- #176
- 3,469
- 1,263
WWGD said:You're agreeing with me. I stated a core us needed and should be kept. Beyond that, it is up for grabs as the material soon becomes outdated. Would you keep, e.g., books on Networking, Oop, A.I beyond the basic level for more than a few years? And I guess teaching quality may vary. I had several professors who had no office hours, graded no work, some times just came into class, wrote for an hour on the board and just walked out afterwards without a single exchange in the process. And I paid a high out-of-state tuition for sonething I could have taught myself. And, no, I don't believe schools should be training centers but the training and job- finding aspects should be considered too.
I am not agreeing with you due to what appears to be differing definitions of "basic level" in this discussion. In fact, I don't think "basic" is the correct way to describe the delineation between what is slowly-changing versus rapidly-changing. The better descriptor is "fundamental." Undergrads learn basic fundamentals and that is what their textbooks cover. Graduate students learn (in class) advanced fundamentals. It is still fundamental material and slowly-changing, but it certainly isn't basic.
So yes, I would say that, in general, textbooks still have a place now and will in the future. They won't necessarily be in the exact form they are in now, but their existence as compendia of fundamental technical knowledge on a subject that have been gathered by verified experts and organized/presented in a way that is (ostensibly) appropriate for teaching a specific audience will remain indispensable for the foreseeable future.