The Education Bazaar

Here are couple of links about how the National Science Foundation (NSF), and higher ed publishing companies, are starting to finally re-examine the role of static textbooks in a dynamic, information rich world full of “Millenial” learners.

The NSF held an invitation-only “Reconsider the Textbook” focus group last week in Washington, DC. From what I read, it sounds as though different potential models of the textbook were run up the flagpole to see if they flapped

There seems to be little doubt that the utility of textbooks is greatly minimized now, and that students no longer interact with publisher-produced, expert-vetted texts in the same way they used to.

As I’ve said before, I think that the battle lines between traditional ways of controlling, disseminating and selling information, as well as validating “expert” knowledge, and the new collaborative methods and means are rapidly being drawn.

It’s going to be a very interesting struggle. I don’t think the infamous EPIC 2015 vision of the media industry is exactly accurate, but I think there are some essential trends identified that will make this an interesting ride for the future of curriculum, as well as popular media.

I’d love to see a version of this video that looked at the future of the textbook. Hmmmm. The textbook industry seems concerned. They should be.

Here are couple of links about how the National Science Foundation (NSF), and higher ed publishing companies, are starting to finally re-examine the role of static textbooks in a dynamic, information rich world full of “Millenial” learners.

The NSF held an invitation-only “Reconsider the Textbook” focus group last week in Washington, DC. From what I read, it sounds as though different potential models of the textbook were run up the flagpole to see if they flapped

Parts of the brainstorming seemed like the academy’s version of a concept-car show, running the gamut from completely digital books with animations, to virtual environments that students can experience and manipulate.

Reconsider the Textbook Teaser

For more than a century, the printed textbook has shaped the curriculum in most science, math, and technology disciplines. In little more than a decade, the world wide web has given many students 24/7 access to information, interactive exercises, and dynamic simulations. In the face of this new technology, will the reign of the textbook continue or is it time for printed texts to retire, going the way of the abacus and the slide rule?….We will assess the state of the textbook and other learning resources, identify the pertinent questions, produce a white paper to encourage future thinking on this critical topic, and plan for widely disseminating our findings.

David Epstein wrote an Inside Higher Education article about the NSF focus group that was pretty straight forward, and which cited the frequent participant comparison of a good “future textbook” as more of a field guide reference to established knowledge than a stand alone book:

What everyone agreed on, is that the way students gather information is changing rapidly, but textbooks are not. They are less portable than ever, and students can’t sell them back to the bookstore fast enough…

Faculty members agreed that the Internet has made information so easily and quickly available that the role of the textbook as a comprehensive reference has been diminished. The next evolution of the textbook, many of the attendees suggested, might be more as an island of credibility amidst the ocean of information, signifying what information is reputable.

Several faculty members used the analogy of the guidebook. “When I went to Egypt, I didn’t take the Oxford History of Ancient Egypt,” said Richard McCray, professor emeritus of astrophysics at the University of Colorado at Boulder. “I took Lonely Planet.” And then, McCray said, if he could spend time at a particular site of interest, and dig deeper if needed, just as a professor can linger on important topics in a class.

In any case, there seems to be little doubt that the utility of textbooks is greatly minimized now, and that students no longer interact with publisher-produced, expert-vetted texts in the same way they used to.

The way students use textbooks varies widely. There was consensus that few students diligently read assigned material before class, and that most turn to the chapter to help with homework problems.

Factors that have prevented change thus far were indentified, including a disincentive for innovation with faculty trying to attain tenure status. It was not clear if any clear direction came out of the meetings.
Change? Reality Check Time…

One thing that really struck me – as someone working toward Open Content in the K-12 world – is that the Inside Higher Ed article mentioned said the most heated discussions were on whether it was better for the commercial textbook industry to come up with the best approach, or for the university professors to drive change.

The rub? Each seemed to be saying that the OTHER was better suited to break the mold. The professors were saying that forces prohibited them from being innovative, and industry reps were saying that the market model would reward the status quo Both seemed to be looking for grants to fund the needed change.

I think they may have missed something essential.

What about involving the consumers in collaboratively created references to support coursework? Couldn’t professors and their students build the suppor materials need to facilitate a course? The professors build in the credibility needed, the reliance on the tried and true, and the learners push back…challenging old ideas. What emerges may be more dynamic and useful, and still valid in a “field guide” to that area of knowledge.

Grants to fund what? The tools to do this already exist, and are Open Source. This just screams “wiki” to me, and Creative Commons licensing of the output. What about industry? What about them as owners and purveyors of knowledge? The dissolved oxygen in that pond may be about used up.

Kudos to Kurt

One of the more sensible things reported in article was the mention of how universities are seemingly moving in to prohibit connectivism and multi-tasking in the classroom….by banning the very technologies we should be relying on to harness new ways of learning. My co-workers will remember my rant two weeks ago about some universities banning laptops in class.

Our hat goes off to one professor who seems to get the irony of this:

Kurt Squire, an assistant professor of education at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, who studies the usefulness of video games for teaching, pointed out that academe is resisting progress in some cases. He pointed out a recent Associated Press article: “More professors ban laptops in class.”

“We have the most powerful tool you can imagine, and our best response now is: let’s ban them,” Squire said.

As I’ve said before, I think that the battle lines between traditional ways of controlling, disseminating and selling information, as well as validating “expert” knowledge, and the new collaborative methods and means are rapidly being drawn.

Funamentally Redefined?

It’s going to be a very interesting struggle. I don’t think the infamous EPIC 2015 vision of the media industry is exactly accurate, but I think there are some essential trends identified that will make this an interesting ride for the future of curriculum, as well as popular media. I’d love to see a version of this video that looked at the future of the textbook. Hmmmm.

The textbook industry seems concerned. They should be. They have much to lose, and little to sell to modern learners.
What about universities? Another Inside Higher Education article by Doug Lederman covered James Hilton’s talk at Educause last fall had some insight:

Hilton, associate provost for academic, information and instructional technology affairs at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, described a landscape in which “disruptive forces” are radically altering the state of publishing, threatening to diminish the role of libraries, and rendering obsolete traditional methods of delivering information. Those forces threaten to relegate colleges to the periphery of society, he suggested.

But the technological advances are also creating enormous opportunities for colleges and universities to become key players in democratizing the collection and sharing of knowledge, Lipton said, offering “hope amid the disruption.”

“We are seeing a redefinition on the scale of the rise of research universities after World War II,” he said. “I’m not talking tweaked, not tuned — fundamentally redefined.”

This may be a fundamental shift that most don’t see coming. I think Hilton is correct, and that this will impact K-12 as well as Higher Ed. Since K-12 is even more dependent on the textbook industry than Higher Ed, the change may come later rather than sooner.

Indeed, this discussion is quite important to K-12 since most school districts allow the textbooks to become the curriculum, and allow deviation from the textbook driven model even less than colleges and universities.

Many school districts actually now direct teachers not to deviate from texts in meaningful ways, and disallow any non-traditional instruction in the current accountability charged climate of No Child Left Behind (NCLB).

We live in interesting times, eh?
Johncn

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 31st, 2006 at 4:29 am and is filed under Collaborative Tools, Open Content, Web 2.0 Challenges. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.