Against 3x Speed

I have listened, and it's amazing, but I'm not sure they are understanding more than I would if I were scanning the page for the navigation options. (I haven't heard someone listening to a long-form text for understanding.)

When I first went back to school for tech stuff (ultimately a master's in EE), my instructor for the entire calculus sequence -- and later on for linear algebra -- struck what I found to be the ideal balance. Something like:

0. Homework is never collected or graded, but don't be fooled into thinking it's not required -- that is, if you don't do the homework, you are extremely unlikely to pass the exams/course. Essentially, this is not knowledge we were learning -- it is skills that require practice. Homework is an opportunity to practice and hone skills.

1. Each lecture introduces a concept and/or technique, and works through a few demonstrative problems to show what it means or how it is done. Homework is assigned from textbook problems that involve the same techniques with progressive difficulty or complexity. The textbook used that pattern where odd-numbered problems included solutions, and assignments usually involved the ones with solutions.

2. The last one-quarter to one-third of every class period was dedicated to review and questions about the homework assigned for the previous class. Because we had the correct solutions in the text, we knew what to ask about (i.e. the ones we couldn't get to come out right). This particular instructor was fantastic at thinking on his feet and working problems on the fly, correctly and without preparation, so usually he'd just work the problem on the board and we could stop him to ask for a more detailed explanation if necessary.

Granted, this model didn't work as well for his linear algebra class. Since many of those problems involve long slogs through tedious and error-prone matrix operations before/while you were really dealing with the concept or technique being introduced, he couldn't as easily demo entire solutions during the question/review periods. I suppose that difficulty would apply to several other higher-math topics, as well, but even so, later in my education I often found myself wishing this or that professor would follow the pattern of my humble calculus teacher.

Secondary school is one thing but in university, lectures aren't there to build your understanding for you. They're there for one of 3 reasons: 1) auditory learning of the same material, 2) to give you additional material not present in reading, or 3) to give a different perspective of the same material. Lectures are also just not long enough to do the work for you - building your understanding is your own responsibility.

I'm also skeptical about this type of complaint on textbooks. I'm not going to say all textbooks are great but this idea that a textbook is a direct impediment or flawed tool for active learning has had no bearing in reality for me personally. Poor textbooks are poor tools. Good textbooks are good tools (I personally don't find there to be a lack of good textbooks). In the subject I majored in at university, mathematics, I can't imagine any amount of teacher input can take the place of problem sets and time spent poring over a textbook struggling to grok something.

I agree that active learning is a necessary part of a successful education. However, almost all the specific targets of this article to be off the mark. In my experience, lectures and textbooks are not what keeps active learning from taking place, in fact they are what necessitates active learning.

I agree with the stated point, however using the university education style as a target frustrates me, because the critique of Mike this article gives is exactly the kind of objection I might have to to claiming that textbooks and lectures are insufficient for learning. Engage, don't just consume!

On more of a quibble than critique, I think 3x playback is poor as the titular metaphor for shallow learning. Listening to an audio book at ordinary speed I find to be far too fast to allow any kind of useful contemplation, and too slow to retain my interest (possibly due to my ADHD, perhaps others find this easier). If I need to think about something, I pause it. Not all information has equal utility, nor do all information streams have equal density. Depending on the narration and content of an audio book I find listening at a higher rate to often be ideal for trialing information for greater analysis. For something else, such as a video feed of a sports game, real time is often too fast for me to even consume all the information I would like (although when watching a sports game I may be more interested in the experience than tactics or particulars of a play).

Every class I have ever taught required a syllabus and text/reading assignments to be available--generally the entire semester is laid out at the first class.

> I could see why a beginner would need a slower pace with more "filler" explanation and background information.

But that's what links are for - allowing you to deduplicate information by merely providing a link to some other content instead of replicating it entirely.

Moreover, you don't know each beginner's background or desired pace. "Fixing" a certain set of information into the video is worse than providing the appropriate links that allow the beginner to read exactly what they're unfamiliar with, and videos hard-code the pace in a way that written material is not - they're the opposite of what a beginner needs.

> Videos are a nice format for this, because they allow one to just sit back like we did at school and take in the information.

The article specifically addresses this - passive consumption (which better describes videos than reading) is scientifically shown to be less effective for learning than active consumption:

> One study[1] found that active learning makes students think they’re learning less even when they’re actually learning more. That’s one reason why, even though they’re less effective, lectures have persisted for so long.

> Other domains are better suited to videos.

The parent comment ("It is more that these days everything is a video.") wasn't taking any issue with the fact that some things are represented as videos, but that everything is. Of course most filmmaking education (modulo some stuff like maybe an introduction to optics) is best done by video - but nobody is complaining about that.

Also, in terms of education, these subjects, while they exist, are a minority. The majority of stuff you learn in school is better done in a non-video format. Not a text format - diagrams and interactive simulation are incredibly valuable for understanding. But, specifically, video is almost exactly the opposite of a good format for learning most things.

[1] https://www.pnas.org/content/116/39/19251