[Textbook-l] Introduction - California Open Source Textbook Project

[Sanford Forte]

> Sanford Forte wrote:
> > The framework is absolutely necessary to follow, as a general guide to
> > content decisions, and approach.
>
> Right.  If you check the archives, we were discussing the frameworks
> just before you joined the list, and I gave links to frameworks of
> different states.  Presumably, we should look at the frameworks of
> multiple states and try to meet several of them at once, when
> possible.
----------
Good idea.


> > Another problem (one I have no control over at the moment), is that the
> > intention of COSTP is to have this all result in printed textbooks. The
> > minute one starts talking about replacing the printed book with
cD-ROM's,
> > web-based environments, etc., eyes begin to gloss over. It costs money
to
> > produce a book.
>
> Absolutely.  We'll take as the primary focus of what we're doing, the
> organizing principle of this particular pilot project to be the
> production of content that's usable in paper format.
---------
Great.

> > At the very least, a pilot that
> > passed muster in terms of meeting the framework standards would prove
that
> > this can be done, and spur legislation (if not in California, certainly
> > elsewhere)
>
> Isn't it true that legislation isn't really necessary in order for
> GNU-free texts to compete directly with proprietary texts?  I mean, if
> we can produce a product that meets the CA standards, and print it for
> say 2/3s the cost of the competitors, then for their own reasons,
> various districts will be inclined to buy ours rather than the
> proprietary stuff?  What legislation is really needed, then?
---------
California (and maybe some other states) published its own K-12 materials
into the 50's. The book were terrible because they were created by a few
curriculum writers on the state dole. When the baby boom hit, commercial
publishers saw an opening, and asked the state for permission to publish
*for* the state. Thus, the California Legislature legislated the State out
of the textbook production business.

It's really not a big deal to create new legislation authorizing the state
to do this itself. It will take political will, and the latter would be
emboldened by a project that proved it possible to radically reduce cost. At
the very least, if the open source model works, even if the state decided
not to act, open source could be presented as an option. This would create a
powerful opening for open source here, and other states, as well.


> > I would suggest reading the project plan - it's not that long - and then
> > going from there. I've spent a lot of time in the state sytem lobbying
this
> > project. In another life, I worked with several major textbook
publishers,
> > so I have some insight into how they work, and how the system works.
>
> Can you fill us in more on what, exactly, you've been lobbying for?
----------
I've been lobbying for three things:

1) Acceptance of the open source model as a viable alternative for K-12
textbook production.

2) Having the legislature approve production of texbooks (from open source
content) by the state.
(this would require the state to set up a system that 'sourced' open source,
and filtered the material to meet frameworks standards; thus, content from
individuals, web sites, out-of-print-authors, and teachers could contribute
to 'content bins' for organization, and publishing by the state. The initial
publishing efforts would also require the state to pony up the cash  - to
itself - to physically publish the books. There's detail in the plan
summary).

> > I would start by taking a look at the math frameworks
> > http://www.cde.ca.gov/cdepress/math.pdf
>
> Math is a little harder for us than some other things, just because of
> the constraints of the web and our wiki software.  We're best with
> text, like a history book.  There should also be a lot of re-usability
> for our existing wikipedia content.
>
> On the other hand, we probably have a higher 'brain power' in areas
> of sciene and math and computers, just because of the sort of people
> who we have working on the project for the most part.
---------
Any curricula would work. If Wikipedia finishes a project in American
History, fine. The idea is to show that it can be done, that open source can
work as effectively as commercial publishers (if not better) in this domain.

> > Absolutely; if you guys can pull that off, millions, maybe billions of
other
> > people would be forever in your debt.(I'm not exaggerating this #, as
there
> > is a great need for K-12 books/content  written in English for places
like
> > China, India, etc.).
>
> Hey, that's what we're all about: World Domination.  Fast.  :-)
----------
Do you have a supply of wikipedia flags? Or, perhaps a chapter in the World
History text about the 'next Guttenberg revolution'

Sanford

> --Jimbo
> _______________________________________________
> Textbook-l mailing list
> Textbook-l at wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l