It's a site that provides electronic textbooks for learning introductory and advanced computer programming. Rephactor is designed to give instructors incredible flexibility in how they present material, and it incorporates dynamic elements that provide a superior learning experience.
No. Rephactor provides all new material written from the ground up, designed to be delivered on the web. It has no relationship to existing textbooks. It's a better alternative.
In computer programming, you refactor your code to improve its design and make it a better product. Our approach to textbooks is a variation on that idea. Instructors should rephactor their course materials in favor of a superior (and less expensive) alternative.
Just register using the course code provided by your instructor. The course syllabus, tailored by your instructor, will guide you from there.
Student access is only $42 per course. Instructors can sign up for free.
First, no printing costs. Second, no traditional book publisher. Third, we're not greedy.
No. None. Nowhere. Never.
No, there are no apps to download. Rephactor is entirely online in pure HTML5, which lets you access it anywhere, at one convenient site.
Sure, just use a web browser. All Rephactor content is designed to work well with tablets.
A printed text is static. It's confined by page size and committed to a linear flow. It's out of date almost as soon as it's printed. It provides no dynamic content or interaction with the student. A well-designed e-textbook has none of these limitations. Learn more here.
Rephactor topics are carefully designed, written, and reviewed by people who know how to teach computing. We understand the challenges involved. Other material may be well-intentioned, but is often inconsistent in quality, incomplete in scope, and simply unhelpful.
Don't try. We vet instructor requests carefully. This is one of the few issues for which we have no sense of humor.
Actually, either is correct. And we think syllabi is cooler.
Why, yes. Yes,. Thank you for frequently asking.
We have no idea what you're talking about.