Re: [Foundation-l] Rethinking brands

My last post, I'm not kidding. 

From Mr. Whitworth:
What we do not have are:

1) Specifications of various curriculums, which we could attempt to satisfy
>> Take one state at a time.  A group of interested people in that state
will get together to develop against their own state standards (which move).
Other states can use that to help them develop their own curriculum so they
don't have to start from scratch.

2) people willing and able to write the necessary material
>> I'm working on finding interested grad students in my state. I hope to
start this July.  If I were to get my tush in gear, I would have a few
chapters of a curriculum finished in order to have something to present and
sell to professors.

3) A mechanism to really advertise our books, and compete in the marketplace
with established commercial book vendors
>> If you build it they will come?  I really think that as texts and
curriculum go up and schools (k-12) are more and more financially squeezed,
they will HAVE to at least consider freely available, well designed
curriculum.

Added by Kathy:
4) The capitalist mentality that whatever I design must be made into money
>> That is why wikibooks, wikipedia, wikimedia is the avenue.  They are
trying to change the old mindset that there is more to information sharing
than selling it.  Knowledge should be free.

-kathy
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Whitworth [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 11:22 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] [Foundation-l] Rethinking brands

When it comes to writing books for a standardized curriculum, it's more
difficult. Wikibooks just doesnt have the man power to write a new book
tailor-made for each different jurisdiction. We've been brainstorming ideas
to find a way to write a single book, and taking information piece-wise to
create a book for a particular curriculum.  What we do not have are:

1) Specifications of various curriculums, which we could attempt to satisfy
2) people willing and able to write the necessary material
3) A mechanism to really advertise our books, and compete in the marketplace
with established commercial book vendors

This isn't to say that the situation is hopeless, because we are making
progress every day. However, there is alot of work left to be done before we
can market wikibooks as being a viable alternative to traditional commercial
printed textbooks.

With US teachers going on vacation for the summer, perhaps we would be able
to attract some of them to help author new material? I don't know how we
would attract them, however.

--Andrew Whitworth


>From: Sanford Forte <[email protected]>
>Reply-To: Wikimedia textbook discussion 
><[email protected]>
>To: Wikimedia textbook discussion <[email protected]>
>Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] [Foundation-l] Rethinking brands
>Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 11:06:42 -0700
>
>The essential challenge is to get end product into the K-12 education 
>channel, in a way that 1) meshes with the requirements set by state 
>education departments to strictly adhere to curriculum frameworks; 2) 
>devise effective means to inform the established K-12 education 
>community that #1 has been completed (on a subject by subject basis); 
>and, 3) establish a means to distribution of materials *in print* that 
>is easy to access.
>
>Content is decidedly _not_ the problem. The real problems are logistics 
>and effective project management toward a goal of completing the above,
>
>Cheers,
>Sanford
>
>***************************************
>Sanford Forte, Director
>California Open Source Texbook Project
>Palo Alto, CA
>[email protected]
>650-321-9152 (Office)
>650-888-0077 (Mobile)
>
>
>
>
>On May 11, 2007, at 10:28 AM, 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.
> >
> > 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
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > Florence Devouard wrote:
> >> I, for one, think it is great to work on better defining the 
> >> mission of Wikibooks. I have one question though, do you know if 
> >> the definition worked upon is generally shared with other wikibooks 
> >> people ? Are they other wikibooks that have worked on such a 
> >> definition, and where the outcome differs widely from yours ?
> >>
> >> ant
> >
> > At last count 18 people supported it and 7 people objected to it.
> > As others
> > have already said, some disagree on limiting English Wikibooks to 
> > just textbooks, how much emphases on textbooks be be given, whether 
> > or not it should be a policy or guideline and some have concerns on 
> > the clarity of the proposal.
> >
> > There is quite a difference from English Wikibooks' current version 
> > and the German version. Google's German to English translation of 
> > the German Wikibooks version:
> > http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%
> > 2Fde.wikibooks.org%2Fwiki
> > %2FHilfe%3AWas_Wikibooks_ist&langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8
> >
> > There have been previous proposals on English Wikibooks to redefine 
> > the current policy as well, before they were merged together:
> > http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?
> > title=Wikibooks:What_is_Wikibooks/Unstab
> > le&oldid=600961
> > http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?
> > title=Wikibooks:What_is_Wikibooks/Unstab
> > le&oldid=665481
> > http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?
> > title=Wikibooks:What_is_Wikibooks/Unstab
> > le&oldid=665488
> >
> > that AFAIK, were abandoned before ever getting to the point of 
> > seeking input from the community to accept or reject them.
> >
> > --darklama
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Textbook-l mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Textbook-l mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
> >
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Textbook-l mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l

_________________________________________________________________
PC Magazines 2007 editors choice for best Web mailaward-winning Windows
Live Hotmail. 
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migratio
n_HM_mini_pcmag_0507