Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot. Best Online Science Course?

First time accepted submitter blubadger writes "Having slept through chemistry at school, I'm looking to fill in the gaps in my science education by following a short online course or two. I've been searching for 'Chemistry 101,' 'Basics of Physics,' 'Biology Primer,' and so on. There's some high-quality stuff on offer – from Academic Earth, MIT and others – but it tends to take the form of videos of traditional university lectures. I was hoping to cut through the chit-chat and blackboards and get straight into the infographics and animations that will help me understand complex ideas. Flash and HTML5 Canvas seem wasted on videos of lectures. If the quality were high enough I would be willing to pay. Have Slashdotters seen anything that fits the bill?"

166 comments

  1. Dear Slashdot, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Where is the comic book version of the Library of Congress, so I can look at pictures and know everything?

    1. Re:Dear Slashdot, by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      Funny. The original poster shouldn't overlook the value of a college lecture. You can listen to it while you drive to work, or in your office. It's a bit difficult to look at charts while in the car or office.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    2. Re:Dear Slashdot, by Kazymyr · · Score: 1

      Agree with this.

      Kinda difficult to brush up on polyacetylimidazolidindiones if you slept through that chapter, without dedicating some hard learning time to it.

      --
      I hadn't known there were so many idiots in the world until I started using the Internet -Stanislaw Lem
    3. Re:Dear Slashdot, by gadlaw · · Score: 1

      Wow, even nerds and geeks can be bullies. Great. There is no call to make fun of someone for wanting to learn and someone who wants that learning in an interesting and digestible way. The main thing is a desire to learn. I'm also interested in seeing if there are other avenues for this sort of learning - so that makes me 'stupid' right? You're so smart.

      --
      Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
    4. Re:Dear Slashdot, by blue+trane · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What if you could present the chapter in such a way that I didn't fall asleep when reading it?

    5. Re:Dear Slashdot, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What if you could present the chapter in such a way that I didn't fall asleep when reading it?

      Are you willing to pay somebody to custom craft you a course that will somehow keep your attention in spite of your lack of interest in the subject?

    6. Re:Dear Slashdot, by sneakyimp · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Feynman Lectures on Physics are awesome. Better than any other materials I ever encountered on the subject of Physics. I don't recall how difficult they are -- i.e., whether they require calculus or not.

      http://www.amazon.com/The-Feynman-Lectures-Physics-boxed/dp/0465023827

      If anyone could recommend something comparable for Calculus, I'd love to hear it. I need a Calculus refresher.

    7. Re:Dear Slashdot, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a really overly broad question with no good answer. It's not a good question for Ask Slashdot. The belittling of it was deserved. There are very few Ask Slashdot questions that make any sense these days or have any good answer.

      See the networking question earlier in the day. What the fuck? The question being posed as such is almost an insult to people that have dedicated their life to the subject. There really is no good answer other than, "Hire a network engineer that is not you."

      Same applies to this lame question.

    8. Re:Dear Slashdot, by Altrag · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm only a bit started on the second book, but the first book did require some minimal calculus -- mostly stuff you'd find in an average first year calculus course.

      What gave me trouble here and there was the way he wrote calculus stuff right into his prose. Its just not the way I'd ever been taught to deal with calculus (or really, any maths.) Even with a full two years of university-level calculus and no shortage of other mathematics classes, I'd always only seen the equations and problems split off in a very obvious and segmented manner. It was a little eye-opening to see that stuff embedded right into the text and written out in words!

      He also tends to skip a few steps (again, probably a reasonable thing to do given the target audience) which can occasionally make following the equations a bit tricky if you don't happen to immediately notice the steps he's skipped.

      Of course, if you're willing to fore-go the maths all together and just try to absorb the more general ideas, you'll probably do all right.

      And finally, you'll have to keep in mind that these books were published in the 1960s and I don't think have ever really been brought up to date (which would be hard to do without changing the nature of the text, given that they're mostly a transcript of his actual lectures.) So there's a little bit of outdated information in there that we've since shown to be.. if not incorrect, at least not entirely accurate. I'm sure I'll see more of that when I finally hit the third book (quantum mechanics), but even in the first book he makes the occasional reference to things that turned out to be not quite as they appeared back in 1964.

    9. Re:Dear Slashdot, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The audience was an intro physics class although there were many non-intro folks auditing his lectures when originally given.

    10. Re:Dear Slashdot, by iiii · · Score: 2

      ...published in the 1960s and I don't think have ever really been brought up to date...

      They have been updated. From wikipedia: "Also released in 2005, was a "Definitive Edition" of the lectures which includes corrections to the original text."

      And the Amazon page says: "The revised edition of Feynman's legendary lectures includes extensive corrections and updates collated by Feynman and his colleagues. A new foreword by Kip Thorne, the current Richard Feynman Professor of Theoretical Physics at Caltech, discusses the relevance of the new edition to today’s readers."

      --
      Light cup, beer drink, thin so chain, neck turtle fat, man I won't say it again
    11. Re:Dear Slashdot, by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      If anyone could recommend something comparable for Calculus, I'd love to hear it.

      Well, I'm not sure there's anything quite "comparable" to the Feynman lectures, but if you're looking to go back and really learn calculus thoroughly, I'd highly recommend Tom Apostol's Calculus.

      http://www.amazon.com/Calculus-Vol-One-Variable-Introduction-Algebra/dp/0471000051

      http://www.amazon.com/Calculus-Vol-Multi-Variable-Applications-Differential/dp/0471000078

      (These are known to some mathematicians affectionately as "Tommy 1" and "Tommy 2.")

      Apostol taught the 2-year calculus sequence at CalTech in the 1960s, so he was going after the same audience at a similar time to Feynman -- it's comparable in that way. It is really a textbook, rather than a series of lectures, but the coverage is quite thorough and methodical, and if you do a large selection of the problems, I guarantee that you will understand a lot more about how calculus works than with most more modern textbooks. It's a little dense if you're new to calculus, but I think it makes a great book to go back and relearn the material properly after you have a basic understanding.

    12. Re:Dear Slashdot, by safehaven25 · · Score: 1

      dont see why this is scored a 0. i mean why does school exist.. why do students go to school for 8+ years after high school to study these things? find how you learn and put in the time and work. there arent shortcuts to understanding, you have to put the work in, and its pretty clear to anyone with a brain that universities arent intentionally convaluted.

    13. Re:Dear Slashdot, by lawnboy5-O · · Score: 1

      Exactly - we have to dismiss the notion of education is only for people ages 1-18 (22 / 24 - post secondary). Its almost as if you are admitting you are only capable of learning so much - which I refuse to accept. Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever. - Ghandi

    14. Re:Dear Slashdot, by darkwing_bmf · · Score: 1
    15. Re:Dear Slashdot, by devow23 · · Score: 1

      I would suggest Courant and John "Introduction to Calculus and Analysis (Volume 1)". It's about the same vintage as Feynman (no bad thing) and quite dense, but wonderfully clear.

    16. Re:Dear Slashdot, by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      There is always the Wikipedia thread. Read through specific articles, every time to come across something you don't understand with a link, follow that link and repeat (use that back button to return you to the higher level article and continue). Eventually you will fill the gaps. Don't forget to follow the resources links at the bottom of an article often they will lead you better information resources. So far I have found that method to be quickest to build up information on a specific topic without getting buried in information I am not currently interested in. Read through a dozen or so interconnected articles and you build up a decent background of information and certainly have sufficient to with the additional resources linked by those articles to get even more if required.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    17. Re:Dear Slashdot, by parkinglot777 · · Score: 1

      The Feynman Lectures on Physics are awesome. Better than any other materials I ever encountered on the subject of Physics. I don't recall how difficult they are -- i.e., whether they require calculus or not.

