I would like to reframe this discussion, as follows: if we were from scratch trying to find the best way to explain a science, describe a history, or tell a story, would a volume filled with paragraph after paragraph of text be the best way to do it? The proliferation of alternatives - from plays to videos to in-person classes and labs - suggests otherwise. And if we assume these alternatives won't suddenly disappear, then we have to ask, what is it students are losing when they read fewer books? I know - the idea is that books allow people to work through complex ideas and lengthy sequences of thought - "in reading and analyzing and formulating our own interpretations." But so do many video games, discussion threads, and - yes - AI interactions. We're not just reading summaries of texts. So I think the author is being a bit disingenuous in depicting the alternative as the equivalent of CliffsNotes. And even with these alternatives, including AI, "judging for yourself what counts as relevant and making your own connections between ideas" remains relevant.
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
