Slashdot Mirror


Open Source Text-Books in California?

ebusinessmedia1 asks: "The California Open Source Textbook Project (COSTP) was created a few years ago in an attempt to help California's educational bureaucracy understand the value of open-sourced, K-12 textbook development, and we are an official collaborator with Creative Commons. COSTP could, within 6-8 years, save California up to $400M+ per year in K-12 textbook costs. (in addition to 100's-of-millions more saved in other states). We're looking for further ideas on how we might push this forward, promote it through something like the Connexions Project http://cnx.rice.edu/ at Rice University, work with enlightened for-profits on an open-source K-12 textbook model, get a test piloted, or somehow get the project bumped up a notch, funded, etc. Ideas anyone?"

"Our project has been lobbied/promoted to every level of government and education in California, from the Governor's office, and the legislature, on down. I hear 'this is a great idea' from many people in government, but not a single government agency or legislator (who agree the project has legs) - not even the California Teacher's Assn. - wants to promote it as an initiative in the legislature.

Nobody wants to upset the status quo, where commercial publishers - in a virtual oligopoly - create costly textbook products that have risen at three times the rate of inflation since 1992. It's not unusual for K-12 books to cost 2-3 times what books with similar content would cost in a trade (regular) bookstore."

11 of 32 comments (clear)

  1. Publishing companies by Alomex · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It won't work. There are already cheaper alternatives out there which are not used thanks to the massive marketing efforts (some might call them bribes) from the publishing companies to have teachers adopt the latest, most expensive textbook out (as if elementary mathematics or chemistry were changing from year to year).

  2. The problem with open source texts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Take a look at Everything2 or Wikipedia for examples of what is wrong with open source reference materials.

    Basically, the only information that gets entered is entered by interested parties. Therefore a topic like the Open Source movement get tons of information (both good and bad) and other things like photosynthesis get very little written about it.

    In reference to the point that texts are rising at 3x the rate of inflation, does that take into account the increase in expenses of the publisher? There are many people involved in making a text, from the author to editors to the unions that run the mills and presses. Just because the price of something is rising faster than inflation does not automatically suggest that there is a problem. It could also suggest an improvement in the quality of the final product.

    1. Re:The problem with open source texts by shaitand · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except there is no equivelnet rise in other books. Except perhaps technical manuals.

    2. Re:The problem with open source texts by ancientreader · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As a teacher, I can state that, at least in my corner of academia, there is no significant increase in quality of texts. The most expensive texts are not larger, and do not contain any more information, intuition, learning aids, or other educational value than they had before. The only big change is that the formatting of the books is a lot prettier than it was years ago.

      As an example, I currently teach a class using the 11th edition of a textbook, which costs around $130. When I took this same class some many years ago [I won't say how long ago :)], the book was in its 2nd edition, and cost around $40. The 11th edition has 3 more chapters than the 2nd, and the 20 other chapters haven't changed much in all those years.

      Friends of mine who are textbook coauthors attest to how publishers hound them to crank out a new edition every 2-3 years, regardless of the rate of change of the subject matter covered. Publishers make $0 in the used book market. They're just now waking up to the prospect of e-textbooks; surprisingly, students as a group are the bigger barrier to e-texts than publishers, for various reasons.

      More generally, there's a huge, thriving open-source-like environment in education, at least at the college level. We experiment with stuff in classrooms, and openly share 'best practices' and related tools within our community. Texts are a logical extension of this, but we should expect publishers to fight them tooth and nail, in the same spirit as Microsoft et al. fight open-source software.

  3. Authors don't get squat. by spumoni_fettuccini · · Score: 2, Informative

    It may work if there is the proper âoepushâ. My wifeâ(TM)s grandfather wrote college textbooks and childrenâ(TM)s books for a living and he made squat. Itâ(TM)s not the author who makes any money it is the publishers and the schools that see the majority of the profit. Also some of the âoeapprovedâ books chosen by the state areâ¦lacking in most information. I graduated from a California high school in â(TM)89, when I had a conversation with my wifeâ(TM)s sister about world war II history and I had to give a background on Pearl Harbor, as she had only a paragraph on it when she was taking US history. What really chapped my hide was she never heard of the USS Arizona. IMHO this is tragic. Any History profs/teachers that can add more info one way or the other please reply.

    --
    -- Some days you're the dog; some days you're the hydrant.
    1. Re:Authors don't get squat. by ObviousGuy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The USS Arizona is only one of the ships that were sunk at Pearl Harbor. That there is now a tourist attraction above it does little for it as an historical ship.

      Now if your sister in law didn't know the significance of Pearl Harbor in regards to America entering WWII, then a case could be made against the educational system. Not knowing about one ship in the attack isn't that big a deal.

      --
      I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    2. Re:Authors don't get squat. by spumoni_fettuccini · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sorry... My point was _she didn't even know about the U.S.S. Arizona, let alone other ships and reasons for the Japanese and U.S. getting embroiled in the war. The U.S.S Arizona is just the most remembered of the ships lost due to the monument. I also forgot to mention she graduated HS in 1999.