      I don't know but this sounds contradicted to me. If you remember that the lectures are awesome, why don't you also remember its difficulty? In other words, if you have a very good impression on something, why would you forget about it even its abstract level? I am wondered how awesome you are talking about here...

    18. Re:Dear Slashdot, by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Why not? It worked for me with The Fortran Coloring Book http://www.amazon.com/FORTRAN-Coloring-Book-Roger-Kaufman/dp/0262610264

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    19. Re:Dear Slashdot, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are some pretty good "Manga Guide to..." books out there.

    20. Re:Dear Slashdot, by DrStoooopid · · Score: 1

      Don't be a dick.

      Some people need to look at things a different way before they can understand and process it. You should never discourage someone that's trying to learn.

      If you don't have something constructive to add, or you're not offering to help educate the guy, maybe you ought to keep your cockholster shut.

      --
      There are 2 groups of people you can make fun of on the Internet without fear of attack. The illiterate, and the Amish.
    21. Re:Dear Slashdot, by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      If he wants the literal comic book version, I'd start here: http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=the+manga+guide+to&tag=googhydr-20&index=stripbooks&hvadid=5776752567&hvpos=1t1&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=13913853472143733238&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=e&ref=pd_sl_59fmehhy56_e

      There are also plenty of good free/open source text books out there. For example, this guy's stuff is pretty good, and quite readable: http://lightandmatter.com/

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  2. I personally love Khans accademy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Not sure if it has the things you need, but I love it.

    1. Re:I personally love Khans accademy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really dude? So you'rea advocating for it, but you don't know what it is?

    2. Re:I personally love Khans accademy. by Rayzed · · Score: 1

      Be careful! They'll leave you stuck in a cave with your ex-girlfriend, for the rest of your life. "Buried alive!"

    3. Re:I personally love Khans accademy. by xclr8r · · Score: 4, Informative

      He knows what it is. He just didn't check for the specific course. Khan covers a lot more than it use to.
      Chem
      http://www.khanacademy.org/science/chemistry
      and
      Organic Chem
      http://www.khanacademy.org/science/organic-chemistry
      Thinking I just got trolled by two ACs.

      --
      Beware of those who profit off the docile and persecute the unbelievers.
  3. two words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Khan Academy. JFGI.

  4. Khan Academy by roadkill-maker · · Score: 5, Informative

    Have you looked at Khan Academy? http://www.khanacademy.org/

  5. Feynman's Lectures on Physics by demachina · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Feynman's Lectures on Physics is probably as good or better than any online course you will find.

    --
    @de_machina
    1. Re:Feynman's Lectures on Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes and no. If you learn by hearing and seeing, as well as reading, then watching lectures online helps a lot, in addition to reading the book. For Physics, MIT's Lewin's physics course is pretty good:

    2. Re:Feynman's Lectures on Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you learn by every sensory modality, don't let those greedy education companies fool you; learning styles are closer to science fiction than fact

    3. Re:Feynman's Lectures on Physics by John.P.Jones · · Score: 1

      Additionally, I would highly recommend Leonard Suskind's Stanford continuing education physics series (available on iTunes & YouTube etc) which is currently in its third quarter of the second attempt. The first covers classical mechanics, the second quantum mechanics and the third (ongoing) special relativity and classical field theory. The fourth I believe will cover general relativity and then the fifth will head into quantum field theory and the standard model.

    4. Re:Feynman's Lectures on Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Two of Feynman's books worth reading/buying:

      Six Easy Pieces (lectures on Newtonian physics)
      Six Not So Easy Pieced (lectures on quantum physics)

      These are available as books + audio CDs. They were my favorite "drive to work" listening for most of a year back about 10 years ago.

    5. Re:Feynman's Lectures on Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      you learn by every sensory modality

      Yeah, if a hot sexy girl gave me orgasms to learn science, I'd learn a lot more science...

    6. Re:Feynman's Lectures on Physics by chill · · Score: 1

      I'm certain that could be arranged for a suitable fee.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    7. Re:Feynman's Lectures on Physics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1

      Lewin's [3 part] Physics course is excellent, humorous at times & one to be highly recommended

      (Academic Earth once had it for convenient download)

  6. not sure this is a good strategy by Trepidity · · Score: 1

    I was hoping to cut through the chit-chat and blackboards and get straight into the infographics and animations that will help me understand complex ideas.

    While there is some amount of popular science at the conceptual level that can be conveyed this way, you aren't really going to get far into even basic chemistry or physics via "infographics and animations", unless the latter have a lot more mathematics than is usually the case. One thing blackboards (and textbooks) have going for them is that, so far at least, they seem to be the main venues via which mathematics is conveyed, and it's quite difficult to get any serious understanding of science without being able to model phenomena mathematically.

    1. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by Hatta · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What is the difference between "infographics" and graphical information written on a blackboard, anyway?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by Wovel · · Score: 1

      There isn't one. I am not sure what his point was. Perhaps someone stuck in traditional Academia.

    3. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Most math is symbolic, not graphical. So the answer to your specific question is "nothing at all, really," but I think you may have missed OP's point.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    4. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by Trepidity · · Score: 1

      I don't think there's a logical distinction, but I do see significant current differences. I have not seen very many infographics that approach the level of mathematical rigor that you find in even introductory physics courses. They seem to be more about comic-style drawings, big text, and simple graphics. Not much in the way of derivations or working equations.

      I would be interested if someone had pointers to more math-heavy infographics, though. Maybe they exist and I just don't know about them?

    5. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Perhaps someone stuck in traditional Academia.

      Ah yes, that stuffy, hidebound world of academia, where smart people have to think really hard for a long time to understand complicated subjects, instead of getting their information in easily digestible "infographics" and becoming instant experts.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    6. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by Dave+Emami · · Score: 1

      Perhaps someone stuck in traditional Academia.

      Ah yes, that stuffy, hidebound world of academia, where smart people have to think really hard for a long time to understand complicated subjects, instead of getting their information in easily digestible "infographics" and becoming instant experts.

      Your point is taken, but there's nothing wrong with wanting to ease the process by using newer techniques at conveying information. That dismissiveness towards "infographics" can apply just as readily to Cartesian graphs, chemical formula notation, Arabic numerals, or even writing itself. Decreasing the effort necessary for one person to comprehend another is a basic goal of language. Well, unless you're a lawyer or politician, of course.

      --

      "The Greens lynched a hacker in Chicago. Last month, but I think the body's still hanging from the old Water Tower."
    7. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blackboards are harder to read, and you have to erase them, and there's chalk dust, and you get in the way of the student when you're writing on them, and you run out of space so you have to write smaller...

    8. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      As much as I despised getting up for the 8:30 math lectures, I found that following the scribbling on the blackboard and getting an explanation of what it means and how you get there helps a lot - exactly like Khan does. Being able to pause a video to think about it would have been a big plus back then.

    9. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      I agree in general. I just have a strong negative reaction to casual dismissal of the immensely hard work necessary to become an expert in ... well, anything, really ... and the idea that a lot of people seem to have that because they read some pop-sci article on something last week, they know more about it than do people who have spent years earning advanced degrees in the subject.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    10. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One is for people interested in learning, the other is for people who have spent their whole life being entertained by blinking lights and sounds from various electronic devices and find themselves unable to pay attention to anything else.

    11. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by Altrag · · Score: 2

      There's a huge difference between learning something and becoming an expert in it. An introductory course to anything isn't going to make you an expert no matter what medium was used to express the information.

      People grossly overestimating their own competence in a subject is a different topic all together, but again is pretty irrelevant to the specific medium used to transmit knowledge to them.

    12. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by blubadger · · Score: 1

      But I wasn't casually dismissing anyone or anything. That's your own interpretation. And I have no illusions at all about how little I will continue to know next week. The contrary is also your interpretation, nothing more.

