From the webpage:
The DAoM library includes 11 inquiry-based books freely available for classroom use. These texts can be used as semester-long content for themed courses (e.g. geometry, music and dance, the infinite, games and puzzles), or individual chapters can be used as modules to experiment with inquiry-based learning and to help supplement typical topics with classroom tested, inquiry based approaches (e.g. rules for exponents, large numbers, proof). The topic index provides an overview of all our book chapters by topic.
From the about page:
Discovering the Art of Mathematics (DAoM), is an innovative approach to teaching mathematics to liberal arts and humanities students, that offers the following vision:
Mathematics for Liberal Arts students will be actively involved in authentic mathematical experiences that
- are both challenging and intellectually stimulating,
- provide meaningful cognitive and metacognitive gains, and,
- nurture healthy and informed perceptions of mathematics, mathematical ways of thinking, and the ongoing impact of mathematics not only on STEM fields but also on the liberal arts and humanities.
DAoM provides a wealth of resources for mathematics faculty to help realize this vision in their Mathematics for Liberal Arts (MLA) courses: a library of 11 inquiry-based learning guides, extensive teacher resources and many professional development opportunities. These tools enable faculty to transform their classrooms to be responsive to current research on learning (e.g. National Academy Press’s How People Learn) and the needs and interests of MLA students without enormous start-up costs or major restructuring.
All of these books are concerned with mathematics from a variety of perspectives but I didn’t see anything in How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Expanded Edition (2000) that suggested such techniques are limited to the teaching of mathematics.
Easy to envision teaching of CS or semantic technologies using the same methods.
What inquiries would you construct for the exploration of semantic diversity? Roles? Contexts? Or the lack of a solution to semantic diversity? What are its costs?
Thinking semantic integration could become a higher priority if the costs of semantic diversity or the savings of semantic integration could be demonstrated.
For example, most Americans nod along with public service energy conservation messages. Just like people do with semantic integration pitches.
But if it was demonstrated for a particular home that 1/8 of the energy for heat or cooling was being wasted and that $X investment would lower utility bills by $N, there would be a much different reaction.
There are broad numbers on the losses from semantic diversity but broad numbers are not “in our budget” line items. It’s time to develop strategies that can expose the hidden costs of semantic diversity. Perhaps inquiry-based learning could be that tool.
I first saw this in a tweet by Steven Strogatz.