Re: [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.

Wikijunior a project within Wikibooks has its own proposed policy which 
would allows for those things within the Wikijunior namespace.

> 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 believe the info your referring to is probably from when Wikiversity 
was still part of Wikibooks. Wikiversity has its own separate project at 
http://www.wikiversity.org now which focuses on providing free 
curriculum in the form of lessons, exams, quizes, worksheets, etc. 
rather then books. Wikibooks is useful if you want books, Wikiversity is 
useful if you need other forms of curriculum.

-- darklama