Jeff Jarvis challenges the perception that content and distribution are not king and claims that conversation is. I have been following a series of bloggers who appear frustrated with the money schools spend on commercial resources (i.e., books). For some reason, perhaps because I write books, such comments generate in me a need to respond. Maybe this need stems from a sense of guilt. However, it is also seems possible I see the issue from a different perspective.
I have absolutely no quarrel with the notion that “the conversation” is important. Conversation, discussion, interaction, etc. are great ways to encourage the learner to think, process, integrate, etc. However, the quest of some to bring the process of education down to certain “basics can become self-promoting. In such discussions, it seems possible “others” are trying to tell the learner” what is best for him/her. In fact, as an “adult learner” I often prefer to purchase a book and not have to listen to the comments of potential teachers who may have a different agenda than my own. I can interact with the ideas of the author and I can use the Internet to locate “free” humans with opinions to test my personal opinions and stimulate my thinking through discussion. In a way, a book and a teacher are both resources intended to assist and stimulate the learner. Just for sake of argment, doesn’t it seem as accurate to claim that both free content and free conversation are available online?
I would propose a different perspective. I agree that there is a reasonable quantity of useful online and hard copy information. Information is also present in the form of content experts and in life experiences. What both good authors and good teachers do is locate and organize quality information and encourage learners to “process” this information and generate personal knowledge. In this effort, the “face to face” teachers has the opportunity to respond to students rather than having to anticipate what issues, misunderstandings, needs, etc. students may have. In most cases, the “face to face” teacher does not have the time to continually develop the background and review the potential information sources an author must consider. The author takes the risk of expending this time hoping that whatever product (a book, video, multimedia product) is generated will be regarded to be of sufficient quality to attract a reasonable number of purchases. It is a very competitive process. In fact, it is a competitive process I must engage in as an author that I do not have to engage in as a teacher. My teaching job is not constantly in jeopardy because another individual decides he or she is willing to engage in some form of competitive process for the students who might consider enrolling in the courses I teach (sounds something like vouchers).
It is easy to make “commercial” sound like a bad thing. It is true – I make some money writing a textbook. But, to be fair, I also get paid to be a teacher. Perhaps I see writing to teach and talking to teach to be more similar than others do.
