> > Well, once I learned to understand that it is not 'teaching' alone that is > the determinant of a student's success - it is the 'learning+teaching' > dyad. To 'work with' this dyad, I believe what I call 'prose + structural > graphics' (p+sg) is needed. (CS Peirce did a lot with dyads and triads in > general (and perhaps with this dyad in particular) - but all his work is > done in 'pure prose'; is thus rather difficult to understand and apply. I > believe that I was able to understand several of Peirce's insights after I > put 'p+sg' to work. >
Yes, I was thinking of CS Peirce just as I got to this passage, because I do associate his name with the need for structure graphics.
Dr. Susan Haack, a well know philosopher and writer on Pragmatism, came to our Linus Pauling House based think tank in Portland that time, and told us stories of Peirce and also Rorty (one of my mentors at Princeton).
She talked about how Peirce retreated at the end of his life, might have seemed misanthropic, no one to relate with much I think. Graphics were important.
I haven't had the luxury of studying a lot of Pierce as i specialized somewhat early in Vienna Circle stuff, which includes Wittgnstein, but also Jung and Freud.
I still plan to read more of his stuff (Pierce's, also Haack's), or get to stellar lectures thereon (I enjoy a good lectures and voluntarily attend them quite often).
What I do remember, in terms of structured graphics, is the Evelyn Wood Reading Dynamics course I took in Manila.
These were business-dressed people in a skyscraper in Makati (biz district, lots of high rises), me a high schooler but somewhat out of my element. But not, I fit right in.
This was useful stuff!
They strongly encouraged structured graphical note-taking techniques, also used when doing "a recall" -- what you always do after finishing some reading: do a written recall to help it become longer term in your thinking.
I don't say I always do this (anyway, one couldn't, as you'd have to do a recall of the recall as you wrote / read them).
The most hyped / advertised goal of the Evelyn Wood course was you'd be able to read at superhuman speeds.
It was more a training in how to take it in non-linearly, pages at once, then sort it out in the recall period.
Sounds naive but you could say that "flip through quickly" mode was only for fluff, and the more technical and challenging things got the slower you'd go. Back to reality. No superpowers today.
But even there, great advice, like: study the Figures ahead of time (like the graphs in a textbook), read the captions, ponder the diagrams.
That way, when you read, you don't have to break the flow of the narrative to study the picture then, as you've already studied it, so just flash on it and continue with your reading.
Yes, good thinking.
> > > I was exulting in how Cyberia now offers you > > private lessons from qualified teachers in the > > comfort of your own nook or cranny, no need > > to venture into the rough and tumble world and > > find some "classroom" in some far corner of > > some campus. The campus is on-line. > > > Indeed. I am trying to get this 'p+sg' into Cyberia - hopefully will be > able to do that soon. >
And / or you may be able to identity existing content that looks like sg going forward.
What I've discovered in my several decades of predicting the future is:
(a) I am often right but enough off in my imagining that at first I don't see that what I anticipated is already here
(b) things that materialize have a longer evolutionary period that seems clearer in retrospect, such that it looks like we've "always" been getting ready for X (they've been getting ready for computer languages since Leibniz).
(c) things spiral. You'll anticipate X but in X there are echoes of Y in the much farther off future, and Z and so on. The time tunnel is long and there's lots of repetition wherein nothing quite repeats (Heraclitus is right about his river, but that doesn't mean there's no repetitiveness). That spiral is both backwards (to the past) and forwards (to the future).
PS: in terms of schematic or structural graphics, I know you don't view Youtubes a lot as it's not easy where you're at. However I think you'd be pleasantly gratified how much in the way of structural graphics is already out there. Pierce must have felt the future too. So much of Khan Academy is just line drawings. Doodles. Like stuff on a blackboard, done in real time. That's a sweet spot with quite a big radius. I play in the same ballpark. Cave paintings. xkcd.com (primitive stick figure comics, and favorited by many into Python e.g. http://xkcd.com/556/ ).