts, and associated vocabulary, and the other is the author. They are reading the same text, but the author's rendition will carry an understanding of the material that is absent in the other one—and not found in the text, either. Doesn't that difference comprise relevant information? Shakespearean actors do this for a living: they stick to the words on the page, but they add another layer of signals to help unlock them for people. Technical and expository writing can benefit from this effect as well. Don Norman argues, for example, that thinking requires emotion, and the voice is an easy way to add an emotional connection.[0] So I believe that any document, explorable or otherwise, is amplified by a human reading, when that human really understands and cares about the material. And again, for subjects that warrant these specialized explanations—which tend to require some specialized language—the value added is particularly great, because it teaches people how to read something new. Second, I strongly believe in an "all-in" approach for things that you care about. Clearly these authors care about reaching people, and I think there can be no doubt that the ability to click "play" brings in listeners who would never have been readers. And by giving a passive "flow" to the presentation, it helps sustain many readers who would have given up. Adding a channel does not "take away" anything. Everything, including the interactivity and the opportunity for non-linear reading, is still there. (And note that the recording doesn't have to be linear, anyway.) The authors are not competing with themselves, they're competing with YouTube and notifications and other low-friction distractions. So I'm excited about the OP. I would like this community—mature, passionate thinkers and teachers—to be the avant garde of future media. [0] Emotional Design, Don Norman

pavel_lishin 10y ago
> They are reading the same text, but the author's rendition will carry an understanding of the material that is absent in the other one—and not found in the text, either. Doesn't that difference comprise relevant information? Not to me, as someone who's never run into the material before. There's no knowledge-carrying particle that's transmitted vocally. In fact, to me it would be a distraction. I learn better visually; I can stop reading, and start again, and quickly re-scan what I'd read before to catch up. It's harder to do that with a recording of a voice, and takes longer.
- gavinpc 10y ago
  > Not to me... to me it would be a distraction Other people might say the same about the graphics, or the interactions. The point is that it's not zero-sum—no one loses out by the presence of other channels, if the document is dynamic. But if some people do benefit, then there's a value proposition.

dyarosla 10y ago

I imagine that the reason for adding narrative is to add another dimension that's proven to be engaging in other mediums; one akin to explanation videos like those found on Khan Academy or the educational sections of YouTube. Sometimes jumping into an explorable explanation without some guide to begin with (outside of text) may be overwhelming. That being said, I don't know how a spoken narrative would integrate into a piece of text. You would likely not want someone to read through the text as written because a spoken explanation will generally differ in phrase structure (shorter, less verbose) than written text.