Knowledge media face an awkward chasm between theories. The old theory was naive transmissionism: "I'll convey this knowledge by telling you about it." That's effectively books' learning model. But we know that model's wrong: learning is an active process of assimilation.
-
-
Is the new theory any better, though? I read about constructivism and I don't see my learning style reflected in that theory.
-
What have been your most successful learning experiences (however you define success)?
- 8 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Please see Chapter 13 of David Wells' YOU ARE A MATHEMATICIAN. You'll see that we have long known how to make educational/pedagogical media that give learners agency and to encourage them to use it. (Trouble is, such media are very hard to make.)
-
Thank you; ordered.
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
The Royal Academy of Dance's grade syllabi. A handful of books and (when I learnt) CDs that illustrate a defined skill progression.
-
This is such an interesting reference—thank you! The syllabi I'm able to find appear to include examination requirements (e.g. "demonstrate secure posture and correct weight placement") but it sounds like what you're referring to also includes learning materials? Have a link?

- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
What about games, or explorables like
@EarthPrimer ? -
Lots of valuable ideas, but there's much missing before we can gel the pieces into a general medium for conveying and assimilating knowledge.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Where does Logo fit in?
-
Its ideas represent a valuable piece of the puzzle. Yet it's just a piece. If we take Logo to be a vessel for differential geometry: if one is interested in learning about that topic, how exactly should one use Logo to pursue it? Logo assumes an outside facilitator as context.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.