    13. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by blubadger · · Score: 1

      At this point I (as the OP) would be interested if anyone had pointers even to "comic-style drawings". No such luck unfortunately.

    14. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by blubadger · · Score: 1

      Is it so difficult to see the difference between computer animation and a video of someone scratching a blackboard with chalk? Come on. Did we really invent computers and the web simply to speed up the distribution of videos? There seems to be a lot of luddism in this thread.

      Infographics is perhaps a dumb buzzword, but everyone understood, you included. And no, far from being "someone stuck in traditional academia", I work at the IT end of journalism and I spend my days trying to convince people to adopt newer, more efficient methods of working.

    15. Re:not sure this is a good strategy by blubadger · · Score: 1

      Have you never seen a well-made animation, or even simply a graphic, that allowed your understanding to click into place? I have. I'm thinking subjects like plate tectonics, weather systems, DNA, evolution, the structure of molecules (rather than mathematics, which my question didn't mention). There are concepts here that clearly lend themselves to explanation by advanced computer graphics, and yet the market doesn't seem to be offering much.

  7. EOD. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.khanacademy.org/#browse

  8. Science is a rather broad subject by Lumpio- · · Score: 1

    Could you be a bit more specific as to what you're looking for exactly?

    1. Re:Science is a rather broad subject by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

      Good, someone else picked up on the rather vague nature of the request. "Science" means he doesn't really need it in great depth, he just wants to learn a little more about the world.

      (Yoda) "Infographics, he wants hmm? Stephen Wolfram's A New Kind of Science has lots of those!" (/Yoda)

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    2. Re:Science is a rather broad subject by blubadger · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I just want to understand what the hell an amino acid (or indeed any acid) is, or how jetsteams work, or what exactly chemical weight is, without having to squint at a small video of someone scraping a barely visible blackboard while burbling jokes and anecdotes to class of students. I figure that there has to be a better way.

  9. Oh waaa by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Higher education consists of actual dialog, lots of words, and drawing on blackboards. Why can't I have infotainment? I'm willing to pay to have things dumbed down for me.

    I know I'm being obtuse, but seriously, this stuff is too complicated for simple little animations and pictures to make substantially easier.

    1. Re:Oh waaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. REAL learning requires work. What is it with the submitters generation expecting everything to come easy.

      Go read popular science rags and pretend you're well read.

    2. Re:Oh waaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      but seriously, this stuff is too complicated

      That kind of defeatist attitude angers me.

      It's the job of educators to make complicated material straightforward to understand.

      If it can be done with simple infographics and animation, then that's great.

      If it can't be done that way YET, then people with more imagination than you will figure out how to do it. All I ask is that you don't stand in their way, or denigrate them as they accomplish what you cannot imagine.

    3. Re:Oh waaa by LF11 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To a certain extent, you are correct.

      However, there are many ways to learn. Classroom learning is just one. Traditionally, humans learn by imitation, experience, and storytelling in small groups. For many modern young people, it appears that YouTube is taking the role of storyteller.

      There are a LOT of students who struggle through a lecture, then promptly go on YouTube to find videos recorded by instructors who are actually interested in teaching. This applies to all levels of classes, from introductory classes to my current head-asploder; biochemistry.

      You may have suffered through traditional "higher education," but a new generation is learning a different way. Some of them are learning it better. We have made tremendous progress in many fields, why do we not study the process of academic instruction just as intensely as, say, nuclear physics? Because people like you seem to think that just because you suffered through it, everyone else must suffer as well. It's only fair, right?

      Sorry. You were being obtuse. :)

      Khan Academy is good, a lot of people use those videos!

      --cej102937

    4. Re:Oh waaa by Wovel · · Score: 1

      I think the askers point was more that the information can be better conveyed by using tools more sophisticated than a piece of chalk. He is right.

    5. Re:Oh waaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can have fun with science but to start, I'm sorry to say that its only the hard way or there's no way.
      While these videos are the exact classrooms where you supposedly slept previously, the only way now is to read and understand. I think books like Feynman series or crash courses or even notes from you friends will help. You can not expect to understand the whole science with just bunch of animations and some hanky panky videos, especially when you have to take the exams for the course. It is true that the animations and the sort of materials you are looking aids the understanding of the science, science should be learnt and the essence of learning lies in the books. This comes from a poor science guy who slept like you in the class but learnt through many books and notes.

    6. Re:Oh waaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I'm in the wrong thread but my message is to original poster and I agree with the previous poster, ikanread.

    7. Re:Oh waaa by Trepidity · · Score: 1

      I do think the amount that you can learn from "simple infographics and animations" can be higher than it is today, but I don't think it will ever be at an impressive level, unless some truly revolutionary things happen in science, which I think is unlikely. It is simply impossible to get a handle on modern science, even at fairly basic levels, without a good understanding of mathematics, because science is so heavily mathematical. And the trend over the past 100 years, if anything, has been towards more pervasive use of mathematical formalisms, replacing things that were previously discussed more informally. I simply don't see a path towards being able to do even fairly basic 2nd-year-of-college level engineering if a student doesn't get comfortable with equations and symbolic manipulation.

    8. Re:Oh waaa by gadlaw · · Score: 2

      What the heck does that mean? What are these 'Popular Science Rags' you're talking about? So anything that helps folks explore the wonder and intelligence of science is a 'rag' unless it does what? Unless it's incomprehensible to anyone but you? How is that helping anyone? It's hard enough getting some folks to even accept science and your attitude certainly doesn't help.

      --
      Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
    9. Re:Oh waaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem of "dialog" and "lots of words" is that most of them are not about the subject. They are great for social reasons and to make a course actually fun, but they are a waste of time for someone who is learning alone and who want to go straight to the point.

      The last book I read was about JavaScript. It was 700 pages. But most of them were useless. The real material could probably fit in less than 100 pages. It was the same for a book about mathematics I read a few months ago. It was great from a language style point of view, but the truth is I didn't care about the language, I only cared about mathematics and I had to skim through the book to get the information.

      It's like watching the news on TV. It takes one hour to watch it. But reading a script containing all the information would take less than 5 minutes.

      Why am I forced to have infotainment?

    10. Re:Oh waaa by HiThere · · Score: 1

      My *guess* was that he meant things like Scientific American, Science Digest, New Scientist, etc. As opposed to Nature, Chemica Acta, etc. (I don't follow the second series, myself. Once upon a time I wanted to, but I also wanted to do other things...and the other things won. But I still follow the popularized Science magazines.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    11. Re:Oh waaa by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is simply impossible to get a handle on modern science, even at fairly basic levels, without a good understanding of mathematics

      I feel like something is missing from mathematics. Part of that is that I'm not very good at it, but somehow I don't feel like the attempt was made to teach me how math actually worked, just how to plug numbers in and get consistent results.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    12. Re:Oh waaa by Animats · · Score: 2

      Higher education consists of actual dialog, lots of words, and drawing on blackboards.

      Misery is looking at video of people writing things on blackboards. At least move up to the format where there's a clear view of the slides and an inset for the talking head.

    13. Re:Oh waaa by mathfeel · · Score: 2
      I agree with your larger point that the traditional lecture style education is not good for everyone.

      You may have suffered through traditional "higher education," but a new generation is learning a different way. Some of them are learning it better. We have made tremendous progress in many fields, why do we not study the process of academic instruction just as intensely as, say, nuclear physics?

      We do. Some physics department, like the one from which I got my PhD, offers research in physics education as a PhD program. Student do research and gather data in classroom and apply the same statistical analysis techniques to asset the effectiveness of certain teaching techniques. Unfortunately, they usually do not get the same respect in the department as more traditional thesis topics. Usually there are a few (<5) faculties out of the whole department who actually care about physics education that they accept student in these topics. The APS is starting to recognize it as a specialty, but only treats it as a "special topic". We are getting there.

