05-10-2009, 06:53 AM | #76 | ||
Fully Converged
Posts: 18,163
Karma: 14021202
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Switzerland
Device: Too many to count here.
|
Quote:
Quote:
If one member tells another member that he or she is a bad teacher merely because that other member has a different belief in the accuracy of Wikipedia, than this is personal. Another reminder: This discussion is about open source textbooks and not about what makes a teacher good or bad. |
||
05-10-2009, 07:15 AM | #77 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 7,452
Karma: 7185064
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Linköpng, Sweden
Device: Kindle Voyage, Nexus 5, Kindle PW
|
Quote:
What do you mean by personal? Do you mean it is bad to be personal in the way you describe? My point was that the person saying he do some action X is the one that starts being personal. How should you then respond to this without being criticized for being personal? |
|
Advert | |
|
05-10-2009, 07:26 AM | #78 |
Zealot
Posts: 136
Karma: 244
Join Date: Aug 2007
Device: Kobo Glo
|
Being good at any job usually requires you to be proficient at all kinds of things. Being a good teacher certainly requires you to master a multitude of skills.
So to call someone a bad teacher just because you disagree with how they advise (or indeed dictate to) their students on one issue is hardly cause to tell them that they are bad at their job. Sirbruce could easily have said they he disagreed with thibaulthalperns opinion of wikipedia and asked him to clarify what he though of printed media and how reliable that was in comparison. Or just asked him to explain his reasoning more fully. A sensible and less argumentative discussion could have followed. That's how I would of done it. No need to start telling people they are bad at their job. It's just bad manners and not what I've come to expect from this forum. Last edited by deltop; 05-10-2009 at 07:35 AM. |
05-10-2009, 07:43 AM | #79 |
Reader
Posts: 11,505
Karma: 8720163
Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Wales, UK
Device: Sony PRS-500, PRS-505, Asus EEEpc 4G
|
But does anyone know how these textbooks will be compiled? Who will be writing the early editions?
|
05-10-2009, 07:53 AM | #80 |
Zealot
Posts: 136
Karma: 244
Join Date: Aug 2007
Device: Kobo Glo
|
A good question, Wikipedia works because it is mainly just a general encyclopedia, people can contribute as much or as little as they like and in any area they feel qualified to write about. However course text books have to meet much more exacting standards, especially in California. They need to cover a subject in much more detail. Haven't projects like this been attempted before? and failed miserably? I just can't see how they could possibly have this done by the fall.
|
Advert | |
|
05-10-2009, 07:55 AM | #81 | |
Fully Converged
Posts: 18,163
Karma: 14021202
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Switzerland
Device: Too many to count here.
|
Quote:
|
|
05-10-2009, 07:58 AM | #82 | |
Fully Converged
Posts: 18,163
Karma: 14021202
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Switzerland
Device: Too many to count here.
|
Quote:
|
|
05-10-2009, 01:33 PM | #83 | |
Evangelist
Posts: 478
Karma: 451808
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: California, USA
Device: my two eyes, KLiiK, Sony PRS-700
|
Quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On to a separate point, not related to what TadW said at all: This is not to say that Wikipedia cannot be used for research. My point all along was that Wikipedia should not be CITED in an academic paper. That's way different than saying it shouldn't be used to gain some knowledge about something as one begins the initial stages of research. Apparently, there has been some logic fallacy in some posts above that conflate what's appropriate to use for preliminary research and what's to be cited in an scholarly paper. What this suggests to me is that whoever made that conflation (who shall be nameless) doesn't engage much, if at all, in professional and published research because that kind of conflation is not often, if at all, made by people who do published research. Furthermore, there has been serious misunderstanding about how scholarly work gets published. We don't just hit "print" and it gets published. A journal article and book goes through numerous review processes, passes through the eyes of numerous reviewers and editors before it gets printed. This is NOT to say the source is necessary correct. After all, we academicians argue about framework, theory, interpretation, and epistemologies all the time. Anyway, time for me to disregard some of the posts on this topic! |
|
05-10-2009, 01:43 PM | #84 | |
Evangelist
Posts: 478
Karma: 451808
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: California, USA
Device: my two eyes, KLiiK, Sony PRS-700
|
Quote:
|
|
05-10-2009, 07:12 PM | #85 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,470
Karma: 13095790
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Grass Valley, CA
Device: EB 1150, EZ Reader, Literati, iPad 2 & Air 2, iPhone 7
|
Quote:
Dale |
|
05-10-2009, 08:15 PM | #86 |
Reader
Posts: 11,505
Karma: 8720163
Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Wales, UK
Device: Sony PRS-500, PRS-505, Asus EEEpc 4G
|
One potential worry is a possible editorial bias. If the Californian authorities are commissioning the books and strongly advising that they are to be used, they might want to suggest how the content is presented.
There is some advantage in having a choice, especially as most subjects have controversial areas. |
05-10-2009, 08:46 PM | #87 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,238
Karma: 34817224
Join Date: Jan 2008
Device: Pocketbook
|
Quote:
I think it will vary widely due to subject matter. For example, basic arithmetic, algebra or trigonometry shouldn't have problems, but Bioscience, history, and literature will have lots. And social sciences - oh my! |
|
05-11-2009, 12:18 PM | #88 | |
Evangelist
Posts: 478
Karma: 451808
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: California, USA
Device: my two eyes, KLiiK, Sony PRS-700
|
Quote:
Not every discipline has a propensity towards textbooks. In cultural anthropology, we often do not use textbooks at the college level. There are a few universities where for cultural anthropology introductory classes do use textbooks and of course many 2-year colleges do too. But for the most part, we don't assign textbooks and instead we assign course readers which are our own compilation of various articles, book chapters, and so forth, along with actual books. The textbook portion of the course comes in the lectures given. That is, the lectures provide the framework and narrative for tying the course together which essentially a textbook does. I've always found using textbooks in certain disciplines such as history and cultural anthropology very odd and often inappropriate--although I do want to qualify that in some situations it does demand it such as when you have many EFL (English as a Foreign Language) students where textbooks are easier to follow and takes much less work for the student to tie the course together. In general though, I think it's more appropriate in fields such as say physical anthropology, maths, and so forth where a bulk of the learning comes from actually having to regurgitate some "hard facts" and information. In cultural anthropology, that often is not the case. Instead, our production of knowledge comes through examining theories, frameworks and putting ideas into conversation with each other rather than having to remember some hard facts. If I were to teach about the Black Atlantic (black diaspora) there is no reason for a random student taking the class to have to remember details about the history, but what's more important is to understand the theoretical approach, frameworks, assumptions, and claims used in envisioning and creating a Black Atlantic. Those kinds of approaches do not lend itself to traditional textbooks and perhaps textbooks would be very dampening in those arenas of learning. Perhaps more common for cultural anthropology is what we call readers. These are pre-assembled published compilation of articles for a particular subject in the field. These are no different than the readers that are compiled by the instructor themselves except that the former is published and distributed widely and the latter is only printed for the course being taught. Last edited by thibaulthalpern; 05-11-2009 at 12:21 PM. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
TomeRaider to go open source | MatYadabyte | News | 27 | 11-18-2012 12:23 PM |
Open source | bradrice | Kindle Formats | 2 | 12-21-2009 09:30 AM |
Open Source Text Books for California Schools | shrimphead | News | 6 | 05-09-2009 03:37 AM |
iRex and Open Source | jrial | iRex | 8 | 03-03-2009 10:34 AM |
TrueCrypt V2.0 Open-Source | Alexander Turcic | Lounge | 1 | 06-21-2004 02:02 PM |