Tag: book

This is a repeat from 2002 with a few additions. What a wild ride it has been. After 5 editions we a commercial publisher, our book is now available through Kindle in combination with some online resources. The online resources are available at no cost to all. The Kindle edition is approximately 15% of the cost of the 5th edition from the publisher.

 

The True Story of How Mark and Cindy Became Authors (Short Version)

Scene 1: Visitors Center – Theodore Roosevelt National Park (early 1990s)

Mark and Cindy discover the North Dakota Wildlife Coloring Book. This coloring book consisted of simple line drawings of North Dakota fish and animals. Mark and Cindy recognize that these images might be scanned and used in student projects. Mark contacts North Dakota Game and Fish to obtain permission to use images in this way. (Note: He later offers a proposal to Game and Fish that if they would hire an artist to create a more complete series of images, he would digitize the images, create a HyperCard stack to organize the images, write a short manual of suggestions for classroom use of these images, and distribute these materials to teachers. State Game and Fish names Mark Grabe to the Project Wild Advisory Board. The clip art collection still lives and is now available online.)

Scene 2: Pam Carlson’s Classroom – The Butterfly Project

The first major classroom project actually created using coloring book images was conducted in the classroom of second grade teacher Pam Carlson. Pam was known to us as a creative teacher interested in involving students in projects. We worked with Pam to implement several projects involving butterflies. One of the projects made use of clip art generated from a butterfly coloring book. Students each were assigned a butterfly, learned as much as they could about “their butterfly” from library resources, created a picture incorporating the butterfly image within Kid Pix, and eventually create a three card, Hypercard stacks incorporating the colored butterfly images and the information the students had learned about the butterfly. Newer versions of the butterfly project are still described in our books.

Scene 3: Some large bookstore in some large city (the details are a little vague)

Mark and Cindy are attending an American Educational Research Association Convention and are exploring a large bookstore (at the time we did not have this type of mega-store in Grand Forks, North Dakota). In this store, we locate a large collection of topical coloring books. There are books on plants, animals, Native Americans, historical events, etc. An idea emerges. Perhaps the company producing all of these resources does not realize just how useful all of these images would be to teachers in a form appropriate to computer supported projects. Perhaps the company would be willing to repurpose these coloring books as clip art collections and market the collections to schools. The company publishing all of the coloring books was Houghton Mifflin.

Scene 4: Loretta Wolozin (Houghton Mifflin Education Editor) Visits the Grabes in Grand Forks

When Mark returns home from the convention, he writes a proposal for Houghton Mifflin. He proposes the development of a product that would consist of a disk of clip art, a copy of the coloring book, and a short manual that would both establish a rationale for curriculum related projects using the clip art (history, biology, etc.) and would explain how to create several specific types of projects (incorporating clip art in word processing documents, incorporating clip art into more complete images using a “paint program”, simple multimedia projects using HyperCard). The proposal and a couple of sample projects are sent off to Houghton-Mifflin.

Nothing happens for several weeks. Eventually, Mark receives a call from Loretta Wolozin. She explains that the trade division (I think that was what it was called) was not interested in the clip art proposal. However, somehow, the proposal for a coloring book related clip art collection had come to the attention of someone in the college division. It turns out the ideas for how students might use technology are regarded as different and interesting. Loretta, who has the responsibility for the books used in the preparation of teachers, wants to know if she can fly to Grand Forks and look at some of our work. I can’t say I have taken many phone calls like this. Loretta came to Grand Forks, sat in front on an Apple Macintosh LC and went through our examples of student projects. I guess she liked what she saw. We are asked to submit an outline for a book and sample chapters. The core of our books then and now remains authentic student projects.

The fourth edition of the book I have just described will be released in a couple of months. Among other things, this brief description is a way of thanking Loretta Wolozin, Pam Carlson and the teachers we have worked with over the years. Taking a chance on an approach that was different, when it involved learning new skills and new ways of doing things (in the case of the teachers) or investing money (in the case of Loretta), is still greatly appreciated.

There is probably another message in this story. We have enjoyed some personal success because of what most would describe as a string of fortuitous events (translate – we were lucky). However, if you are lucky enough to do work you find to be valuable, productive and fun, you don’t always have to search for opportunities. Sometimes, opportunities find you.

Mid August is time to get serious about preparation for the Fall semester. I realize that some educators are already back and hard at work, but this is for the rest of you.

