|
Posted by blmblm@myrealbox.com on 03/16/07 20:41
In article <prWdnZ5fUfQlt2fYRVnyjgA@bt.com>,
Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
> blmblm@myrealbox.com said:
>
> <snip>
>
> > I guess even if one has written the greatest book ever on a subject
> > there might still be a reason not to use it in a class one teaches,
>
> For example, it may be pitched at the wrong level.
Yes indeed, and I should have said so.
> I would not use "C
> Unleashed" as a text from which to teach C, for example. Readers of
> that book are supposed to know C already (to a reasonable level).
>
> > since by doing so one misses an opportunity to expose students to
> > multiple points of view.
>
> There's that, too.
>
> > But it (not using one's book) would seem
> > to argue a certain lack of confidence in one's work, no?
>
> I don't see it, actually.
>
> Here's our heroic author of "The Physics of Foo", in the first lecture
> of the term, discussing the reading list for the course:
>
> "As you will undoubtedly have noted, the seminal work in this field,
> 'The Physics of Foo', is missing from your reading list. This is partly
> because modesty prevents me from recommending a book I wrote myself,
> and partly because we can learn much by studying the mistakes that
> lesser authors have made."
>
> Of course, it would take a certain amount of chutzpah to carry this off
> convincingly... :-)
Indeed. I like it. So, the instructors who recommend their
own books are actually displaying less-than-maximal chutzpah ....
Or maybe it's simple greed, though I would think that only applies if
class sizes are large or one has a particularly favorable arrangement
with one's publisher.
I wonder whether there are well-known examples of people writing
textbooks and then *not* using them in courses for which they (the
books) would be suitable. <shrug>
--
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|