No, it's not. An encyclopedia is a reference (as you can, indeed, ironically find out by checking the Wikipedia entry for "encyclopedia").
> Etymology isn't destiny [...]
exactly.
> [...] but I think most encyclopedias are still used as teaching resources.
Of course, learning how to use a reference properly and effectively can be a goal in didactics, especially when you're studying a particular subject. But the reference work is not, by itself, a teaching resource such as a textbook.
I don't understand what's so controversial about that. If I open a page about, say JIT compilation, I'm also immediately confronted with jargon. The fact that most people here would be familiar with that jargon doesn't mean that that page is of any use to someone who doesn't know what a compiler is. The same applies probably to hundreds of different subjects, be it biomedical, philosophical, etc.
> Etymology isn't destiny [...]
exactly.
> [...] but I think most encyclopedias are still used as teaching resources.
Of course, learning how to use a reference properly and effectively can be a goal in didactics, especially when you're studying a particular subject. But the reference work is not, by itself, a teaching resource such as a textbook.
I don't understand what's so controversial about that. If I open a page about, say JIT compilation, I'm also immediately confronted with jargon. The fact that most people here would be familiar with that jargon doesn't mean that that page is of any use to someone who doesn't know what a compiler is. The same applies probably to hundreds of different subjects, be it biomedical, philosophical, etc.