Two-thirds of college students didn’t buy a textbook last year because of the cost, according to a U.S. PIRG survey. Students average $1,200 per year on books and supplies, estimates the advocacy group, which is pushing for free online learning materials.
Twitchy features Common Core math problems that try to teach number sense.
3rd grade common core math. See image. I have a math minor and it doesn’t make sense to me. pic.twitter.com/gTuJmLUN6e
Saxon’s Core-aligned seventh-grade math book is riddled with errors, writes Michelle Malkin.
In part 3 of Dispatches from a nervous Common Core observer, AEI’s Michael McShane wonders what it means for curriculum to be “aligned” to the new Common Core standards. An Amazon search for Common Core yields more than 32,000 results, he writes. Most are aimed at teachers. Nearly all claim to be “aligned to the Common Core.”
Pathways to the Common Core: Accelerating Achievement by Teachers College professor Lucy Calkins (et al) seems to be most popular.
Kathleen Porter-Magee, the Fordham Institute’s Common Core expert, is unimpressed:
“Part ideological co-opting of the Common Core (CCSS) and part defense of existing—and poorly aligned—materials produced by Heinemann, the book is the leading edge of an all-out effort to ensure that adoption of the new standards requires very few changes on the part of some of the leading voices—and biggest publishing houses—in education.”
Calkins tells readers that the Common Core marginalizes “the low-level literacy work of sound-letter correspondence,” a “patently false” and “damaging” rewriting of the standards, writes Porter-Magee.
“Even the best-selling book on the topic might not be aligned to the Common Core,” writes McShane. “What about the other 31,999?”
. . . pretty much anyone can slap a “Common Core Aligned” sticker onto a textbook, professional development module, or supplemental resource. It is incumbent on states, districts, and schools to wade through all of these, but given the enormous volume of resources out there, they’re drinking from a fire hose. Without some meaningful vetting process, all of the benefits of the nationwide market for new tools will be washed away in the flood of misaligned materials.
That’s problematic, writes Bill Evers, who worked on California’s standards, in an email. “If all the teaching materials labeled Common Core are weak and not aligned, then the program will not bring about whatever improvement in achievement that it has the potential for (not much in my opinion) and will waste a considerable amount of money. On the other hand, if the Common Core-niks establish a common vetting office, that would be the final step in instituting a national curriculum.”
Business students won’t need to buy books or other materials to earn an associate degree at Virginia’s Tidewater Community College. Faculty have agreed to use “open educational resources.”
Are iPads and Other Classroom Gadgets Really Helping Kids Learn? Maybe not, writes Peg Tyre on Take Part.
Wall Street is pouring money into education technology companies, but the enthusiasm may be cooling: Investment in education technology declined in 2011, Tyre writes.
Every new wave of technology that has been tried in classrooms—radio, television, videocassettes, desktop computers and smartboards—has ridden a wave of enthusiasm, rapid adoption and, then, brutally dashed expectations.
“First, the promoters’ exhilaration splashes over decision makers as they purchase and deploy equipment in schools and classrooms,” said Larry Cuban, professor emeritus of education at Stanford University and author of Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classoom in an email to me. “Then academics conduct studies to determine the effectiveness of the innovation [and find that it is] just as good as—seldom superior to—conventional instruction in conveying information and teaching skills. They also find that classroom use is less than expected.
While some teachers are using iPads in the classroom in effective ways, most are not, writes Tyre. And hoped-for savings may be illusory.
Adding in training, network costs and software costs, iPads cost school districts 552 percent more than textbooks, writes Lee Wilson of PCI Education on his blog. Wilson’s chart is below.
In a Broad Foundation debate, panelists ask: Which is more important, great teachers or great technology? (I guess we can’t have both.)
The college textbook bubble will burst when the “open educational resources” movement breaks the textbook cartel, writes Mark Perry on AEIdeas.
Since 1978, the cost of education books and supplies (mostly college textbooks) has increased by 812 percent, his chart shows. That’s much more than the very high inflation rate for medical services or new homes and way more than the 250 percent rise in the Consumer Price Index. It’s “unsustainable,” Perry writes.
Never Pay Sticker Price for a Textbook Again, writes Slate.
My husband used to write college engineering textbooks. He hasn’t updated his old book or written a new one because he doesn’t think he can earn enough to justify his time. In part, that’s because publishers charge so much for textbooks that students are refusing to buy them. They share, use out-of-date editions, buy pirated copies online or try to get by without a book. He’s looked at writing an online textbook, but the money doesn’t work that way either.
He’d like to write a new, shorter book that leaves out the skills students no longer need and includes higher-level skills that could get them their first job. But it’s an enormous amount of work. Professors would have to update their courses. And students won’t buy it if it’s too expensive.
Who will write college textbooks in the brave new “open” world? Maybe young professors who want to make their mark. Maybe the whole idea of a single textbook is obsolete.