I'm late to the party, but I want to respond to the OP's OP. I don't think we tolerate errors in textbooks any more than we do in a layman's youtube video. It's just that many of us feel we are forced to tolerate the former because a textbook is a necessary component of the course we've been hired to teach. I believe we are now living through a transition period, watching the extinction of the expensive physics textbook. In recent decades it has has been promoted and enhanced by publishers whose only goal is to increase their profits. The way in which physics is presented to students will, I hope, improve as we get these ubiquitous pieces of nonsense out of the textbooks by killing the textbook itself. Perhaps the OpenStax project will allow us to edit their textbook soon, and that will serve as a model for reform.
I think that it's a mistake to conclude from the PER results that lectures are bad. I think instead what we should conclude is the the old lecture method is bad. Mini lectures interspersed with engagement activities is not the traditional old lecture method, and neither is it something new that was created by the PER community. Rather, what the PER community has done is brought the issue to the forefront and provided us with new engagement activities.
Comparing lectures, to videos, to book-reading? Well, all three have their place and complement each other. As Arnold Arons was fond of saying, we must engage their minds. Minds wander after a few minutes of concentration. Some of us have disciplined ourselves, and developed sets of tools, to maintain our concentration better than others. Our students need to develop this discipline and these skills and it's our job to help them. I'll use lectures, video, and reading assignments to help. Anything it takes!
Herman Trivilino
Physics Professor
Faculty Professional Development Leader
College of the Mainland
www.com.edu <http://www.com.edu/>
________________________________
From: Phys-l on behalf of John Denker
Sent: Thu 09-Jan-14 9:18 PM
To: Phys-L@Phys-L.org
Subject: [Phys-L] book versus video versus lecture
Some questions:
I am still stung by the contrast:
*) 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?
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l