I have spent the past month or so updating “Meaningful Learning and the Participatory Web“. This is one of Cindy and my online textbooks for preservice and in-service educators. We have two textbooks one derived from our original textbook (now a Kindle book “hybrid”) and our experimental online book. We first used our online book to explore how our traditional book might be modified so that educators and students were not forced to rely on a hardcopy book within a field emphasizing other methods for learning. We did move beyond our traditional commercial textbook, but we have retained both products to continue our exploration of content options.

Our online book has gone through a number of iterations over the past ten years. It was first written as a wiki. We then recreated it as a set of web pages. Now, we have redone the book as pages within WordPress. Most use WordPress as a blogging platform, but the software is quite flexible and offers advantages as a content management system. The content of the book has been continually updated and the WordPress environment should make future updates easy.

Meaningful Learning and the Participatory Web is out effort to demonstrate the generative learning potential of technology. Using the long accepted value of “writing across the curriculum” or “writing to learn”, we redefined such as activities as “authoring to learn” and “teaching to learn” in keeping with the participatory theme and the enhanced capabilities of digital technology. The book uses the interrelated concepts of tool and tactics to propose classroom activities. For each category of application, we connect tutorials explaining technology use (tool) with classroom applications (tactics).

All of our online resources are available at no cost.

I have been working to develop a “philosophy” for our book site. Since most would have no reason to read this position statement, I decided to cross post here.

Everyone reading this comment have likely experienced many textbooks in their academic lives. However, unless you have written one, you may not have defined for yourself exactly what a textbook should contain. I suppose it is possible those of us who do write one begin my using the textbooks we have experienced as models with the possibility that we have a tweek in mind to make our offering unique. Some years ago, we decided to take a different enough approach to textbooks that we felt it necessary to break with a publisher who did not share our vision. Issues of cost, recency, modeling of the way technology should be applied in instruction, and when and how authors should write led us to the model you are now applying. What readers experience is different in ways that they probably recognize and in ways that are invisible because some differences depend on how content is developed.

We have written about some of these new ideas elsewhere (see a series of blog posts beginning with this entry). This is not a rehash of that content. Rather, these ideas are intended as a more general reflection on textbooks and what they should contain. Textbooks have been criticized of late for a variety of limitations and inadequacies. Various criticisms have been recently applied to many aspects of schooling – the preparation and selection of teachers, the methods of instruction, the focus of the curriculum, etc. My general reaction to criticism is to use it as an opportunity to consider personal and institutional practices. Mostly, I regard criticism as having some truth but typically advocating overreaction. Adjustment typically is a more productive reaction than reform. Hence, our own efforts at generating a textbook have some similarities to textbooks most have used previously, but with some adjustments.

Here are some general characteristics we believe must be true of textbooks and differentiate textbooks from other learning resources.

Comprehensiveness – we assume that instructors assign a textbook to complement the role they play with learners. In much the same logic as the concept of “flipping the classroom”, the time available for direct interaction with students is not typically spent most productively providing students with information. A good textbook should allow an instructor to skip some important topics students are likely able to master on their own, take advantage of personal expertise and experiences to provide unique insights for learners, and respond to learner issues and observe their efforts at application.

A textbook author applies a somewhat different type of scholarship than is typical of most academics (in our opinion). Expertise often requires great focus and depth. As a personal example, one of us taught the introduction to psychology course for many years. I felt a unique expertise in the areas of learning, motivation, and development, but I would not really claim what I knew about abnormal psychology and clinical practice would come close to matching the background of my collegues who prepared clinical practitioners. These real differences existed because of our training and our daily experiences over many years of work. I assume that the author(s) of introductory psychology textbooks and textbooks in general are different. They either make a commitment to spend great amounts of time to develop expertise in areas that were not at the core of their own preparation or they combine with other authors with different backgrounds.

Cindy and I have taken both approaches in writing our textbook on technology integration. We have unique backgrounds and we spend time broadening our background in areas where greater insight is necessary. We begin by carefully considering what topics are relevant and then make the effort to develop background and experience when some of these topics are not the focus of what we have done for years. Textbook authors must strive to be competent generalists in a time of specialization.

Finally, different instructors and different groups of learners are looking for different things. We do not assume that all we write will be relevant to all, but a comprehensive approach should cover most of the bases for most.