      Khan Academy is good, a lot of people use those videos!

      --cej102937

      When I was TA-ing to pay my way through my degree, I recommend KA to many intro physics students. Then after talking to a lot of them, I find the result to be kind of mixed. Some find it helpful, other not and it somewhat surprised me that it did not correlated with grade. The worst case is that some thinks it's helpful when in fact it did not (and you can tell by asking conceptual questions that is only a twist of the problems covered in the video). Totally anecdotal. However, fellow students who actually engaged in physics educations research tents to agree that a one way dictation, abet using video, do not help student who lacks a good conceptual foundation to begin with. And this guy, who also did a PhD in physics education, also agree. I do think the world is better with those video than without though.

      --
      The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the 'social sciences' is: some do, some don't
    14. Re:Oh waaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I feel like something is missing from mathematics. Part of that is that I'm not very good at it, but somehow I don't feel like the attempt was made to teach me how math actually worked, just how to plug numbers in and get consistent results.

      It's not missing from mathematics; it's just missing from the lower levels of mathematics education. The analogy I often use is that a calculus course is like teaching someone how to drive a car; if you want to know how the car works and how to build and repair one yourself, you need to take a course in real analysis (which is essentially calculus done over again with everything actually proved).

      Students who are not math majors seldom reach this level (which typically requires some gateway "introduction to higher mathematics" course), so they never have any idea what mathematics is about: they learn how to use it, not to do it. Indeed, most math graduate students don't have much of the big picture either. I'm a math Ph.D. with an unusually broad background (including comp. sci., physics, some engineering), but I still find that some senior faculty members seem to be able to see how the pieces fit together in a way that I still don't. So there are still higher levels; I wonder how far they go.

    15. Re:Oh waaa by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      Well, yes, but, as with everything, there's a cost-benefit analysis to go through.

      Just how much IT skill does that little animation with drill-downs and what-not take? How much editorial time by PhDs and other expensive hires does it take. How long until its outdated and needs to be redone? And, as I said, with upper-level focused material, the extra effort doesn't necessarily add substantial retention benefit.

    16. Re:Oh waaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If we would just remove the sooth saying things would already change dramatically, nothing sort of revolutionary.

    17. Re:Oh waaa by Alien7 · · Score: 1

      Tell that to theDance your PHD people

    18. Re:Oh waaa by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      Can't view videos at work. Summary?

    19. Re:Oh waaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It really depends. No amount of infographics is going to help you through subjects like quantum mechanics or general relativity (I've studied physics and I just glaze over when GR is mentioned). There is a point where, if you want to learn, you need to sit down and read long, dry and boring explanations of the facts with lots and lots of complicated formulae.

      The GP's point was just that: sometimes you can't dumb down a subject into easily digested "infographics" or animated presentations. Heck, sometimes you can't even figure out a visual representation for what you're talking about...

    20. Re:Oh waaa by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It's not missing from mathematics; it's just missing from the lower levels of mathematics education.

      Yeah, I'm not expressing myself well. Not much sleep last night. Anyway, I've been told that once you get into algebra you have enough math to prove that stuff about fractions you learned back in second grade or whatever, but that's not in the curriculum. So I guess what I'm complaining about is that mathematics education doesn't proceed to proofs by the shortest route, because that's what it really should be doing. Otherwise, like me, one will mostly learn to plug in numbers, and not learn how to create new formulae. (OK, I can make up my own simple ones, but it's not much of a foundation to grow on because I feel like I'm just mimicking.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    21. Re:Oh waaa by Altrag · · Score: 1

      Probably no more than writing the same information in a textbook, having it edited and rewritten, dealing with publishers, etc -- providing the tools are in place to create drill-downs and what-nots.

      We're just starting to come to grips with such tools, and you're right that they currently take a fair bit more IT skill than your average non-compsci professor is likely to have (or at least, a different set of IT skills.)

      But there's nothing inherently bad about the medium. Interactive learning has huge potential if its done well. But we're still learning how to teach with this new technology and yes, it will take some time to get there. Remember, books have been around thousands of years. Blackboards or some equivalent for at least hundreds. Interactive learning tools: Maybe a decade? Perhaps 2-3 decades at best if you count some of the really really early attempts. Give it some time.

      Of course, the one thing that's still missing from that equation is an actual person to go ask when the blackboard or textbook aren't enough. THAT is what's missing from computer-based teaching. The blackboards and books are not the problem. The lack of an actual teacher is the problem. And that can be rectified by you know, setting it up as an actual course material and having an actual teacher. Same as any other teaching technique.

    22. Re:Oh waaa by Japher · · Score: 1
      >It's the job of educators to make complicated material straightforward to understand.

      Well, almost. It is the job of educators to make complicated material as straightforward and easy to understand as possible, but no more. Some things are just plain hard. Additionally, educators must concern themselves with what works for the majority of their students, and have to accept that they won't be able to make things clear for everyone. There comes a point of diminishing returns in simplification and ultimately it is the responsibility of the student to fill in the gaps.

      >If it can't be done that way YET, then people with more imagination than you will figure out how to do it. All I ask is that you don't stand in their way, or denigrate them as they accomplish what you cannot imagine.

      And in return I ask that you recognize that educators are doing their damndest to teach material that they have spent a lifetime gathering and that expecting them to have a magic bullet is unreasonable in the extreme.

    23. Re:Oh waaa by Weatherlawyer · · Score: 0
      I'm doing something about geo-physics to try and make it understandable. Unfortunately, I have had to reconsider what is accepted by mainstream science and have thrown out most of their concepts. (For example the unpredictability of earthquakes.

      I am all in favour of pictures rather than lectures. I went to that Khan academt site and found it boring as hell. Poinltess pictures of carbon, lead and gold and a most annoying nasal tenor voice.

      Here is an example of what |I am trying to do:

      http://my.opera.com/Weatherlawyer/blog/2012/05/30/how-to-forecast-typhoons-from-the-north-atlantic-hurricane

      All of which can be accomplished with a dozen or less weather charts in an animation. (Which I haven't yet got around to.)

      Here is one on a slightly different topic but in pictures:

      http://my.opera.com/Weatherlawyer/blog/2012/06/04/4th-5-9-m

    24. Re:Oh waaa by Weatherlawyer · · Score: 0
      It's hard to use allusions to teach maths. Especially to 8 year olds. It has to be done by rote. A "This is so because I say it is." sort of thinking. It's depressing as hell and very useful.

      I always remember the look on the teacher's face when plodding through the multiplication tables:

      one time three is three etc we got to the system we used for playing Hide and Seek.

      We tore through the 5 times table and didn't stop "ready or not" till we reached one hundred. This was fifty years ago I still smile remembering how we all looked around at each other stupidly, realising we had achieved something amazing.

      It didn't last.

    25. Re:Oh waaa by blubadger · · Score: 1

      Excellent points. This is looking like the definitive answer to my question. "It doesn't exist yet, come back later." You're right that teachers will always be needed as the one-on-one recourse. And that in turn can help towards the design of the next generation of educational material.

    26. Re:Oh waaa by blubadger · · Score: 1

      Would have written that in the question but wanted to keep things polite. Well put.

    27. Re:Oh waaa by blubadger · · Score: 1

      It is simply impossible to get a handle on modern science, even at fairly basic levels, without a good understanding of mathematics

      These sound like "fairly basic levels" for a postdoctorate student, rather than a layperson. I find it difficult to believe that cell division, or sublimation, or even gravity, can be better explained using chalk and algebra than by our much-derided friend the "infographic" or by any kind of decent animation, perhaps with interactive elements to assist understanding. There is just tons of potential there.

