3 ms·
The problem is that we let experts design curricula. Experts don't see a problem with the old way, because that's how they learned it, and look at them - they'r
by dTal 8y ago
The problem is that we let experts design curricula. Experts don't see a problem with the old way, because that's how they learned it, and look at them - they're experts!
It's the same reason a top-down effort to use tau instead of pi can't get momentum. People who struggle with math find it a game-changer, but mathematicians just shrug and say they don't see the point.
I expect a similar dynamic explains why open source software has such terrible user interfaces, and why legalese is so impenetrable: the people with the power to change it, don't see the problem.
- qwerty456127 8y agoIndeed. Experts in teaching should design curricula and write textbooks, not experts in the subjects (of course experts in the subjects should be asked to check everything is valid but not how to teach). Nevertheless it has been a long time since I've last seen an open source program with a terrible user interface. I'm writing this in Chrome (which is open source too and its GUI is quite ok) on KDE5 Plasma (which gives me aesthetical and ergonomical orgasm all the way I use it although I always hated how old versions of KDE looked and felt) on Manjaro while making notes in the Atom editor (which is ridiculously resource-inefficient yet perfect aesthetically and very intuitive and comfortable to use) and managing files in Krusader (which isn't as feature-reach as Total Commander yet looks a way more eye-candy and is almost equally convenient). Also legalese is so impenetrable only in English (and, probably, some other) language speaking countries, legal English indeed seems a language distinct from what ordinary people speak but in many countries laws are readable as easily as anything else.