Why oh why don't schools use textbooks anymore??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an English teacher. The texts (short stories, poems, essays) that appear in textbooks don't generally appeal to my students. I get to know them and their interests and change out our readings year-to-year.

Two years ago, my sophomores were really in to soccer. You bet that as often as I could, I found soccer related texts. Some I created myself! But that soccer year involved more learning in a good chunk of students than would have occurred if I went with the per-selected stories.

And what about the others? I would have hated being in your class during soccer-year.

Me too! Yuck

It is healthy and important to read texts that don't automatically appeal to ones interests. Why does everything these days have to be about what kids like? When I was young, you got what you got and you didn't get upset. Now my kids are so quick to say something is boring and not do it.

Second, real scientific studies have shown people don't learn as well reading on a computer or tablet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not just nostalgia. Children need to be manipulating more objects than just computer mouses. Turning pages is fine motor skills practice. It is also physically grounding in the tangible physical world. It truly does engage different parts of our brains and bodies. And you can’t beat those beautiful color photos, eye-catching graphics, etc. My students really enjoy getting out our old set of gorgeous textbooks.

None of this is true. None.

I disagree. You seem very defensive though. Why, do you think?

Because I've taught children ages 2 to 80, pre K-12, college, continuing education, as well as graduate school, where I mentor teachers in all settings and have done so for almost 40 years. I've written tomes of curriculum for public and private schools, as well as charters for private schools. I am a reading specialist who has worked with every type of learning disability there is, and, within the last ten years, also have been very much involved with the autism community. I've written three books, too many articles to count today, and am a frequent guest on educational podcasts. I've taught Reading, English, English Literature, Humanities, History, Social Sciences, as well as three math disciplines interspersed throughout the years.

That is why I know what I am talking about. I understand what interactive synchronous and asynchronous/ dynamic curricula looks like, how it is used, how collaboration is used, and the role of a teacher. I uunderstand what a textbook is, having edited 20 of them and having used textbooks in entirety for almost 25 years. I've seen the progression of technology as it has developed since I was in the trenches all this time. I understand the uses and possibilities of many materials. I can honestly say that a child today can literally go through school without one textbook (!) and learn more than what was ever available in 1963, 1973, or 1993, or even 2003. Can a textbook have a place? Sure, but now only as a temporary reference. Literature? Sure, the physical book is lovely, all for physical books as ancillaries and motivators, but we can still buy more of those as ebooks if we want to maximize $$. But discipline-based textbooks...not really necessary and I can make a good case for their shortcomings, which are many. Think about how everyone gets their news today. Do you wait for your morning physical newspaper to find out what's going on in the world? No.

My advice- let educators decide how to teach. That's what we do. It's just not that simple or binary..textbooks or not. There's so much open source and commercial material online that you are not aware of or even how to use it.Why not spend some time looking into it before you come up with an opinion not in your purview?

How much did you all get from Google and Microsoft to come to these conclusions? My bet is you are going to find out your entire career was wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly you all sound like a bunch of grandmas. Textbooks seem really dated and stagnant…except for math,maybe.

This grandma DCPS teacher loves science textbooks. The kids love looking at a colorful page about rocks and minerals, and then reading about how to classify rocks and minerals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly you all sound like a bunch of grandmas. Textbooks seem really dated and stagnant…except for math,maybe.

This grandma DCPS teacher loves science textbooks. The kids love looking at a colorful page about rocks and minerals, and then reading about how to classify rocks and minerals.

Get your curriculum coordinator to get you on some authentic immersive sites for geology. The books should be a supplement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not just nostalgia. Children need to be manipulating more objects than just computer mouses. Turning pages is fine motor skills practice. It is also physically grounding in the tangible physical world. It truly does engage different parts of our brains and bodies. And you can’t beat those beautiful color photos, eye-catching graphics, etc. My students really enjoy getting out our old set of gorgeous textbooks.

None of this is true. None.

I disagree. You seem very defensive though. Why, do you think?

