"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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
_______________________________________________
Textbook-l mailing list
Textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
_______________________________________________
Textbook-l mailing list
Textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
_______________________________________________
Textbook-l mailing list
Textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
_______________________________________________
Textbook-l mailing list
Textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
_______________________________________________
Textbook-l mailing list
Textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
_______________________________________________
Textbook-l mailing list
Textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l