A core model and voice – we believe a textbook is more than a collection of topics, it should be based on a core model and use a common voice. We believe the pieces of learning resources should fit together. A structure rather than a mish-mash facilitates the integration of ideas. We believe that the content of a textbook should unfold in a meaningful way and should have a certain consistency to support comprehension. A consistent writing style contributes to this integration and it is difficult for multiple authors to converge on a consistent way of expressing themselves.

Critical analysis –this may be the most surprising expectation we impose on ourselves. We recognize that many aspects of education cause controversy and this is certainly the case with opinions on the way technology should be used by learners. We believe it is our responsibility to fairly represent these controversies to learners (future or practicing teachers) no matter our personal positions. If we do take a position (and we do), the positions taken should be based on the best research available. To some extent then, our approach on certain topics is to describe the controversy and offer the best analysis we can. We are not marketers or advocates with the exception of advocating for what seem to be the most productive methods. To support our analyses, textbook authors should identify the best evaluative sources (see completeness) and offer these resources so you will be able to examine these sources yourself. Our web site always invites discussion and we welcome “better” resources for our review should you think we have missed quality resources supporting a position we did not take.

I have spent several hours a day for the last couple of months updating one of my online resources for educators. Done or not (mostly done) it is time for me to prepare for my summer grad course.

I have two major online projects taking slightly different approaches. Integrating Technology for Meaningful Learning is Cindy and my effort to support formal courses for in-service and practicing teachers. This is the continuation of our textbook project now consisting of a Kindle book and web resources. We consider this our 6+ edition. To some extent, we use this as out exploration of the future of the textbook. This work takes what I regard as the necessary textbook approach – it defines major issues in instruction with technology and attempts to do a good job of arguing all sides of these issues. The Kindle book need not be purchased to view the online resources.

Meaningful Learning and the Participatory Web, the resource I have been most recently updating, is more directed at practitioners and defines “participatory” roles for learners in terms of tools and tactics. The tools sections describe the technology “apps” and how these tools are used. The tactics sections are focused on learning activities linked to a specific category of tools. These resources represent our original attempt to develop an integrated set of learning resources completely available online. We also offer opportunities for learners using these resources to participate and contribute their own ideas.

This is a book recommendation. I read a variety of content because I believe my personal creativity works best when I feed it ideas. This might be described as reasoning by analogy, but I believe the focused approach of so many academics suffers from an influx of new, but existing perspectives.

I encourage those interested in generating instructional content to consider some of the ideas advanced by Jeff Jarvis on the news and the business of selling the news. Specifically, I recommend Geeks Bearing Gifts. If you are unwilling to spring for the $10 demanded by Amazon, Jarvis is also providing the same content as Buzzmachine posts. As I write this, he has made it to the latter chapters so you could read most of the book for free.

I want to highlight two ideas from the book which I think offer some interesting ideas for the educational publishing industry. There is much more to be had, but these are two ideas that immediately caught my attention.

Idea 1 – the article is not the only way to imagine the unit of distribution

I have long believed that a textbook has some specific limitations because it is offered as a single unit. Recognizing components would allow a number of limitations to be addressed (my analysis). Jarvis makes a similar case with the newspaper article. Most of us have a vague understanding of the format journalists often use to generate news articles. There is the initial summary, segments supporting and expanding this summary (quotes, background, deeper explanation), sources, etc. We probably learned somewhere that an article is originally written to gradually taper off should the editor have to shorten an article by cutting at the end. We may also be familiar with the issue of “burying the lead” in which an author misses what should have been the most important point and did not highlight it in the initial paragraph.

Jarvis does a nice job of pointing to experimental approaches related to the ideas he identifies. For example, he points to Circa News as a service built to use the elements of typical news articles more creatively. You can try Circa (optimized for reading content on your phone) and might want to review another of my posts on this service.

What insights might educational content providers gain? I think the idea of identifying the components in what we offer and possibly providing better ways to provide and develop these various components may be helpful.

Idea 2 – show me the money. How can professionals support their work?

Within the present reality of unlimited and often free online content, how can professional content providers and content organizations support their work? Clearly, the cost of textbooks has generated a lot of attention and scorn. Jarvis deals with the reality of business models throughout.

Here is one example of an idea I like. I would suggest I have had a related idea about educational content, but that is not the point here. Jarvis proposes that authors and readers represent a relationship that is not necessarily one directional. Relationships are a big thing in his book. He suggests one idea related to a more participatory approach I found intriguing. What if “readers” could buy down the cost of content in various ways (this is my interpretation and even if this is not what Jarvis intended I still like my spin)? This would obviously be more practical with a subscription model than a single purchase (a book). For example, a reader my buy down the cost by being willing to view ads (some free vs. paid services already use this approach). What if readers provide information (complete surveys) or even content (personal stories, examples) to reduce personal costs for the primary service? For example, I have proposed that practicing teachers might provide classroom examples as a way to supplement textbooks.

