My last post, I'm not kidding.
From Mr. Whitworth:
What we do not have are:
1) Specifications of various curriculums, which we could attempt to satisfy
> Take one state at a time. A group of interested
people in that state
will get together to develop against their own state standards
(which move).
Other states can use that to help them develop their own curriculum so they
don't have to start from scratch.
2) people willing and able to write the necessary material
> I'm working on finding interested grad
students in my state. I hope to
start this July. If I were to get my tush in gear,
I would have a few
chapters of a curriculum finished in order to have something to present and
sell to professors.
3) A mechanism to really advertise our books, and compete in the marketplace
with established commercial book vendors
> If you build it they will come? I really think
that as texts and
curriculum go up and schools (k-12) are more and more financially
squeezed,
they will HAVE to at least consider freely available, well designed
curriculum.
Added by Kathy:
4) The capitalist mentality that whatever I design must be made into money
> That is why wikibooks, wikipedia, wikimedia is the
avenue. They are
trying to change the old mindset that there is more to information
sharing
than selling it. Knowledge should be free.
-kathy
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Whitworth [mailto:wknight8111@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 11:22 AM
To: textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] [Foundation-l] Rethinking brands
When it comes to writing books for a standardized curriculum, it's more
difficult. Wikibooks just doesnt have the man power to write a new book
tailor-made for each different jurisdiction. We've been brainstorming ideas
to find a way to write a single book, and taking information piece-wise to
create a book for a particular curriculum. What we do not have are:
1) Specifications of various curriculums, which we could attempt to satisfy
2) people willing and able to write the necessary material
3) A mechanism to really advertise our books, and compete in the marketplace
with established commercial book vendors
This isn't to say that the situation is hopeless, because we are making
progress every day. However, there is alot of work left to be done before we
can market wikibooks as being a viable alternative to traditional commercial
printed textbooks.
With US teachers going on vacation for the summer, perhaps we would be able
to attract some of them to help author new material? I don't know how we
would attract them, however.
--Andrew Whitworth
From: Sanford Forte <siforte(a)ix.netcom.com>
Reply-To: Wikimedia textbook discussion
<textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
To: Wikimedia textbook discussion <textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] [Foundation-l] Rethinking brands
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 11:06:42 -0700
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
_________________________________________________________________
PC Magazines 2007 editors choice for best Web mailaward-winning Windows
Live Hotmail.
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_mig…
n_HM_mini_pcmag_0507