Thanks. It was definitely the board member guy (forgot name) who email the
list with the differences between wikibooks and wikiversity that pushed me
to move/develop under wikiversity. They they seemed to have changed their
mission statement to include everything I need (worksheets, multimedia,
curriculum tests, etc.):
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Elementary_Curriculum_and_Training
The guy even has a pedagogy template statement (giggle - note, that is a
teacher joke).
I was really surprised at wikiversity as they gave a nice "welcome and here
is a nicely formatted help guide to get you started" under my talk page when
I registered (harriska2, same as wikibooks). I'll still hang around
wikibooks as I'm partial and loyal - plus it's where I started this venture
that is likely to kill me.
I started a science kindergarten curriculum. I'll still script in what the
teacher will say but will end up giving a general summary for teachers that
don't like scripts. I'll also add videos (homemade and links to
http://avgeeks.com), pictures (cool bacteria), and sound clips of the songs
because sometimes I, myself, don't know them all. You know those
kindergarteners, they need motion and action. I hope to move forward this
summer with some volunteers from a nearby university but I'm not holding my
breath. No-pay doesn't seem to garner as much interest :(
-Kathy
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Horning [mailto:robert_horning@netzero.net]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 2:29 PM
To: Wikimedia textbook discussion
Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] [Foundation-l] Rethinking brands
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
I'm not sure where you got the idea that we can't put together a
curriculum
package for a K-3 instructional environment on Wikibooks. I am sorry that
you have felt that such a concept is something that is heavily discouraged
on Wikibooks, and this is precisely why I feel that a "textbook only"
philosophy is so heavily flawed... even if you try to stick with an
educational content basis to Wikibooks content.
The main issue I have about this heavy emphasis on textbooks is that it gets
rid of the concept that "Wikibooks is not paper". There are some very
interesting things that can be done using an electronic interface even on a
wiki that can be very productive and not necessarily look like a "textbook"
but can clearly be educationally oriented. Indeed, some very interesting
things along these lines have been going on with Wikiversity, which is where
most of the creative energy seems to have gone from Wikibooks.
Administrators and participants on Wikiversity don't seem to be so worried
about format standards and appearance so much as trying to provide
educational experiences.
Perhaps this is something that needs to be defined in terms of where the
distinction between these two project (Wikibooks and Wikiversity) ought to
be made. There were many individuals who objected to Wikiversity getting
"kicked off" of Wikibooks in the first place precisely because this would
set up an arbitrary distinction of content that was "traditional" and
"non-traditional" kinds of books. Wikibooks like "Aarvard the
Arrdvark"
also introduced some interesting ideas in terms of what can or should be
done for the K-3 audience, although what it mainly accomplished was the idea
that Wikibooks should be non-fiction only and not include fictional content.
This does make it difficult in terms of making a 1st grade reading primer
where there is a tradition of using fictional content as a methodology for
introducing language concepts.
I certainly would encourage the development of such a 1st grade reading
primer on Wikibooks, and I think it would be a very useful addition.
The main point is that the development emphasis would have to be on the
primer and reaching explicit goals for language introduction and not trying
to be creative with your writing. I would also have to say that for this
age group, a larger coordinated educational package including suggested
lesson plans, activities, informational resources (including recommended
Wikipedia articles for further reading) and worksheets is something that
perhaps should be used as well. The only reason I see for the distinction
of "no quizes" or other non-textbook material is mainly to give a mission to
Wikiversity instead. But to scatter a curriculum development package
between the two projects doesn't make any sense either.
I would hope that others would support experimentation on the development of
such a curriculum package on Wikibooks, and do keep in mind that if there is
resistance to such a project on Wikibooks, there are many on Wikiversity
that would be willing to see such content at least be found somewhere on a
Wikimedia sister project.
_______________________________________________
Textbook-l mailing list
Textbook-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l