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
Is the new theory any better, though?
I read about constructivism and I don't see my learning style reflected in that theory.
1
What have been your most successful learning experiences (however you define success)?
1
Carefully picking the material I'm going to use, and systematically studying it.
1
Replying to
How do you pick it? How do you systematically study it?
Replying to
Look at ToC of multiple sources, sort by year, try to pick the most recent, most comprehensive, and most principled (subjective).
Then I study it in sequence. Getting hands-on with the subject can be a bit delayed sometimes.
2
1
I like long surveys on a subject (e.g. Modern B-Tree Techniques by Graefe).