      But yes, my question lacked clarity on this point. I do not want to understand "complex ideas" completely, just to grasp the basics. I want basic things to click in ways they haven't done so far. I'm not a scientist and never will be (I studied history), I just want to be a little less dumb. Just a little.

    28. Re:Oh waaa by LienRag · · Score: 1

      I'm not convinced...

      There's such a huge difference between a lecture made by an average teacher and a lecture made by a brilliant one, and most of these differences come from the ability of the later to make it simple and interesting.

      And yes, pictures and animations CAN help making learning simple and interesting.

      The fact that they are usually used to make "infotainment" doesn't mean there are no ways to use them without dumbing things.

    29. Re:Oh waaa by tzanger · · Score: 1

      I find most books to be very difficult to learn from. They are filled with bullshit that explain the simple parts and gloss over the stuff that's actually tricky. Most tech books (to learn a programming language) are also filled with idiotic banter designed to make you feel comfortable with the author. I have no idea why. I usually get the best learning from hacking my way through real examples on some simple project with an IRC channel full of people who are at various stages of learning or teaching themselves.

  10. KhanAcademy by Yogiz · · Score: 4, Informative

    I suggest you take a look at the videos at http://www.khanacademy.org/. The guy that makes these has quite a talent for teaching and the sketches help a lot with more difficult subjects. I'm currently about half way through with the macroeconomy playlist and I find the information very easy to obtain in the format it is provided there.

    1. Re:KhanAcademy by LF11 · · Score: 2

      ^^ this ^^ I can't recommend Khan Academy enough. Many people in all the science classes I have taken (chem, biochem, orgo, anatomy, physiology...) have been hitting up YouTube to learn material, and it has been working very well for them. Khan Academy is a constant favorite!

      cej102937

    2. Re:KhanAcademy by FatAlb3rt · · Score: 2

      What Udacity as well - they are quickly ramping up their courses. New one for physics starting June 25.

    3. Re:KhanAcademy by FatAlb3rt · · Score: 1

      By What, I obviously meant Watch. Obviously.

    4. Re:KhanAcademy by alta · · Score: 1

      I second this. We're going to be homeschooling our kids next year and there are some courses here we're going to integrate into the curriculum.

      --
      Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
  11. CDs that come with Text Books & youtube by troylanes · · Score: 1

    Get on craigslist/ebay and find some used text books that come with CDs. They typically have wonderful animations and interactive diagrams that helped me immensely in my Bio/Biochem undergrad. Also, do a cursory search on youtube. My wife recently completed some basic chemistry courses and showed me some of the stuff that was on youtube -- amazing it was.

    1. Re:CDs that come with Text Books & youtube by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      -- amazing it was.

      Yoda, where have you been?

  12. CrashCourse - lots of infographics and animations by astropirate · · Score: 2

    Crashcourse has lots of nice animations and information. http://www.youtube.com/user/crashcourse

  13. YouTube series: Crashcourse by Z80xxc! · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's a work in progress, but there's a new YouTube series called Crash Course which presently covers biology and world history. They're planning to encompass other subjects in the future as well, but it just recently started. The history lessons are taught by author/nerd John Green and the biology is taught by his brother Hank Green. I suggest you check it out; it's got lots of neat graphics, simple explanations, and is easy to follow.

    As mentioned in other posts, Khan Academy is also a fantastic online resource. It's not quite as spiffy as Crash Course, but covers far more subjects, and is easy to follow.

    1. Re:YouTube series: Crashcourse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're really looking to learn something and retain it well, beware that watching a video (or an infographic) is rarely enough. Teaching about many science subjects is less about teaching students something they didn't already know than it is about dispelling the misconceptions they already have.

      Here's an very good video that talks about the effectiveness of science teaching videos like those from the Khan Academy. It's a criticism, but a friendly, constructive one.

      Khan Academy and the Effectiveness of Science Videos

    2. Re:YouTube series: Crashcourse by fotoguzzi · · Score: 1

      I see you don't like videos, so I made a video that explains why videos suck.

      --
      Their they're doing there hair.
    3. Re:YouTube series: Crashcourse by blubadger · · Score: 1

      Thanks, will definitely be checking out Crash Course. Sounds great.

  14. Surf's up! by dolo724 · · Score: 1

    Time to hit the internets for some basics. Use the same search terms as you've just typed in and use the homework-helper sites for high school and college. Some professors (and good HS teachers) know their students need more than just lecture in class.
    Also, visit Tube-U (youtube) and watch actual science experiments in progress. Go to Wiki places for dry descriptions and SOURCES you can actually look up at your local public library.
    Specifics? chemistry.about.com, chem1.com, google...
    Don't be afraid to take notes; if you have a question the (course/video/text) doesn't answer you will be able to look it up later.
    Lay in a good supply of baking soda, vinegar and don't forget to notify the DHS you're interested in becoming a Mad Scientist.

    --
    But you just gotta have another sigarette
    1. Re:Surf's up! by blubadger · · Score: 1

      Thanks, there are a couple of small leads in your densely packed advice! In general though, I'm looking for something which forms a coherent whole (i.e., a start-to-finish course, even if short) and has high production values. Hulu rather than Youtube. Wikipedia is, as you say, just way too dry and in-depth most of the time. I believe they have an "Introduction to..." series for complex subjects, but so far there aren't many such articles.

      Baking soda is great, but hydrogen peroxide is even better on the bathroom tile grout. Now I just need to understand how it works!

  15. Get off my lawn by thestuckmud · · Score: 1

    Back when I was in school, we has Schaum's outlines, and we liked them. Search the internet for explanations if you have trouble, but working through a ton of problems n paper will give you proficiency and confidence.

    1. Re:Get off my lawn by zmughal · · Score: 1

      I agree with this. Schaum's Outlines are surprisingly comprehensive, easy to follow, and well-written. They are meant to complement textbooks, but given the low priority on conceptual organisation found in many textbooks, these can often be used alone if you do the problems.

  16. Open Learning Initiative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    You should take a look at Carnegie Mellon University's Open Learning Initiative ( http://oli.cmu.edu ). They have whole courses, which are typically not video-based, and they include lots of interactive exercises to help you grasp the concepts. (Full Disclosure: I'm currently working on a new chemistry course for OLI, which should be available later this year or early next year.)

    1. Re:Open Learning Initiative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for this. I test drove the french class and decided to sign up.

    2. Re:Open Learning Initiative by gadlaw · · Score: 1

      That looks great. Thanks for the information and the heads up.

      --
      Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
  17. Crash Course! by slasho81 · · Score: 1

    Check out Crash Course for two great courses in biology and world history.

    1. Re:Crash Course! by blubadger · · Score: 1

      Yep, mentioned above. Thanks for the tip.

  18. The Great Courses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Courses

    http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/courses/courses.aspx?s=821&ps=910

    1. Re:The Great Courses by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 2

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Courses

      http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/courses/courses.aspx?s=821&ps=910

      Beware the bombardment of direct mail they will send you when they get your address.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
  19. Udacity by wjousts · · Score: 1

    Udacity has a physics course it's rolling out at the end of the month. Looks fairly basic, but you'll have to decide for yourself if the level is appropriate for you.

  20. Business School by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Having slept through chemistry at school, I'm looking to fill in the gaps in my science education by following a short online course or two.

    That's where most of the rest of people like you seem to end up.

  21. /. ads with sound by SoupGuru · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Here's my ask Slashdot:

    Are you actively trying to disgust long term users?

    I used to check Slashdot daily. Maybe I'll just check in on Rob Malda's Google+ stream from now on.

    --
    What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable
  22. General Chemistry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pauling's General Chemistry is actually pretty readable. The units are a bit weird, but if you're not using it for a class, that shouldn't matter. Also, I recently read The Periodic Table: A Very Short Intoduction by Eric Scerri, which is short, interesting, and doesn't coddle you. If you insist on learning online, Khan Academy gets my vote.