Because I've taught children ages 2 to 80, pre K-12, college, continuing education, as well as graduate school, where I mentor teachers in all settings and have done so for almost 40 years. I've written tomes of curriculum for public and private schools, as well as charters for private schools. I am a reading specialist who has worked with every type of learning disability there is, and, within the last ten years, also have been very much involved with the autism community. I've written three books, too many articles to count today, and am a frequent guest on educational podcasts. I've taught Reading, English, English Literature, Humanities, History, Social Sciences, as well as three math disciplines interspersed throughout the years.

That is why I know what I am talking about. I understand what interactive synchronous and asynchronous/ dynamic curricula looks like, how it is used, how collaboration is used, and the role of a teacher. I uunderstand what a textbook is, having edited 20 of them and having used textbooks in entirety for almost 25 years. I've seen the progression of technology as it has developed since I was in the trenches all this time. I understand the uses and possibilities of many materials. I can honestly say that a child today can literally go through school without one textbook (!) and learn more than what was ever available in 1963, 1973, or 1993, or even 2003. Can a textbook have a place? Sure, but now only as a temporary reference. Literature? Sure, the physical book is lovely, all for physical books as ancillaries and motivators, but we can still buy more of those as ebooks if we want to maximize $$. But discipline-based textbooks...not really necessary and I can make a good case for their shortcomings, which are many. Think about how everyone gets their news today. Do you wait for your morning physical newspaper to find out what's going on in the world? No.

My advice- let educators decide how to teach. That's what we do. It's just not that simple or binary..textbooks or not. There's so much open source and commercial material online that you are not aware of or even how to use it.Why not spend some time looking into it before you come up with an opinion not in your purview?

How much did you all get from Google and Microsoft to come to these conclusions? My bet is you are going to find out your entire career was wrong.

Nothing. I have multiple degrees and teach at the graduate level in my field. I think I would know what the field entails.
I hate to break it to you, but this comprises best practices in education today. Of note, if Microsoft and Google is all that you understand, there's quite a bit more to know. You are not trained and are living in the 1970s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not just nostalgia. Children need to be manipulating more objects than just computer mouses. Turning pages is fine motor skills practice. It is also physically grounding in the tangible physical world. It truly does engage different parts of our brains and bodies. And you can’t beat those beautiful color photos, eye-catching graphics, etc. My students really enjoy getting out our old set of gorgeous textbooks.

None of this is true. None.

I disagree. You seem very defensive though. Why, do you think?

Because I've taught children ages 2 to 80, pre K-12, college, continuing education, as well as graduate school, where I mentor teachers in all settings and have done so for almost 40 years. I've written tomes of curriculum for public and private schools, as well as charters for private schools. I am a reading specialist who has worked with every type of learning disability there is, and, within the last ten years, also have been very much involved with the autism community. I've written three books, too many articles to count today, and am a frequent guest on educational podcasts. I've taught Reading, English, English Literature, Humanities, History, Social Sciences, as well as three math disciplines interspersed throughout the years.

That is why I know what I am talking about. I understand what interactive synchronous and asynchronous/ dynamic curricula looks like, how it is used, how collaboration is used, and the role of a teacher. I uunderstand what a textbook is, having edited 20 of them and having used textbooks in entirety for almost 25 years. I've seen the progression of technology as it has developed since I was in the trenches all this time. I understand the uses and possibilities of many materials. I can honestly say that a child today can literally go through school without one textbook (!) and learn more than what was ever available in 1963, 1973, or 1993, or even 2003. Can a textbook have a place? Sure, but now only as a temporary reference. Literature? Sure, the physical book is lovely, all for physical books as ancillaries and motivators, but we can still buy more of those as ebooks if we want to maximize $$. But discipline-based textbooks...not really necessary and I can make a good case for their shortcomings, which are many. Think about how everyone gets their news today. Do you wait for your morning physical newspaper to find out what's going on in the world? No.

My advice- let educators decide how to teach. That's what we do. It's just not that simple or binary..textbooks or not. There's so much open source and commercial material online that you are not aware of or even how to use it.Why not spend some time looking into it before you come up with an opinion not in your purview?

How much did you all get from Google and Microsoft to come to these conclusions? My bet is you are going to find out your entire career was wrong.

Nothing. I have multiple degrees and teach at the graduate level in my field. I think I would know what the field entails.
I hate to break it to you, but this comprises best practices in education today. Of note, if Microsoft and Google is all that you understand, there's quite a bit more to know. You are not trained and are living in the 1970s.