      --
      -- Some days you're the dog; some days you're the hydrant.
    3. Re:Authors don't get squat. by shaitand · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Perhaps, but I can give you a good example. I've yet to hear of a Grade School US History class that mentions that most of the people in the colonies during the revolutionary war were loyalists.

      They neglect to mention George Washington was a slave owner.

      That prior to entering politics, in his time as a lawyer, Abraham Lincoin was counsel in alot of cases relating to slavery and run away slaves... yet he never defended a slave.

      They don't even mention that the 16th amendment could not be ratified without the southern states, but was put into effect anyway. They don't mention the drastic changes in citizenship that came with it. It wasn't until this point that people were U.S. Citizens instead of citizens of their respective states. They also strongly imply the civil war was over slavery even though historical evidence does not indicate this...

  4. Good luck by duffbeer703 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The publishing industry is deeply rooted in the corrupt educational beuracracy and is gaining ground, if anything.

    You'll notice in college classes today that large freshman English and Literature classes use something called the "Mercury Reader" which is a customized collection of stories that costs about $40. The publishers encourage instructors to swap out stories every year. (Killing the used book market)

    I taught a English 101 class a couple of years ago and was forced to use it. My students went and spent $40 for works that are in the public domain! They could have easily purchased four or five Dover Thrift Editions for $8-10, or bought used books for less.

    --
    Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
  5. K12 reform is complex and mysterious by joelparker · · Score: 2, Informative
    Your project is admirable and challenging,
    affecting politicians and also publishers.

    I advised Sun Micro on California ed. projects
    and learned K12 reform is complex & mysterious.

    I learned that real power is seldom with the politicians,
    saving money is seldom sufficient motivation to change,
    and state departments and teachers are critical allies.

    Feel free to contact me if you need web hosting;
    I can give it for free to educational projects.

    Cheers, Joel - joel@school.net

  6. Thanks for the comments so far - and some answers by ebusinessmedia1 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Thanks for your considered, and thoughtful responses

    Currently, California creates a 'framework' for every K-12 topic (or general area, like language development). Commercial publishers then take those frameworks and build content around them. Open source authors could do the same thing. If the state employed those authors, or contracted them, so much the better.

    The final step for text approval is through the State Board of Education text selection committee. Books that pass muster are then permitted for adoption by districts.

    Open source textbooks would *have* to honor the framework documents to get through peer approval within the state board - that's a given. Thus, all materials have to meet a framework requirement. However, that's what the publishers currently have to do anyway. There's no reason the State itself, by adding some curriculum experts/outside contractors to do the appropriate filtering and writing, could not publish its own K-12 books.

    I spent 15 years in the textbook publishing industry; thus, I can speak with some authority on this issue.

    The economics of open source textbook publishing are a 'no brainer'. We're looking at the State self-publishing, and then reverse licensing content. There are *immediate* savings (this is easily shown) on the front end (marketing, rotalty and inventory costs), and licensing revenue on the back end.

    Almost half the price of a K-12 book comes from marketing costs, royalties, and inefficient warehousing.

    Further savings are realized down the road - say 10 years - when portable devices in the classroom are ubiquitous. If states don't get control of content, can you imagine little Johnny or Jane streaming the Preamble of the Constitution and paying Prentice Hall a micropayment for the privilege? That's where we're heading if states don't get control of content in their respective educational envronments.

    As for the increased costs of textbooks, there's no reason this should be happening. Publishers manage to keep the cost of trade books down...why not textbooks? It's a fact that some publishers offer *the very same* university level textbooks (also outrageously priced) overseas, printed on cheaper paper, for a fraction of the going price in North America).

    Open source textbook publishing is not rocket science, or obscure, as a publishing model. It *will* happen, and it's only a metter of time.

    I will admit that this model may be just a tad ahead of where the market, or educational bureaucratic sensibilities, are at the moment.

    Consider what cost-plus licensing of this material (and the process) to other states would mean - i.e. *billions* of dollars saved, and put back into parts of our state educational systems that need it most.

    Another query had to do with why legislation would be required to start something liek this.

    California used to publish its own textbooks back in the 50's. They were pretty awful. The reason for this was that there was no distributed source of information, or people, that could work on books; they (the books) were penned by just one or two authors. That situation has changed. We now have the internet, digital media, etc., etc.. There is no excuse for not looking into this aggressively, publishing a single curricular area as a pilot, and taking it from there.

    The state legislated itself out of the publishing business in the early 50's, and gave the power to publish K-12 material to private enterprise. Thus, it would have to legislate itself back into the publishing 'business'.

    Again, thanks for all your considered comments. We will be adding more information and updates to our site as we progress; we're in this for the long haul, until it's a reality.

    Please feel free to write with ideas. We can be sourced from our web site. http://www.opensourcetext.org