3 ms·

My point was, that the way notation is just thrown at you in the video can only add to the phobia for the uninitiated. The video is clearly aiming at basic peda

by jonsen 11y ago

My point was, that the way notation is just thrown at you in the video can only add to the phobia for the uninitiated. The video is clearly aiming at basic pedagogic explanation, and it is all destroyed in the end. The math versed who easily read that math without explanation do not need the bead juggling. The pedagogy fails in the end.

ColinWright 11y ago
The explanation of the theorem has got as far as it can go by that point. There's a choice to be made. Avoiding notation means that those who could now connect the explanation with things they have already seen is lost. Avoiding notation also means that it's just all been a show, and there's no real take away except that, well, this guy played with beads an counted things. If someone is truly notation-phobic then there is nothing to be done. Having the notation means that those in the middle ground have a chance to see real maths in action, and may be inspired to do more. The genuinely notation-phobic will never advance in math. For those who know the theorem this is a cute visualisation. People will only learn when they are ready, and all pedagogy needs to be targeted at those who are ready for it. I suspect we agree more than people reading this might think, but we might disagreed over the perceived purpose of the video. I see it as getting people engaged with the thought processes, and then showing that it's really math, and look, here are the formulas that come out of it. It's an opportunity to learn about the formulas. For the genuinely notation-phobic, there is no real hope, except for them to see that this is a cool thing their phobia is preventing them from understanding better, so maybe getting over the phobia would be worthwhile. I could do a complete case analysis, but this isn't the place, and I don't have the time. Would you suggest not having the notation at all? What would then be the point of the video? Who would gain?
- jonsen 11y ago
  Yes, we agree a long way. I'm sure the video works well in its intended greater context, as you describe here. My points are about taking the video at face value out of context, which is probably what lead to clear-as-muds comment.
  - britcruise 11y ago
    Hey there, I created this video. It was just one part of a longer lesson I was trying on "Random Algorithms" because it involved Fermat's primality test...so in this case we really needed that formula to try it out which is why I added it at the end. https://www.khanacademy.org/computing/computer-science/cryptography/random-algorithms-probability/v/randomized-algorithms-prime-adventure-part-8 https://www.khanacademy.org/computing/computer-science/crypt...

by jonsen 11y ago

ColinWright 11y ago

The explanation of the theorem has got as far as it can go by that point. There's a choice to be made. Avoiding notation means that those who could now connect the explanation with things they have already seen is lost. Avoiding notation also means that it's just all been a show, and there's no real take away except that, well, this guy played with beads an counted things. If someone is truly notation-phobic then there is nothing to be done. Having the notation means that those in the middle ground have a chance to see real maths in action, and may be inspired to do more. The genuinely notation-phobic will never advance in math. For those who know the theorem this is a cute visualisation. People will only learn when they are ready, and all pedagogy needs to be targeted at those who are ready for it. I suspect we agree more than people reading this might think, but we might disagreed over the perceived purpose of the video. I see it as getting people engaged with the thought processes, and then showing that it's really math, and look, here are the formulas that come out of it. It's an opportunity to learn about the formulas. For the genuinely notation-phobic, there is no real hope, except for them to see that this is a cool thing their phobia is preventing them from understanding better, so maybe getting over the phobia would be worthwhile. I could do a complete case analysis, but this isn't the place, and I don't have the time. Would you suggest not having the notation at all? What would then be the point of the video? Who would gain?

jonsen 11y ago
Yes, we agree a long way. I'm sure the video works well in its intended greater context, as you describe here. My points are about taking the video at face value out of context, which is probably what lead to clear-as-muds comment.
- britcruise 11y ago
  Hey there, I created this video. It was just one part of a longer lesson I was trying on "Random Algorithms" because it involved Fermat's primality test...so in this case we really needed that formula to try it out which is why I added it at the end. https://www.khanacademy.org/computing/computer-science/cryptography/random-algorithms-probability/v/randomized-algorithms-prime-adventure-part-8 https://www.khanacademy.org/computing/computer-science/crypt...