I know that making these ideas work would be a challenge. Implementation would not be that technically problematic, but it seems that it would be easy to game such systems without contributing much of value. Some type of evaluation would be necessary, expensive, and messy.

The Jarvis book has one major contribution I think is overlooked. When traditional models are obviously in decline, we should not assume that all is lost. New models that value quality will eventually be developed. The models in the book may not be the eventual successes, but it is reassuring to review ideas that exist and are interesting.

There may be comparable developments in the development of educational content. I just do not see traditional publishers investing much in R&D efforts. Perhaps someone will write something that will reassure me in the same way the Jarvis analysis brought me new insights into a different area of content generation.

The Atlantic recently carried an article entitled “Down with Textbooks” . Every time I enounter such an article I feel the need to respond. It is likely such pieces generate this reaction because a) I author a textbook and b) I used a textbook in most of the courses when I was teaching full time.

To be fair, the Atlantic article is about the teaching of history. I admit I did not enjoy history as a student and did find it boring. I have not tried to teach history and certainly would be poorly prepared to do so. I do know something about the teaching of history because of some grant work I did and I recognize that there are different schools of thought regarding the purpose of learning history. Clearly, students in early history courses do not experience history as historians experience history. History can be a great exercise in critical thinking requiring an explanation for historical events pieced together from the interpretation of multiple primary sources. This seems to be the position taken by the author of the Atlantic article. The history most of us experienced was an effort to familiarize ourselves with historical events. This is what some want. Some see a basic understanding of history as the basis for citizenship assuming a common understanding of our heritage. Some politicians push for this approach and others see this approach as a form of indoctrination. History may not be the best subject area to use as the basis for evaluating the contribution of a textbook.

I am not certain I accept the argument that textbooks are boring as a rationale for much of anything. What you or I find to be boring is likely a function of many factors. For example, I find what some consider inherently interesting experiences such as discussion/conversation to be extremely boring if either a) I want to experience what an expert has to say about the topic or b) I or the individuals I am to engage in a discussion with have only casual knowledge of a topic. I do not see interest as a global characteristic of method. When I can supply my own interest, I often prefer an efficient approach in the early stages of learning. When I must learn something, interested or not, I also prefer efficiency. For example, I have moved to a new state and now must retake the exam to acquire a new driver’s license. I want a resource that will prepare me for this requirement in the most efficient way possible. I do not require diversity of experience. I do not require entertainment. I want an efficient exposure to the information I am expected to understand.

I assume textbook authors have different perspectives on their work. My own perspective in writing a textbook used to prepare teachers to help students learn with technology has been to identify the range of themes important to consider and to explore these themes with a sensitivity to the complexity of these issues. By range of themes, I mean topics from coding to copyright. By complexity, I mean that there are often disagreements and multiple perspectives on many of these issues – e.g., constructivism vs direct instruction. To the extent that I understand complexities to be unresolved, I feel it is my responsibility as an author to use the research available to explain strengths and weaknesses.

The Atlantic article made a case for the value of multiple resources in learning. I would certainly agree. What I think I do as an author is to provide a general starting point true to issues and alternatives and assume the course instructor will use his/her expertise to explore some topics in depth. I believe learning is a function of breadth (context) and depth. I hope to free the instructor to provide the depth appropriate to the instructors own expertise and the individual needs of the students in a given course.

The notion of “flipping the classroom” has proven popular in recent years. This phrase likely means different things to different people. To me, it means use face to face time to do best what can be done in face to face time. A good textbook frees up face to face time for discussion, individual needs and interests, and the unique expertise of the instructor. I also think a second core, but typically unexamined idea in the flipping approach assumes the establishment of a basic framework or background on which depth of understanding is then built. Again, this is what I think a good textbook should try to provide.

One final point – I do not consider many popular books on educational topics are textbooks. This is not to dispute the value of such books. Most popular books take a focused approach and do not make the effort to examine the strengths and weaknesses of alternatives. Again, without a solid background what is proposed in such books can be very challenging to evaluate critically. I do not expect these books to carefully examine what others would argue are the limitations of what has been proposed, but I would expect such a critical analysis from a textbook.