"The SRA materials are wonderful, but not even one state education curriculum committee (most states have these) will pass them through peer review for serious consideration by districts as _required_ books."
I suspect that the reading, math, and spelling curriculum are somewhat dry and boring and need teacher imagination to "punch them up." What if curriculum were designed in such a way that it could be outlined with key words to ensure teachers could teaching "in their own way" but also switched to full script for teachers that want to use the script. Add in some more cartoons, images, video, and some funny lines or inquiry/Socratic methods to change it up.
The Reasoning and Writing program by SRA is most certainly more entertaining (at least the first 3 years) than the other curriculum.
BTW, your resume is very impressive.
-Kathy
-----Original Message----- From: Sanford Forte [mailto:siforte@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 11:59 AM To: Wikimedia textbook discussion Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] [Foundation-l] Rethinking brands
Kathy, At long week's end, we are all a bit muddled. :) That said, my point is that _any_ textbook written to a state curriculum standard would have the same open access for revision, by whomever wished to do so. The advantage is creating a book that strictly adheres to a state curriculum standard (pick a large state, like California, Texas, Florida, or New York) is that it will pass muster in that one state, and inspire similar projects by others who want to write for other states.
The SRA materials are wonderful, but not even one state education curriculum committee (most states have these) will pass them through peer review for serious consideration by districts as _required_ books.
Andrew's point is well-taken, but the assumption that Wikibooks would have to do different materials for every state is unfounded. All we need do is construct _one_ book that follows the standard, as a placeholder and proof of concept. Once that's done, there would be a definite viral effect in the market, because although the K-12 education community is massive, word travels fast.
Currently, one fo the weaknesses of Wikibooks in regard to K-12 textbook production is lack of a seamless way to get all WYSIWYG to print, and garnering a focus on one project, to prove it can be done.
In fact, _most_ of the hard work in curriculum construction has been done by the state's curriculum standards committees. Go to my website www.opensourcetext.org and link to the California State standards, just to get an idea about how comprehensive those standards are. byw, I have migrated the purpose of COSTP to one where I am helping to spread the word about the necessary strategic and tactical actions that are necessary to get a truly open and well-distributed K-12 textbook databank accomplished. We're all working toward the same goal[
Cheers, Sanford
*************************************** Sanford Forte, Director California Open Source Texbook Project Palo Alto, CA sforte@opensourcetext.org 650-321-9152 (Office) 650-888-0077 (Mobile)
On May 11, 2007, at 11:24 AM, KH wrote:
Sorry Sanford, I think too much coffee has muddled my brain. I'm not sure what you mean but I'm very, very interested in getting your point.
-Kathy
-----Original Message----- From: Sanford Forte [mailto:siforte@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 11:21 AM To: Wikimedia textbook discussion Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] [Foundation-l] Rethinking brands
Hi, Kathy,
The irony here is that materials that are created in a way that meshes with already-approved state curriculum frameworks are _also_ available to "a teacher, parent, school, district, or state can take it, leave it, or adapt it for their needs".
Cheers, Sanford
Sanford Forte, Director California Open Source Texbook Project Palo Alto, CA sforte@opensourcetext.org 650-321-9152 (Office) 650-888-0077 (Mobile)
On May 11, 2007, at 11:16 AM, KH wrote:
Although I agree with you, Sanford, with wikibooks, a teacher, parent, school, district, or state can take it, leave it, or adapt it for their needs.
I'm looking for open curriculum or anything like that out on the web and there really isn't anything right now. The South African stuff is a structure but there isn't anything there for a teacher to use, let alone adapt.
-kathy
-----Original Message----- From: Sanford Forte [mailto:siforte@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 11:07 AM To: Wikimedia textbook discussion Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] [Foundation-l] Rethinking brands
The essential challenge is to get end product into the K-12 education channel, in a way that 1) meshes with the requirements set by state education departments to strictly adhere to curriculum frameworks; 2) devise effective means to inform the established K-12 education community that #1 has been completed (on a subject by subject basis); and, 3) establish a means to distribution of materials *in print* that is easy to access.
Content is decidedly _not_ the problem. The real problems are logistics and effective project management toward a goal of completing the above,
Cheers, Sanford
Sanford Forte, Director California Open Source Texbook Project Palo Alto, CA sforte@opensourcetext.org 650-321-9152 (Office) 650-888-0077 (Mobile)
On May 11, 2007, at 10:28 AM, KH wrote:
I was under the impression that wikibooks would also include textbooks for k-12. Normally, k-3 don't have traditional texts because many are still learning to read. Later, they read to learn. So much of the "textbook" is really worksheets, pictures, and planned lectures and activities. Actually, a better word to use for k-3 is curriculum, not textbooks. But I've read we are not supposed to do curriculum.
Soooo, I'm not sure what wikibooks really is. Here is where I got my info:
http://www.lessig.org/blog/archives/003069.shtml
Although dated 8/05, it seems Mr. Wales had a definite vision:
"The second thing that will be free is a complete curriculum (in all languages) from Kindergarten through the University level. There are several projects underway to make this a reality, including our own Wikibooks project, but of course this is a much bigger job than the encyclopedia, and it will take much longer."
Curriculum, by definition, is a package. It can include textbooks but certain goes beyond that to worksheets, teacher planning, activities, etc. I would love to redo the SRA Direct Instruction curriculum in wikibooks so that parents AND teachers have an option for scientificially based curriculum. But according to new definitions, I'm not sure wikibooks is an appropriate place. Under the old definition from the website listed above, it is.
-Kathy
-----Original Message----- Florence Devouard wrote:
I, for one, think it is great to work on better defining the mission of Wikibooks. I have one question though, do you know if the definition worked upon is generally shared with other wikibooks people ? Are they other wikibooks that have worked on such a definition, and where the outcome differs widely from yours ?
ant
At last count 18 people supported it and 7 people objected to it. As others have already said, some disagree on limiting English Wikibooks to just textbooks, how much emphases on textbooks be be given, whether or not it should be a policy or guideline and some have concerns on the clarity of the proposal.
There is quite a difference from English Wikibooks' current version and the German version. Google's German to English translation of the German Wikibooks version: http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F% 2Fde.wikibooks.org%2Fwiki %2FHilfe%3AWas_Wikibooks_ist&langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8
There have been previous proposals on English Wikibooks to redefine the current policy as well, before they were merged together: http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php? title=Wikibooks:What_is_Wikibooks/Unstab le&oldid=600961 http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php? title=Wikibooks:What_is_Wikibooks/Unstab le&oldid=665481 http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php? title=Wikibooks:What_is_Wikibooks/Unstab le&oldid=665488
that AFAIK, were abandoned before ever getting to the point of seeking input from the community to accept or reject them.
--darklama
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
_______________________________________________ Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l