Teachers Write an Open Textbook In a Weekend Hackathon
linjaaho writes "A group of Finnish mathematics researchers, teachers and students write an upper secondary mathematics textbook in a three-day booksprint. The event started on Friday 28th September at 9:00 (GMT+3) and the book will be (hopefully) ready on Sunday evening. The book is written in Finnish. The result — LaTeX source code and the PDF — is published with open CC-BY-license. As far as the authors know, this is the first time a course textbook is written in three-day hackathon. The hackathon approach has been used earlier mainly for coding open source software and writing manuals for open source software. The progress can be followed by visiting the repository at GitHub or the project Facebook page."
Finnish it... Get it? Finnish... it?
The US could learn a lot from the Finnish approach to education...
Palm trees and 8
The main thing which distinguishes a paedagogical material from bad paedagogical material is care.
There are lots of people who know lots of stuff. Almost all these people are able to quickly write down some information relating to this stuff quickly if you give them vague outlines.
But teaching is an interactive process, and finding out what teaching material works means spending time with students and developing your material based on that experience.
And then updating it regularly to reflect feedback.
I am a mathematics graduate and I could knock together an introduction to lots of things in a weekend. Hell, when chatting with intelligent researchers in other disciplines, I have done "introduction to blah" on-the-spot lectures *literally* on the back of a napkin in canteens or whatever. I really don't think I managed to convey enough to give the audience a solid foundation, and it certainly wouldn't have worked at a secondary school level where I don't know that I'm talking to exceptionally bright people.
Hackathon? Booksprint?
When did mundane events and tasks become faddish?
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
> The book is written in Finnish.
When did they finnish it?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Richard Feynman is probably the most famous person to complain about textbooks, but he wasn't complaining about closed source, he was complaining because they weren't any good.
So the question remains, is this textbook any good?
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Why is this considered a hackathon? Seems like the term "hack" is a little too cliche...kind of like "epic", "epic fail", etc. They wrote a textbook, wow. I wonder how many errors are in it and how biased it is. Prolly could use a little peer review but 3 days to fill a couple hundred pages...I mean "three days to hack some paper and not epic fail is swell."
If you are not going to do everything that a commercial publisher and their authors would do to ensure the quality of the work, please don't tell the world about it. Just put the work up for people to fix, and let them announce it when they're satisfied with it.
Bruce Perens.
It's going to end up being a steaming pile of crap, designed by a committee, rushed to finish. Why such a hurry? In my experience, great textbooks are labor of love of experts in the field with talent in writing.
Here's a English-language video from Vesa Linja-aho, the submitter and the main boss guy in this project: http://youtu.be/ThbUiky4AKA
Maybe not. But...:
A teacher friend recently pointed out this quality of the work in textbooks to me. It seems like quality isn't what makes it hard to compete--rather, it's the same sort of things that made it hard for opensource software to compete with Microsoft et al.
-rozzin.
Please note that it's in Github, and continuing to be updated. To put it another way: they wrote the first draft in three days.
And actually, being open does make things better and more useful. Why did the IBM PC succeed where so many others failed? Sure, part of it was that it had IBM's backing... but a large part was that it was much less closed and proprietary than alternatives: IBM built it from commonly-available parts, and published the specs. That allowed clone manufacturers to get started. They used a knock-off of a well-known, 'generic' OS (CPM) instead of a custom-made, proprietary one... which made it possible for a lot of software that started on CPM to be easily ported over. They didn't go around forcing people to get licenses to write software for their system either.
Prior to the late 20th century, most of the world operated in an 'open' fashion for almost everything. A musician who heard a good tune would freely copy it and base their song on it -- that's part of how we got such classics as "The Star-Spangled Banner" and "Amazing Grace". In the world of literature, openness gave us the tales of King Arthur and Robin Hood, the Greek myths, the Iliad and Odyssey. Nosferatu - widely recognized as one of the greatest horror films ever made - was almost destroyed by a copyright dispute.
Scientists and engineers have freely built on each other's discoveries and inventions for centuries. Indeed, patents were created in order to spread this - so inventors would publish how their devices worked, in order that other inventors could learn from them.
Open systems are universally more useful than closed systems, all else being equal -- because you're allowed to do more things with them.