2. “ There is more than one way to burn a book. And the world is full of people running about with lit matches.” Ray Bradbury
3.
4.
5.
6. Big Four Globe Fearson Modern Curriculum Press Prentice Hall SRA Ginn Open Court Holt, Rinehart, and Winston Houghton Mufflin Silver Burdett Glencoe Harcourt Brace Riverside Scott Foresman MacMillan Harcourt McDougal Littell Scott Foresman - Addison Wesley McGraw Hill Reed Elsevier Vivendi Pearson
Textbooks were born from the need to teach reading and writing to children By the end of the 18th century (1700s) textbooks were commonly in the hands of students Textbooks were based on questions and answers and focused on memorizing rules and facts and definitions Asking questions for memorization changed to questions about understanding - this change happened mainly as a result of training for teachers - 1890s - but the change occurred slowly because the training of teachers went slowly The adoption process was first implemented after the Civil War, because Southern states wanted separate textbooks that told its version of the war between the states. There are 22 states that formally participate in the textbook adoption process, with the remaining 28 comprising what is known as “Op en territory ” . Origins of the modern textbook adoption process is rooted in early 1930’s to standardize specifications for print textbooks Main Source: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED419246.pdf
Schema: Readers understand text by accessing or constructing appropriate content schemas (organized knowledge about the objects, events, and situations in the text) Schema Theory also has implications for textbook design, and by extension design of other instructional materials. In order to facilitate student learning, material should be organized according to conventional structures that students may already be familiar with. Price and Driscoll found that at the beginning of their 1997 study, 10.5% of subjects could solve a particular type of problem (a selection problem) in an unfamiliar context. However, 57.3 % of those involved in the study could solve a very similar problem in a familiar context.
2009 - $5.2 Billion in sales for El-Hi For publishers, the quantity imperative and the tight time deadlines in state adoption processes all but guarantee that quality will be neglected. The image of a distinguished author working away for years to write a compelling textbook is largely a thing of the past. Today, publishers often start with a unified checklist of all the names, standards, facts, and subjects that must be covered to win approval in California and Texas. Next, a team of consultants is hired to prepare study aids and draft questions and student exercises. A separate team prepares the illustrations, graphics, maps, tables, and charts. In-house editors and committees review the text for bias, sensitivity, and compliance with state criteria. The actual writing of these tomes, however, is generally farmed out to "development houses” where teams of writers who are not subject experts collaborate on the text, which can often run to 1,000+ pages. The tag team approach to constructing these books is one reason they lack a single authorial voice and coherent "story."
Today, four multi-national conglomerates account for roughly 70% or more of all K-12 textbooks sold: Pearson (British) McGraw-Hill (American) Reed Elsevier (Dutch) Vivendi (French)
DO HANDOUT WITH DISCUSSING REVISIONS Bias and Sensitivity Reviews are done by ALL publishers - protects them from criticism from groups Authors are selected usually by gender and race Multiculturalism: African Huts = African Houses Tribes = Ethnic Groups Native American Groups are addressed by Nation Dialect - not allowed Gender - women must be represented and if not then a footnote must be given explaining (I.e…voting before 1920), and no mankind or use of words ending in man (fireman) - so no more “Death of a Salesman” Elderly - must be shown in positive light and more women shown than men Disabled - must be represented - cannot be shown in negative light (no Captain Hook)
Studies have consistently documented three fatal flaws: 1.Textbooks are not actually carefully reviewed and sometimes are not read at all. Instead, they are scrutinized against superficial "checklist" criteria. 2.Committee members do not review schoolbooks to see whether they "work" as education tools. Publishers do not have to show that their books help students retain knowledge and raise achievement, or even field test instructional materials first to see how well they function in real classrooms. 3.The review process almost inevitably drives publishers and states to embrace the lowest common denominator in textbook content. DEFINITIONS for TEXAS ADOPTION: Conforming Textbooks: Instructional materials meet ALL Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). Nonconforming Textbooks: Instructional materials meet 50% - 99% of the TEKS. States with Textbook Adoption Process: DO MAP ACTIVITY 1. Oregon 2. Idaho 3. California 4. Nevada 5. Utah 6. New Mexico 7. Texas 8. Oklahoma 9. Arkansas 10. Louisiana 11. Mississippi 12. Illinois 13. Indiana 14. Kentucky 15. Tennessee 16. Alabama 17. Georgia 18. South Carolina 19. North Carolina 20. Florida 21. West Virginia 22. Virginia
What do you see as the common theme here?
In California, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last summer (2009) announced an initiative that would replace some high school science and math texts with free, “op en source ” digital versions. With California in dire straits, the governor hopes free textbooks could save hundreds of millions of dollars a year. “ In five years, I think the majority of students will be using digital textbooks, ” said William M. Habermehl, superintendent of the 500,000-student Orange County schools. “T h ey can be better than traditional textbooks. ” “ We believe that the world is going digital, but the jury i s still out on how this will evolve, ” said Wendy Spiegel, a Pearson spokeswoman. “W e are agnostic, so we ’ll provide digital, we ’ll provide print, and we’ll l see what our customers want.”
Diane Ravitch - Assistant Secretary in the US Department of Education during the administration of President Bush 1
