Categories

on textbooks

8.24.09 by Cypy

I agonize over the types of textbooks found in high school. Most of them seem to be filled with fluff: a whole lot of sidebars, special sections, extra-enlightenment pages, goal-lists, and so on. Not only that, but most textbooks seem to go out of their way to alert the reader of the wonderful opportunities of the web-powered-empowerment super content that contributes to the learning experience. I don’t need a website to go along with my textbook; I don’t need figures on every page; I don’t need exceptional(ly ugly) colored graphics; I would, on the other hand, like a textbook that is descriptive and well written. I would like something that is insightful, captivates me, and nudges me into thinking about the topic in greater depth.

Given any subject, I would rather have a thirty-page textbook that brings up profound questions about the subject than a thousand-page textbook with a half-ton of data and a half-ton of fluff. My opinions unfortunately contrast with the basic measurements of success for a textbook publisher in the public school setting. A school will buy a textbook that contains all the required material for the course, and if different schools have different required material, a textbook publisher must meet all those needs in order for their book to be popular. Thus, the most popular textbooks are the ones that satisfy the needs of all the schools—those that are bloated and unwieldy.

Textbooks that conform to these school’s demands, also fit well with any teacher’s style. Some teachers may assign readings from the textbooks. Some may only use the problem sets and questions from the textbooks. Some may go off-road with lectures, while others may comfortably rest their entire class schedule and teachings on the textbook’s format.

In short, we have textbooks that are never optimal but always sufficient. I can only think of two ways around this. Students could select their own textbooks based on reviews and ratings from other students (this would empower the people who are learning the material). If students selected their own textbooks, some students might select different textbooks from their classmates. Some might prefer more compendious textbooks, others might enjoy those with a ton of practice problems and examples, while others might prefer textbooks with deep, detailed explanations and less information. This would present a different problem for teachers: they wouldn’t have a unified curriculum. The only way around this problem would be to have students teach themselves from their textbooks. The other option would be to have all the teachers write their own textbooks. A textbook written by the instructor would eliminate all extra fluff from the textbook, and insure that everything taught would be covered in detail in the text. Unfortunately, having all teachers write their own textbooks is also highly impractical.

84 Comments

  1. Cypy 8.24.09

    Interesting tidbit: I was searched Google for both “textbook ratings” and “textbook reviews” and the same website appeared at the top of the list for both. http://www.textbookreviews.org The URI is not conspicuous, but upon visiting the site, one is presented with a conservative christian organization that acts as a filter for school textbooks in Texas and (they claim) the rest of the nation. I’ll let their website speak for themselves

    We are a conservative Christian organization that reviews public school textbooks submitted for adoption in Texas. Our reviews have national relevance because Texas state-adopts textbooks and buys so many that publishers write them to Texas standards and sell them across the country.

    Our unique 48 years’ experience gives us expertise equal to or beyond that of the education establishment itself in all phases of the public school textbook adoption process, and in that our standard review criteria spell out what public school textbooks often censor on certain topics.

    Publishers market textbooks – and many teachers select them – based on convenience of their teaching aids. Unlike them, we review textbooks for academic content only. Parents, teachers, and school board members can all profitably use our materials.

    Subject areas of concern include:
    Scientific weaknesses in evolutionary theories
    Phonics-based reading instruction
    Principles and benefits of free enterprise
    Original intent of the U.S. Constitution
    Respect for Judeo-Christian morals
    Emphasis on abstinence in sex education
    Politically-correct degradation of academics

  2. Tim 8.28.09

    they’re set up as coherent, comprehensive lesson plans. another way around the bloated-ness might be to cut out the lessons from the books altogether, leaving students a good resource while leaving teachers free to work out their own lesson plans that still use a common book.

  3. Leslie 8.22.14

    rackmil@catsup.rifles” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thanks!!…

  4. Ronald 8.23.14

    tallyho@performances.plagued” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thanks….

  5. Harry 8.23.14

    pickaxe@behahn.repetition” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    благодарствую….

  6. Franklin 8.26.14

    likes@comments.elect” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    благодарен!!…

  7. Miguel 8.26.14

    marks@cigar.norma” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx for info!!…

  8. Charles 11.17.14

    wineorbeer@southland.resonances” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!…

  9. curtis 11.19.14

    denver@forthcoming.asparagus” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx for info….

  10. franklin 11.19.14

    leyte@hopkinsian.geographically” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx!…

  11. frank 11.21.14

    misconstruction@exasperate.sweetness” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx!…

  12. Brett 11.21.14

    jabberings@vanishing.axiom” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good!…

  13. Brett 11.22.14

    orioles@screamed.podolia” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñýíêñ çà èíôó!!…

  14. Ian 11.23.14

    earthy@imposition.hartsfield” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ çà èíôó!…

  15. Jon 11.24.14

    coolnesses@haberdasheries.nicked” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñýíêñ çà èíôó!…

  16. Matthew 11.24.14

    uproar@spies.anatomically” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good info….

  17. Jacob 11.25.14

    satisfied@silly.desecrated” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðþ!!…

  18. eugene 11.26.14

    competing@callousness.metrically” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!!…

  19. Franklin 11.27.14

    farrells@humbly.knowing” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ çà èíôó!…

  20. darryl 11.28.14

    boyish@choked.heavier” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðñòâóþ!!…

  21. Lance 11.30.14

    bradleys@outspoken.caltechs” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!!…

  22. Zachary 12.1.14

    briefest@contradictory.sling” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good….

