Let's get Salman Khan (khanacademy.org) on the TED stage
alexisohanian.com
alexisohanian.com
Better wording might be "I think his work is worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize", to avoid the impression of sarcasm ?
Apparently, for some strange reason, someone nominated Adolf Hitler, too. Now I learned at least something today.
[1] http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/shortfacts.html
Al Gore and Barrack Obama received their prizes for "not being George Bush". That is about it. The Nobel Peace Prize is useless bullshit (as is the Nobel Prize in Literature).
Edit: sorry if that sounded crabby. I haven't eaten lunch yet.
TED started off great but seems like it has gotten a little weird over the last few years. Not sure how to explain it - maybe it's because most of the talks feel like mental masturbation at this point - they make people feel good, but don't result in action. Or it could be the liberal slant (the subtext of some of the talks seems to be "this is why we deserve more government funding").
From listening to a few of Sal's videos on finance, he seems to be more of a free market capitalist guy which may not mesh well with that crowd. A lot of this is speculation though, so I could be wrong.
Am I crazy, or did he do a talk that was subsequently removed?
Stupendous choice Alexis.
I think you mean gouge.
Looks like they're somewhere between a 6 and a B gauge. Or up to 4, if you're European.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauge_(bore_diameter)#Conversio...
Good online instruction presents very different challenges not found with traditional classroom teaching or "professor-as-focus" videos. It's an instructional medium unique to itself, and still finding its legs.
I completely disagree with course content that's been created using poor-quality audio and "visuals" (not video). "Good enough" is not only disrespectful to the student but completely unnecessary given the quality and cost of great content production tools available the past four years.
Higher-quality means more post production work, however, but it's worth it because "when it's done right, it will always be done right."
Four rules have emerged so far in this new medium: 1) The material must take center stage, not the presenter, 2) students prefer granularity of subject matter in short vignettes, 3) done well is always done well, promoting repeatable instructional excellence, 4) high-quality audio/visual production tools are a must.
A lot of us, not just Sal, employ these principals in our work. But overall, it needs to bake a little more before being presented at TED or before the MacArthur Foundation.
The educational paradigm is shifting, and indeed being disrupted, but not in the way most people think.
Evidently a LOT of people disagree with you.
Mr. Khan seems to have an MVP (minimum viable product). Just possibly this is one of those cases where if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
This is a new instructional medium, with new rules and huge opportunities. My point: We can do a lot better.
I'm gonna stand over here and wait for some of the fanboy nonsense to die down. Sal's been around for a while and a LOT of people are new to him.
Let him do what he does best, and leave TED out of it.
Khan could indeed use fancier tools to produce his short videos, but what really makes them valuable is the content. I don't see that the current presentation style detracts from the teaching value one bit.
The underlying assumption then was that "modern students" needed to be "entertained" or somehow spoken to "in their own language" whatever that is. Your points, especially "high quality audio/visual production tools are a must", echoes that sentiment to me.
All in all that seems to me more disrespectful to students than letting the subject matter speak for itself, and assuming that young students are as capable as we are of seeing the magic in geometry, or calculus, if it is correctly and clearly explained.
Edited: Also, producing 1600 videos puts him rather apart from others in the field, even those producing awesome graphics.
The problem with production in the 80's and 90's was time and cost. High cost and long production time guaranteed the problems you point out.
But the cost of high-quality production today is so low as to be non-existent. Production time is still a factor -- as it is in software development.
Sal chose quantity over visual quality and hit the long ball. But c'mon, a Blue Snowball USB microphone is only $99 and produces crystal-clear audio.
I can watch it or if I don't like it, I can not watch it and it I have not lost a single thing other than a moment of my time.
In terms of quality I mean, what do you want? While watching and listening I can clearly understand what he has written and said and that's all that matters.
It seems many disagree with you and for that I'm glad, since it shows me that there at least some people on this planet that will value the substance of the message over how appealing it is presented.
I think part of his magic, is that he didn't wait to polish his presentations to conform to the powerpoint school of banality. He got the content out in an honest me-to-you no-bs way that students can relate to - he seems authentic in a way most teachers are not, and he seems to put no effort into making him self look good, as there is no faculty to impress.
MIT OCW is fantastic content and well presented, but the standards of communication are lower not higher than Sals, imo.