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.
Conversation
Books (and videos and lectures) sometimes work anyway, but because the learner's doing the heavy lifting—making connections, posing & answering questions, etc
In apprenticeships and great classrooms, the new theory (constructivism) operates: teachers foster active assimilation.
2
3
49
But what's the equivalent of a "book" which was composed using an effective theory of how its reader will learn? We don't know.
It's a rock and a hard place: we know the old theory's wrong; we don't know how to make media which operate under our new theories.
Exciting times.
19
11
80
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.)
1
2
Replying to
The truth, of course, is that learning occurs via many extremely subtle processes that elude precise specification and explication by any existing theory. There's just one generally valid principle: learners will neither master nor retain anything that only makes them miserable.
1
1
Agreed on all counts.
1
1
Show replies