School

On the virtues of brevity

I understand that textbooks were never meant to be light reading in any sense of the word. Anyone who openly states that textbooks are light reading are either MENSA candidates or mentally ill. I also understand that presenting something as advanced as engineering subjects is a difficult proposition and editing them to be clear and concise at the same time sounds contradictory. Having stated the prior givens, I do expect them to be coherent in their organization. I expect them not to meander around the subject, and waste my time in getting to the point. Take the textbook for the class I’m currently taking as an example. On the section I’m currently on, it takes six pages before the final derivation. The scary part is that there are missing portions in the derivation. It’s almost quantum-like. There’s no middle point. In one step, an equation will transform to an almost completely different equation without any semblance of relationship between the two. They basically left off a major portion of the steps to the final derivation, making the assumption that you’d intuitively know. Well I don’t! That’s the reason why I’m taking the class.

I have read some very well written textbooks. They state only what is necessary. They never wander off too far outside the field of study unless there is relevance, and there are plans to revisit the subject at a later point in the book.

To all of you aspiring textbook authors out there. Do you parents proud (as proud as a parent can possibly get when they tell their friends that their offspring spends his/her time boring the next generation of eager young minds) and get to the point as quickly as possible. This way you induce the minumum amount of boredom in the pedagogical process.