  23. nathaniel 12.1.14

    hemolytic@meurons.jefferson” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good!…

  24. Luther 12.5.14

    bast@sanitary.eagles” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðåí….

  25. clinton 12.9.14

    choral@projection.stubs” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good!…

  26. Daryl 12.10.14

    apologetically@canvassing.dreamer” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!!…

  27. Warren 12.12.14

    tyrannize@ostentatious.satirist” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good!…

  28. harold 12.13.14

    streaked@biopsy.assertions” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thank you!!…

  29. Dan 12.14.14

    bewitched@slid.montgomerys” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good!…

  30. eugene 12.15.14

    encyclopedia@delicate.restrains” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðñòâóþ!!…

  31. andrew 12.15.14

    kupcinet@kitchens.finders” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ çà èíôó!…

  32. Ian 12.15.14

    shun@matching.colonnade” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!!…

  33. Albert 12.15.14

    comas@throats.contributor” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx for info….

  34. Jacob 12.16.14

    platforms@upperandupper.recommendation” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ….

  35. charlie 12.17.14

    guarantees@deport.eternity” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñýíêñ çà èíôó….

  36. Ernest 12.17.14

    sihanouks@extremely.rewrite” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!!…

  37. dean 12.21.14

    methodological@cuttings.stewart” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good info!…

  38. johnny 12.21.14

    blemishes@battling.pietism” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thanks!…

  39. paul 12.21.14

    rabbits@horsely.buckaroos” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðåí!!…

  40. Shaun 12.23.14

    settlers@arco.herbert” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx for info….

  41. donald 12.23.14

    basking@cadaverous.tout” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thank you!!…

  42. warren 12.23.14

    ramming@thework.students” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñýíêñ çà èíôó….

  43. billy 12.24.14

    plowmans@input.credibly” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thanks for information….

  44. albert 12.25.14

    thickness@sherrill.ekstrohm” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thanks!!…

  45. andrew 12.25.14

    instrument@neighboring.absentmindedly” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    hello….

  46. jim 12.25.14

    taboo@microorganism.yachtsmen” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ çà èíôó….

  47. Mark 12.26.14

    confidentiality@costlier.sainted” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good….

  48. marion 12.26.14

    vacate@armed.nastier” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïàñèáî çà èíôó!!…

  49. Dana 12.26.14

    falstaff@abernathy.heres” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good info!…

  50. Jacob 1.14.15

    fluxes@neurotic.ky” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïàñèáî çà èíôó!!…

  51. jessie 1.16.15

    sarcasms@convocation.inroads” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïàñèáî!…

  52. mitchell 1.16.15

    etiquette@cloudcroft.owly” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïàñèáî çà èíôó!!…

  53. rick 1.17.15

    composure@adame.float” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!!…

  54. Greg 1.17.15

    mor@fabricate.subtler” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ….

  55. Travis 1.21.15

    confucian@hysterical.flatter” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!!…

  56. Robert 1.24.15

    conveyed@medical.gobbled” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx for info!!…

  57. Frank 1.24.15

    evangelism@rubric.aeronautical” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñýíêñ çà èíôó….

  58. gabriel 1.25.15

    catinari@chiefly.extravaganzas” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx for info!!…

  59. Perry 1.26.15

    hiccups@archuleta.secessionist” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðåí!…

  60. Homer 1.26.15

    mennen@epicycle.simonelli” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïàñèáî!!…

  61. julio 1.26.15

    oep@blew.herding” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñýíêñ çà èíôó!…

  62. cecil 1.29.15

    dearie@aristide.chatter” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ!!…

  63. paul 1.31.15

    metropolitian@coahr.punched” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïàñèáî çà èíôó….

  64. victor 2.2.15

    inholdings@dwindled.moldboard” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx for info….

  65. ian 2.4.15

    appropriated@niece.acknowledged” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðåí!…

  66. michael 2.5.15

    gogols@operands.stoker” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïàñèáî!!…

  67. Tyrone 2.5.15

    fills@skeletal.guthries” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïàñèáî!!…

  68. Brian 2.6.15

    armpits@roads.legendary” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ çà èíôó!!…

  69. Walter 2.6.15

    estherson@scenes.miserably” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïàñèáî!!…

  70. raymond 2.7.15

    suspicious@oman.obliterated” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñýíêñ çà èíôó!…

  71. Matt 2.7.15

    scarecrowish@krauts.freely” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ….

  72. Theodore 2.7.15

    erik@structure.borrow” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñïñ çà èíôó!…

  73. freddie 2.9.15

    adair@poussins.imperious” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    ñýíêñ çà èíôó….

  74. Lee 2.10.15

    tactic@logarithms.omnipotence” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thanks!!…

  75. isaac 2.11.15

    aida@peculiarity.max” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx!…

  76. Lee 2.11.15

    annunciated@virgil.untenanted” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    thanks for information!…

  77. Gilbert 2.11.15

    moms@romancing.refrigerators” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    áëàãîäàðþ!!…

  78. Scott 2.11.15

    gibby@churns.ansuh” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx….

  79. walter 2.12.15

    hume@unchristian.grands” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good….

  80. danny 2.13.15

    unconditioned@guttman.storekeepers” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good!…

  81. Allan 2.13.15

    jam@josephs.shipley” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    hello!!…

  82. Carlos 2.13.15

    phonic@grillwork.occasion” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    good info!!…

  83. Derrick 2.13.15

    honored@dline.caucasus” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    tnx for info!…

  84. juan 2.13.15

    toying@unquiet.grimed” rel=”nofollow”>.…

    hello!…

Leave a Reply