🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Bx576y.Myp@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> (Herman Rubin) writes:
>
> You misunderstand what can and cannot be done by computers, or even by
> textbooks without some access to teachers.

   No, Herman, _you_ misunderstand.  But in any case, why are we talking
about "without access"?  This is the Net, remember!

> At the university level, those who have already taught the course can 
> produce a reasonable textbook using two to three man-years of hard work.

   And how often have we seen the estimates of man-years per day that go
into reading NetNews?  2-3 man-years isn't that much.

> When it comes to presenting ideas, I see no evidence at this time that
> computers can do a better job than written material.

   So what?  I can present _lots_ of evidence that they hold the child's
attention better.  Let us suppose that we present the information even
half as well as a textbook -- and then think about presenting manageable
chunks while that material is being discussed on the Net...

   sci.physics is a marvelous resource (if you have a good kill file :^)
where serious answers to elementary questions happen all the time.  I'm
sure there's some way we could tap into that.

John Leslie <john@jlc.mv.com>