OT, but... While working on One Laptop Per Child, there seemed potential to disrupt science education content. Science researchers who normally wouldn't prioritize contributing to education content, were being drawn in by the possibility of rapidly reaching millions instead of thousands of students. The "build it and they will come" of a massive new and empty app "store". Plus the context of non-commercial "change the world" Open Education Resources.

So that didn't happen. And more recently, maybe if VR/AR had taken off more sharply, there might have been a similar effect. But no.

So here in the future... I don't know how to quickly convey just what wretched dreck, err, how wonderfully better content could be. How about this: Kindergarten through undergrad, students are told the Sun is yellow, in textbooks and outreach. Then an infinitesimal few finally get an "oops, sorry, nope, our bad" from a graduate class on common misconceptions in astronomy education. Incoherent dreck, err, opportunity for wonderful improvement, doesn't begin to describe current content.

So my question is, does anyone know of vaguely similar potential for disruptive improvement in the quality of science education content?

Instructor performance art focuses on specific students, and limited outcome goals, under severe resource constraints. Science education research focuses on isolated deployable improvements. But "big interdisciplinary creative mashup of improvements, catalyzed by massive collaboration of research expertise"... isn't a thing, isn't something we're set up for, or incentivized to do.

But it's what I'm interested in. So, any thoughts?