    1. Re:General Chemistry by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 1

      I greatly second Pauling's General Chemistry - it is by far the most accessible genchem text I have ever seen (and I have seen many). As a bonus, the paperback is only $15 or so.

      --
      My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
  23. There is value in "shallow" learning by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just because someone wants just the broad strokes doesn't make them a bad person.

    Knowing ABOUT something is half the battle to knowing HOW to do something. I don't need to know how to do the math myself to appreciate the concept of what it is doing.

    Just one look at the math for something like this makes they eyes of most people glaze over, and they don't even know it exists. Even without being able to solve those equations themselves, a "comic book" version of it, if done well, might make more people appreciate stuff they "use" every day.

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    1. Re:There is value in "shallow" learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In layman's terms you mean like how you press a number on a phone(tone), how long you press it (length) and how much force you use pressing it(amplitude)...?

      By the way I am drinking/drunk and my eyes did glaze over it however one common criterion that exists (or doesn't exist) I should say is the valuation of how one is able to interpreter data/ideas/knowledge and a delivery model associated with various modes of thinking.

      Honestly Einstein sucked at regular "maths", we all know this. However the pattern recognition should be more "vellum" based thinking and it is considered "Un-scientific" to use metaphors/analogies as well as antithetical social precedences ("you don't have a phone that you can press hard the keys on????"

      Honestly your comment is great just wanted to add my two bits to the discussion.

      YES, A COMIC BOOK VERSION WOULD BE AEWSOME OP!!!!

    2. Re:There is value in "shallow" learning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with shallow learning is that it doesn't stick. It goes into some mental repository a bit longer than short term memory (medium term?) and is forgotten within a couple weeks. That might be good enough for cramming for an exam in high school or not-so-elite universities, but not if you're serious about learning something worthwhile.

      BTW this is one of the problems I have with Khan Academy. Sal's lectures make it "easy" to sit through a presentation so you can smile and nod along... and then not remember anything afterwards.

    3. Re:There is value in "shallow" learning by rbmyers · · Score: 1

      If you have the requisite math to understand the cited Wikipedia article, the presentation is clear and concise. If you don't have the requisite math, I have no idea what could be done for you. This all reminds me of a fellow TA in a different department complaining that his undergraduates students at the well-regarded State U wanted math to be like Sesame Street. I doubt very much if the nations that are consistently outperforming the US on math and science exams are pandering to such a desire from students. If you wind up reporting to a high-level bureaucrat or manager who doesn't understand the subject matter he or she is overseeing, you can thank "broad strokes" education, I'm sure.

    4. Re:There is value in "shallow" learning by iiii · · Score: 2

      Agreed.

      There is great value in knowing which things we (i.e. humanity and the scientific community) understand and which we don't. To me this is the primary message and the joy of reading/listening to Feynman. Over and over again he sketches out what we understand in a field and then highlights the questions that remain, and shares his enthusiasm and wonder for those unanswered questions that are waiting out there for a sharp mind grasp. This focus on the unanswered question is what makes his work so inspirational. It makes you want to become a physicist so you can go out and solve some of those mysteries. And that also is what differentiates Feynman's approach from how science is taught in most places. It's taught with a focus on what we know, which unintentionally gives the student the impression that we mostly understand things, which is completely wrong.

      On another note, as a computer scientist and architect of large systems, it is important for me to know what is do-able and what is not, which problems we have solutions for, which are intractable nonstarters, and which we have a chance to solve in the right situation with the right brainpower applied. The details of why are less important. For example, I don't need to understand deep crypto to know what we can encrypt the comms between these two components. I know it's a solved problem, what it can and cannot do, and that's all that matters to me. Put it in my toolbox along with sorting, hash tables, full-text indexing, AJAX, machine learning, and hundreds of other techniques, each of which is its own deep field, and I can use this knowledge to design systems with high confidence that they are going to work as planned.

      --
      Light cup, beer drink, thin so chain, neck turtle fat, man I won't say it again
  24. These are enjoyable by ggpauly · · Score: 1

    http://www.physics.harvard.edu/about/Phys253.html

    Even if you don't understand them.

    --
    Verbum caro factum est
  25. Dear Submitter by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2

    Having slept through chemistry at school, ...

    Seriously, go for the lecture videos. Take notes, and review them afterwards, just as if there was going to be an exam on the topic. Don't overload yourself; these things take time to absorb and to integrate with your existing knowledge.

    Pause and replay videos as much as needed, but you have to concentrate on the material being conveyed. An engaging infographic can give you an overview of some topic (like for plate tectonics or the SN1 reaction mechanism) perhaps to the "informed layman" level. To reach a more knowledgeable level, you'll have to get your own mind wrapped around related groups of essential details (the classes and processes of felsic minerals, for instance). If you fall asleep during a lecture video, then replay it and try to stay awake.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    1. Re:Dear Submitter by blue+trane · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Classroom lectures are, literally, old school. Using online presentation tools instead of adhering to the old physical classroom format means you don't have to deal with chalk dust, for example, or taking the time to erase a black-or-white board. You can do retakes. Distracting coughs, etc. from the audience can be eliminated. And the teachers can be more themselves, more in control of what they present. They can take themselves out of the picture and focus on what they're trying to communicate on the screen, instead of having to worry about obscuring someone's (or the camera's) view while writing on a physical blackboard.

  26. Open University by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Open University. UK/European. Being going for years now. You pay for it though and earn real UK diploma/degree qualifications.

  27. doesn't really exist by pswPhD · · Score: 1

    In my experience, scientists show results etc with graphs using slides and rarely ever show animations. Researchers are more interested in the numbers than pretty pictures that can be generated. I went to lecture that was basically on computer modelling in industry, who said animation were great for management and trade shows- they look nice and tell you absolutely nothing about what is actually going on.

    In my area (chemistry) most lecturers don't have the time or the ability to create animations which are useful, even in areas where animations would look quite cool (e.g. time dependent quantum mechanics stuff). My recommendation to you is to live with the video or audio, or look at the popular science articles, NASA blog or whatever.

  28. Best Online Silence Course? by Suomi-Poika · · Score: 1

    I am thinking quietly now.

  29. I agree - what's the reason for this snobbery? by gadlaw · · Score: 1

    You know, some things are complicated - no kidding. But the ability to teach those things, even complicated concepts, means you should be able to translate that information to something your students can learn. In other words, if you can't explain it, you can't teach then you really don't understand it yourself. That could be the reason for these snarky comments.

    --
    Enjoy your Karma, after all you earned it. Feel your Karma Joe, feel it burn.
  30. General Chemistry, Linus Pauling, Dover by causeur · · Score: 1

    worked for me. $20 new.

  31. All you need by proslack · · Score: 1
    --


    Floating in the black seas of infinity without a paddle.
    1. Re:All you need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they're lacking in any chemistry above a high school level, but the physics and other science courses are good.

    2. Re:All you need by blubadger · · Score: 1

      They look stronger on humanities subjects, and the course titles seem somewhat arbitrary rather than hierarchically organized. But interesting nonetheless, thanks for the tip.

  32. Create a learning plan by Peterus7 · · Score: 2

    I would check out the Edupunk's guide to DIY Education, and move forward from there. Khan Academy is good for math, because you can actually test your skills, but with science education, you need some way of actually showing the process skills. Until then, though, KA should be a good refresher.

  33. Online resources that I use. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I have taught K-12 for 8 years, college level for around 9. Besides my own YouTube Chanel on Human Anatomy and Physiology http://www.youtube.com/user/mrfordsclass/featured and my own website http://mrfordsclass.net.

