*) Many people -- including many on this list -- are using
textbooks that contain hundreds or thousands of physics
errors (not counting typos and other trivialities), yet
nobody seems to care.
*) If some non-scientist puts out a video that explains
a true observation using logic that is arguably not 100%
rigorous, then OMG it's a scandal. Panic. Hair on fire.
I considered the hypothesis that in certain situations,
people care more about the video, because it is easier
to get a certain type of students to watch the video than
to read the book. (For other types of students, completely
different considerations apply.)
Then I got to thinking, everybody likes to emphasize the
importance of active engagement. "Lecture" is a curse
word in PER circles. On the other hand, what could be
more passive than watching a video? Why is not a video
in every way worse than a comparable lecture?
I can understand that a good lecture is better than
a bad lecture, and watching the video of a good
lecture might therefore be /relatively/ better than
a lousy in-person lecture ... but to those who insist
that all lectures are bad as a matter of principle,
I ask again: Is not watching Salman Khan on video
in every way worse than watching him in person? If
not, why not?
Let's see if we can steer this in a constructive
direction. Suppose you had a class where the students
were highly active and highly engaged. Now suppose we
wanted to design a short video about log/log paper or
something similar.
*) What should be on the video?
*) How should the video be used?
-- Should students watch the video in class, or at
home, or ????
-- How does it integrate with discussions and
exercises and other stuff that's going on?