Slashdot Mirror
Nature Publishes a "Post-Gutenberg" Electronic Text
lpress writes "Most of today's electronic textbooks are re-purposed versions of print books. Nature has published an e-text that departs from the traditional book format and business model. Their Introduction to Biology e-text was created from the ground up and consists of 196 modules rather than a sequential book and the student gets a lifetime subscription for $49. Nature will continuously update the e-text as the science and pedagogy evolve."
One area that's not often addressed or implemented is the concept of multi-leveled content. By this I mean that a traditional linear sequenced book conveys material mostly at one level of depth and proceeds sequentially. But I find for some material that a document that carries within it simultaneously beginner, intermediate, and advanced material can be useful. What I mean is that a reader proceeding sequentially through the book can choose treatments at the level suitable for them at the time and later come back and revisit at a deeper level, when they have enough background to understand deeper.
I've taken one book I'm doing and split it into three volumes with hyperlevels like this. Volume 1 is a series of lectures exactly such as you'd get in a lecture hall. Volume 2 is readings to go along with the lectures to provide more material, and these exist as beginner, intermediate, and advanced hyperlinked items. The idea is that a student can get the basic background everyone should have in the domain, the more curious student can absorb the intermediate level treatments of the same topics, and the advanced student can be exposed to the fine points. While this could be done in a print book, it is easier to implement in a hypermedia form. The advantage of such a split-up approach is that it can deliver a volume of work without making the slower students have to plough through a dense and long path, they just need to tread the road they're given. (Volume 3 is a workbook and uses same approach.)
However, a problem with such books is that with material fragmented so much and the structure not visible directly, it is harder for someone to grasp the overall structure of knowledge in the domain if they're first getting oriented. It's like a choose your own story book where you cannot see the overall story structure and could not speed read it easily, even if there is a linear table of contents.
Issues with an e-reader are: 1) lecture board views and graphics just don't fit on a reader screen and are a pain to have to scroll around for students. 2) sometimes small screens just aren't enough. I'd like to see a video output port (do you hear me, Lab126 in Cupertino?) 3) sometimes it is really beneficial for students to be able to print pages and mark them up.
My database professor has said he wants to move entirely to a modular eText format, but his publisher (one of the big academic guys) is the one resisting the change. His textbook is $150 brand new, $120 used, and he said he'd really like the the ebook to be a third to half of that price. That's cash that the publisher, not him, will lose out on, since his royalties are significantly less than $50.
Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
What I see in many current products is a lack of organization, a lack of student friendly setup, or a lack a obsessive focus on proprietary content. Here is what the internet is good for. Supplying content. Here is where a firm can profit. Organizing and presenting content. I have seen on example where this is actually done reasonable well. I have seen it done badly in many other cases. Simply placing every link found in google in a database organized by subject is not how this should be done. Believe me I have seen products that do this. What nature has done may or may not be well done. It does not really seem to be that innovative. I have seen other products that follow the same line.
One thing that works well for me in organizing content is Moodle. Like the Nature book it is organized into units. There is not built in mechanism to force students to follow a certain path, but content can be presented and valid assessment created. This is technology that exists the can free students from reading 1000 pages out of context, paying huge bills for books, and taking tests where the purpose is often minimizing cheating rather than testing skills. The question is how much will students pay for a moodle setup. Probably not enough to be worth setting it up.
On an aside, what is up with testing on the computer. Why do we still have tests that are mostly multiple choice? It is possible to have math questions with randomly generated numbers and calculated question. It is possible to have scripts and regex expression to check short answers automatically. There are tool bars that let students enter algebraic expressions. Computer have been around for nearly two generations, yet will still teach basically as we did 30 years ago. With books and scantron machines. It is crazy. There is no well paying job where one gets paid for filling bubbles. Learning is no longer simply reading a book for facts. Increasingly what we learn is process, how to interact with a computer so the results are what is expected. It is much more complex, experiential, dare I say hands on.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
It sucks the joy out of development too.
even today there's Learning outfits clamouring for us to do 3D web-based content in Director. We've managed to avoid doing one for about 4 years. However, since they require support for ancient browsers (so WebGL or Canvas3D, or whatever is actually made standard eventually is right out) and resist using newer browser plugins (like Unity3D, or, hell, the new Flash player which has 3D capabilities), we've managed to convince them that pre-rendered scenes in Flash are good enough.
We've tried to convince them to use better technology, and, more importantly, let us have proper control of design and implementation, but the problem with the people who commission these kind of E-learning things are a) Technologically inept and b) control freaks. However, they do have c) Money. and the Money comes from the budget, which is given by the higher ups, who are even more Technologically Inept and love shiny things like 3D.
Sometimes they don't even seem to care if people can learn using the tool, so long as they get the budget.