    I am also a huge fan of the following Mr. Causey for Chemsitry (YouTube) http://www.youtube.com/user/mrcausey?feature=results_main. The Khan Academy (I think everyone knows about this one) http://www.khanacademy.org/. You can also explore iTune, specifically their podcasts. User will upload their tutorials, and some univeristies have their own channels. You might also want to check out http://www.merlot.org/merlot/index.htm. Not as easy to navigate, but it is huge in the e-learning world. Professors can upload videos, entire web-based trainings (WBTs) and more.

    Beside my shameless plug at the start, I sincerely hope this helps.

  34. AiG 'science' courses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Basically, when it comes to biology and geology you're gonna want to take these courses offered by Answers in Genesis.

  35. Some courses and other resources by cowtamer · · Score: 2

    FREE STUFF

    UC Berkeley Webcasts (I learned quite a bit from these -- try different courses by semester. Listen to the 1st and 2nd lecture to see if it's high value. Some are better than others. I got an excellent MEMS lecture from here once, and a really good one on Byzantine history. Some (like history) are good as audio in your car. Others get better with charts.

    http://webcast.berkeley.edu/

    MIT OpenCourseWare (haven't tried, but hear good things)

    http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm

    Khan academy (of course)
    http://www.khanacademy.org/

    PAID RESOURCES

    Kaplan http://www.kaptest.com/
    (Take something like the MCAT review if you can afford it for science/physics. They do a really good job of distilling the basics of science/biology/etc. without any nonsense. Disclaimer: I've also taught for Kaplan)

    Also, don't discount old fashioned books:

    The "Head First" series of books
    (Try the "Dummies" books also if you're not insulted by the title)

    Head First Physics

    Home Schooling Curricula
    Whatever you may feel about the social implications of home schooling, there are some excellent science resources which will catch you up. I will shy away from recommending specific ones for fear of inciting a flame war. I hope someone better versed in these curricula can enlighten us with recommendations.

    Textbooks!
    Try to get some used textbooks from a used book store, if all you want is the 101 level stuff:

    Chemistry (Oxtoby-Nachtrieb) http://www.amazon.com/Principles-Modern-Chemistry-Fifth-Edition/dp/B001F39B2Y
    (There are many nicely written Biology books -- see what you like)

    And if you really want to enjoy chemistry:

    Chemical Demonstrations, Shakhashiri

    (Warning: do not try these at home until you know what you're doing)

    You may also wish to check out your local Makerspace/Hackerspace. You will probably find very educated geeks who'd be more than willing to teach you stuff...

    1. Re:Some courses and other resources by tzanger · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't mind finding out what some of the specific homeschooling resources you're afraid to list are... Please email me (my email address should be shown in my user info page).

  36. What you are looking for is called a "textbook" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    You are looking for something called a "textbook."

    A textbook does not have any fancy flash videos, but it does (usually) have helpful illustrations, sample problems and solutions, and good introductory material on a variety of topics.

    The lectures are often superfluous for introductory science concepts. The books usually aren't. Sorry, you probably won't be able to find quality textbooks in eBook formats for your Nook or Kindle, either. I can assure you that, for physics, there are no fancy video shortcuts to understanding the concepts. It's a very heavily math-based field, so you need to sit down and wade through equations if you want to understand anything. Otherwise, it's a bunch of magical-looking directives handed down from on high.

    If you visit a local college bookstore, you'll probably find many used textbooks for all fields of science at moderately crazy prices. Once you've written down the relevant author names and book titles, bring up Amazon on your smartphone and order them online for a saner price. Many college courses list books on the course web site, so you could draw inspiration from that as well.

    Since I have no idea what you are interested in, I will recommend some physics books that I liked as an undergrad.

    Fundamentals of Physics by Halliday, Resnick, and Walker is a good introductory physics text book.

    Introduction to Nuclear and Particle Physics by Das Ferbel is a relatively lighthearted and humorous discussion of basic ideas behind nuclear physics and high-energy physics (quarks, etc.).

    Introduction to Quantum Mechanics by Griffiths is my favorite quantum physics text book (square wells, etc.).

    The Art of Electronics by Horowitz and Hill is an excellent and practical electronics book. It will teach you how to make a circuit board. It's not exactly a beginner's book, so get something else first if you don't have a grasp of basic E&M (if you don't know what V=IR means, this book isn't really for you).

    You will need a basic understanding of mathematics before anything in physics makes any sense to you at all. Calculus will get you pretty far by itself. I recommend a calculus book by Larson, Hostetler, and Edwards for that; it has a lovely integration table in the back. Linear algebra is required if you want an undergraduate-level understanding of physics. Complex analysis, probability, and computer programming are also very useful subjects.

    Oh, it's useful to note that there are no "nice" textbooks for graduate level physics. There are many textbooks, but they usually need to be accompanied by a lecturer who can translate the darned thing for you, because we can't be bothered to agree on basic terms. So, as a warning, stay away from grad-level physics text books as anything other than a sleeping aide or door stop.

  37. Freshman Organic Chemistry at Yale is awesome by TheSync · · Score: 2

    Not quite Chem 101, but when you are ready for truly understanding the quantum mechanics of how molecules form from atoms, why molecules are acidic or basic, why they are reactive or not, you totally need to check out Prof. McBride's Yale Freshman Organic Chemistry (CHEM 125).

    It is on YouTube, but the iTunesU version is better.

  38. Virtual Cell Animation Collection by TheProspector · · Score: 0

    See the Virtual Cell Animation Collection at http://vcell.ndsu.nodak.edu/animations/

  39. quick, minimal physics lectures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can try these videos: http://fearofphysics.com/Videos/ for a refresher/gap filler on physics (mechanics).

  40. beg to differ by Chirs · · Score: 1

    I'm more visual than auditory, especially for things like directions (I'll draw a map). I have to be really interested in something to actually learn significant amounts from an audio track--a video of a presenter with background graphics (or even a slideshow with audio track) is more engaging.

    For something like physics or chemistry, an audio lecture can give the highlights but is going to be useless for the details--imagine trying to verbally explain a long complicated formula with multiple terms, superscripts, subscripts, parentheses, etc.

  41. You studying up for a Nobel prize? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    Seriously, not to knock the pursuit of knowledge, but what is your goal? Are you looking for a layman's understanding? There are tons of great lectures on YouTube giving you the basics. If you want any more than that, animated graphics won't do it. You're going to have to crack open a book.

    And, I say this 140 pages into my old Calculus textbook in an effort to relearn for a math class I'm taking in the Fall after a 15 year absence.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  42. The Great Courses by sirwired · · Score: 1

    I can highly recommend The Great Courses. They are a professionally-produced series of either Audio or A/V lectures, accompanied by a very thorough outline/supplement. The only drawback is that when a particular course isn't on sale, their prices are ridiculous. But they go through a regular schedule of rotating sales, so any particular course will be on sale every few months.

    The courses are generally written to the level of an advanced High School class or early undergrad class, depending on the specific course. They are good way to pick up general literacy in a topic, if not complete mastery that would enable you to pass a college course.

  43. Eureka! :-) by Burz · · Score: 1

    http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE82493DFAB9EA6FD&feature=plcp

    The playlist is in reverse, but the show itself (from public television before it went commercial) is cute and entertaining as well as being an introductory course on physics. The same Youtuber also has a senior physics playlist that I haven't yet viewed.

  44. Re: Animations vs dialog/words/drawings by newdarktimes · · Score: 1

    I know I'm being obtuse, but seriously, this stuff is too complicated for simple little animations and pictures to make substantially easier.

    I'd say high quality animations and pictures are EXACTLY what's required to make basic biology, chemistry, and physics substantially easier. These subjects are ideal targets to improve with these tools. Consider the excellent animations in this ted talk: (animations start at around 3:40).

    How long do you think the level of understanding granted by a few minutes with these animations would take to impart via "dialog, lots of words, and drawing on blackboards"?

