3 ms·

Not a good idea. One course to rule them all in a field creates a risk of massive amounts of people learning bad information and reinforcing it through sheer ma

by xwdv 6y ago

Not a good idea. One course to rule them all in a field creates a risk of massive amounts of people learning bad information and reinforcing it through sheer majority. Better for people to learn the same information in different ways and from different sources.

maerF0x0 6y ago
I guess I agree in the most extreme (singular case) which i assume would never happen. But I do think that there is an efficient set that is much smaller than 1000s of teachers 2x per year x 40 yrs. Maybe modify my comment ^^ to "dozens" or something like that, and that would naturally be multiplied by languages/countries as I see it unlikely there'd be massive reuse across those boundaries.
- untoreh 6y ago
  it would be more like different courses are best at teaching the same thing in a particular way that works best with a subset of people, so the top would be made of the set of courses that works with the majority of the population. The problem is that the way humans learn is not exactly understood, is it even a finite set? And what is its diatribution? Can it change through time/culture? Can it be identified in genetic traits? So if the learning methodology changes through time the best courses would also follow with it
jlelonm 6y ago
No offense, but are you joking? This is an extremely cynical take. You don't see any benefit to having one mega amazing course? You think there's no way to overcome the limitation you mentioned (bad information) at all? How about a peer review process?
- searchableguy 6y ago
  Why does it even need to be one mega course? Millions of institutions exist. Even if you take 1% of them and tell them to create a freely available course, it's good enough. Beside, I don't understand how many public funded universities don't release everything they do or teach. It's just weird imo. Why does education need to be expensive? Why should you have to pay for it? It's one of those things that I don't understand the reason for being behind paywall.
  - galoisscobi 6y ago
    +1 to the idea of having a few good math courses created by institutions. I think if I can save all that time on repetitive lecturing, it would make more time for discussion/experimentation based learning. I’ve also wondered about why publicly funded institutions don’t publicly release their courses and other resources. When the COVID lockdown started, I naively hoped that we would get some more pure math courses since now universities are teaching remotely but haven’t really found any universities doing that. I’m tempted to reach out to my alma mater and ask if I can audit their pure math courses that they’re teaching remotely in the fall. It definitely seems easier to find CS courses online than for pure math. Maybe because there’s a wider audience for that, I don’t quite know.

by xwdv 6y ago

maerF0x0 6y ago

I guess I agree in the most extreme (singular case) which i assume would never happen. But I do think that there is an efficient set that is much smaller than 1000s of teachers 2x per year x 40 yrs. Maybe modify my comment ^^ to "dozens" or something like that, and that would naturally be multiplied by languages/countries as I see it unlikely there'd be massive reuse across those boundaries.

untoreh 6y ago
it would be more like different courses are best at teaching the same thing in a particular way that works best with a subset of people, so the top would be made of the set of courses that works with the majority of the population. The problem is that the way humans learn is not exactly understood, is it even a finite set? And what is its diatribution? Can it change through time/culture? Can it be identified in genetic traits? So if the learning methodology changes through time the best courses would also follow with it

jlelonm 6y ago

No offense, but are you joking? This is an extremely cynical take. You don't see any benefit to having one mega amazing course? You think there's no way to overcome the limitation you mentioned (bad information) at all? How about a peer review process?

searchableguy 6y ago
Why does it even need to be one mega course? Millions of institutions exist. Even if you take 1% of them and tell them to create a freely available course, it's good enough. Beside, I don't understand how many public funded universities don't release everything they do or teach. It's just weird imo. Why does education need to be expensive? Why should you have to pay for it? It's one of those things that I don't understand the reason for being behind paywall.
- galoisscobi 6y ago
  +1 to the idea of having a few good math courses created by institutions. I think if I can save all that time on repetitive lecturing, it would make more time for discussion/experimentation based learning. I’ve also wondered about why publicly funded institutions don’t publicly release their courses and other resources. When the COVID lockdown started, I naively hoped that we would get some more pure math courses since now universities are teaching remotely but haven’t really found any universities doing that. I’m tempted to reach out to my alma mater and ask if I can audit their pure math courses that they’re teaching remotely in the fall. It definitely seems easier to find CS courses online than for pure math. Maybe because there’s a wider audience for that, I don’t quite know.