  45. Use WSSCCalomeni YouTube Chemistry Screencasts by Vegoose · · Score: 1

    Regarding your request for STEM materials, you are welcome to use my Chemistry screencasts (http://www.youtube.com/user/WSCCCalomeni). The 18 screencasts are not lecture videos, but instead designed for an online Community College Introductory Chemistry Course. They are not as popular as (and different than) Khan’s work (I have not advertised them), yet they have still had over 20,0000 views in a year and a half. I have also authorized their use for school systems in India.

    You are also welcome to use any of my various periodic charts, periodic tables, and handouts (Dropbox link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/0y957p0tpiork8z/g0-SxImEKa). All of the materials are FREE. They are licensed to the public and commercial domain under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. (Disclaimer—I am not trying to profit off of any of the above material).

    The screencasts were produced a year and a half ago; I am currently working on producing updates. Any constructive feedback is welcome. The creation of any successful online STEM course is a lot of work. While developing courses at a university, I developed 29 design courses in six months. The development (and teaching) of one online chemistry course took two years of half-time work. A lot of the work consisted of making the course highly resistant to the cheating/plagiarism common in online courses (the solution is easy—make the assignments unique and challenging enough such that cheating/plagiarism is more work than the course assignments).

    As far as STEM courses go, I consider chemistry and discrete math, two of the best course which teach critical thinking. A course which focuses on the weekly solution of problems will be of greater long-term benefit.

    My background is software development and engineering. I completed my first “online” course (Statics) in Fall of 1984 using an Engineering University’s internal network of Unix computers.

    Best regards and professional success.

  46. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess the real question to ask is why? This has a lot of baring on where you should look for info. But seriously, the best way is just to get a Chem 101 textbook and query the internet when you need help disambiguating topics.

  47. take it from a Nobel laureate by kwoff · · Score: 1

    You said online but also said willing to pay, so for what it's worth....

    Linus Pauling's "General Chemistry" is brilliant and a Dover Publication so it's cheap and a classic.

    For a popular introduction to science (esp. great explanations of the chemical bonds, but also amazing word play...): The Canon, by Natalie Angier.

  48. Great Courses Company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think someone mentioned this company above.
    http://www.thegreatcourses.com/
    I've really enjoyed the courses I bought from this group. The content richness varies from prof to prof but all high quality.

  49. Best place to lear science and Math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You should go and check none other than the Khan Academy. He his the best .
      http://www.khanacademy.org/

  50. WTF? Strands run in opposite physical directions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One must be copied "backwards" Why? WTF?

    Why can't you just match section to section?

    These kinds of animations are worse than useless, because they invariably leave out or gloss over details without which it is impossible to actually understand anything that is being "explained"

    A huge segment of even "educated" people have no idea of how little they actually understand.

  51. World of Chemistry by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    http://www.learner.org/resources/series61.html
    "A video instructional series for college and high school classrooms and adult learners; 26 half-hour video programs and coordinated books"

    I've watched it twice, once in my twenties, and once with my kid. It is hosted by a Nobel prize winning chemist (Roald Hoffman) with demos by Don Showalter. Holds up pretty well for something from 1990 as far as the basics, except maybe for touting the wonders of Bisphenol A in the last episode or so.

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  52. Uhm no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > There's some high-quality stuff on offer – from Academic Earth, MIT and others – but it tends to take the form of videos of traditional university lectures.
    >I was hoping to cut through the chit-chat and blackboards and get straight into the infographics and animations that will help me understand complex ideas

    The idea of taking a class is that the teacher *explains* stuff to you. If you could look at some Infographics and understand everything, then you wouldn't need professors at all. There's a lot to be said for self-study, but it can not and will not replace classrooms. Lecture style teaching has been around for thousands of years, not just because we didn't have computers, but because it works. In fact, the closer to that we can get with internet classes, the higher the quality will be (f.e. real-time many to many HD video conferencing between all the students and the professor at the same time would allow people to ask questions and allow everyone the benefit of the answers just like a real classroom). The Internet maybe new fangled, but we have had mail-order "correspondence" courses for a long time.

    Anyway around it, you can't not put in the work and expect to get the benefit.

    1. Re:Uhm no by blubadger · · Score: 1

      Yada yada yada. Did I ask for advice on how to learn? Please, if you don't agree with the premise of the question, just don't reply. (This could have been addressed to a number of posts, I picked yours at random.)

  53. Udacity will soon put up an physics class by wahgnube · · Score: 1

    Udacity has now expanded its courses to include a new introductory physics class. In this class, you get to travel around Europe virtually and learn the basics of physics on location by answering some of the discipline's major questions from over the last 2000 years.

    It looks like a lot of fun, and do also check out the MIT Tech TV videos mentioned on the page I've linked above. They are a fun way to learn physics too.

    1. Re:Udacity will soon put up an physics class by blubadger · · Score: 1

      Udacity looks cool. To you and others, thanks for the tip.

  54. Re:take it from a Nobel laureate; SECONDED! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have purchased two copies; Dover has a LOT of good stuff, Science, Math, Art, Philosophy and more! Also (for math and physics) try looking at Roger Penrose's "The Road to Reality" http://www.amazon.com/The-Road-Reality-Complete-Universe/dp/067945443; I was amazed at how much I DID understand! Additionally do consider Ash and Gross "Fearless Symmetry" http://www.amazon.com/Fearless-Symmetry-Exposing-Patterns-Numbers/dp/0691124922

    This is rather away from your query but it may be of interest to some slashdotters: for obscure -often "old fashioned"- hands on 'Maker' tech try Lindsay Technical Publications http://www.lindsaybks.com/

  55. Physics, classical mechanics and electricity by rapidmax · · Score: 1

    Even though I've finished university of applied science about ten years ago I stumbled upon the MIT classical mechanics lectures by Walter Levin and couldn't resist to work through the whole course. It's excellent. The same goes for electricity and magnetism lectures.

    1. Re:Physics, classical mechanics and electricity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about "Mechanical Universe" and its progeny. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mechanical_Universe

  56. Teach me how to hack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This reminds me of the folks that would pop in the IRC channels and say something like, "can you teach me how to hack?"

  57. Hacking alien computer systems by Gavin+Scott · · Score: 1

    Most inspiring course that I've seen:

    http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/biology/7-012-introduction-to-biology-fall-2004/

    Biology turns out to be way cooler than all this computer stuff. The cells in your body are actually stochastic digital computers which were not designed by a human intelligence, and so we're basically hacking alien computers to figure out how life works, and these computers are WAY more complicated and powerful than anything you've ever experienced.

    If you're a young tech geek, then this might just inspire a career-path change.

    The MIT OCW course linked here has both audio and video lectures (I first listened to the audio version and was able to get most of it without needing the video content). Don't get too bogged down in the chemistry at the beginning. And know that what we know has increased dramatically from the time of this 2004 snapshot.

    It's getting a bit long in the tooth now (there's an updated 701SC in their simplistic "Scholar" series, but I find it just too light and fluffy without most of the really inspiring stuff). Hopefully they will release the full 7.012 from fall 2011 at some point.

    G.

  58. Virtlab by dbarkley · · Score: 1

    Virtlab.com offers a chemistry laboratory manual targeted to a simulated web-based laboratory written in Flash. I'm biased because I helped develop it but my authors and I are quite proud of it. The exercises are intended to help students with the quantitative aspects of chemistry and are specifically designed to help spark intuition.

  59. Re: Animations vs dialog/words/drawings by blubadger · · Score: 1

    Good points. Thanks for the TED link.

  60. Gaps in science (or any other field) education by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I recommend the Teaching Co's courses, either on DVD or on CD's. Go to www.thegreatcourses.com. I've gone through many of their history courses, one of their geology courses and am now working my way through astronomy. They also have math and chemistry titles. -walt