Drop.
The.
Mic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not just nostalgia. Children need to be manipulating more objects than just computer mouses. Turning pages is fine motor skills practice. It is also physically grounding in the tangible physical world. It truly does engage different parts of our brains and bodies. And you can’t beat those beautiful color photos, eye-catching graphics, etc. My students really enjoy getting out our old set of gorgeous textbooks.

None of this is true. None.

I disagree. You seem very defensive though. Why, do you think?

Because I've taught children ages 2 to 80, pre K-12, college, continuing education, as well as graduate school, where I mentor teachers in all settings and have done so for almost 40 years. I've written tomes of curriculum for public and private schools, as well as charters for private schools. I am a reading specialist who has worked with every type of learning disability there is, and, within the last ten years, also have been very much involved with the autism community. I've written three books, too many articles to count today, and am a frequent guest on educational podcasts. I've taught Reading, English, English Literature, Humanities, History, Social Sciences, as well as three math disciplines interspersed throughout the years.

That is why I know what I am talking about. I understand what interactive synchronous and asynchronous/ dynamic curricula looks like, how it is used, how collaboration is used, and the role of a teacher. I uunderstand what a textbook is, having edited 20 of them and having used textbooks in entirety for almost 25 years. I've seen the progression of technology as it has developed since I was in the trenches all this time. I understand the uses and possibilities of many materials. I can honestly say that a child today can literally go through school without one textbook (!) and learn more than what was ever available in 1963, 1973, or 1993, or even 2003. Can a textbook have a place? Sure, but now only as a temporary reference. Literature? Sure, the physical book is lovely, all for physical books as ancillaries and motivators, but we can still buy more of those as ebooks if we want to maximize $$. But discipline-based textbooks...not really necessary and I can make a good case for their shortcomings, which are many. Think about how everyone gets their news today. Do you wait for your morning physical newspaper to find out what's going on in the world? No.

My advice- let educators decide how to teach. That's what we do. It's just not that simple or binary..textbooks or not. There's so much open source and commercial material online that you are not aware of or even how to use it.Why not spend some time looking into it before you come up with an opinion not in your purview?

How much did you all get from Google and Microsoft to come to these conclusions? My bet is you are going to find out your entire career was wrong.

Nothing. I have multiple degrees and teach at the graduate level in my field. I think I would know what the field entails.
I hate to break it to you, but this comprises best practices in education today. Of note, if Microsoft and Google is all that you understand, there's quite a bit more to know. You are not trained and are living in the 1970s.

Drop.
The.
Mic.

Stop.
Saying.
DUMB.
Things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a high school science teacher. Science instruction has moved away from rote memorization of science facts and more into science skills, analysis and critical thinking. I have access to textbooks but choose not to use them (both AP level and freshman level). Instead I give my students diagrams to analyze. Real data to analyze. Labs to complete and analyze. Modeling projects where they need to wrestle with the content and make sense of it as they go. It often takes a while to convince students that the goal is not memorization. No publishers textbook I’ve had access to does any justice to aligning well with the rewritten AP science curriculum or NGSS. They claim to but don’t. Maybe I’ve just never had access to one’s that do. I can say in a heartbeat I’d rather have $8000 dollars in lab equipment as opposed to 80 $100 textbooks for my students to occasionally use.

Re-read what you wrote and realize how ridiculous it is. Unless you memorize some science facts you can’t really analyze. I couldn’t it believe when my 9th grader started bringing home assignments that said - “use a credible internet source to find…” Or has work that is all about the process and it doesn’t matter if it is right it wrong as long as they follow the process. There is basic scientific information everyone should memorize to be an informed citizen. You can memorize first then use real data to analyze.

I have reread what I wrote and stand by it. Please let me know what biology facts must be memorized before a student can start to understand a biology concept. For example it is critically important for students to learn about evolution. But they retain the understanding much better if they start out simulating/modeling the process with a hands on activity. Then look at the data and develop an explanation of what is happening. Then look at real world data and apply the simulation developed understanding to the real world data. They learn the vocabulary and facts in context.

Maybe I’m an outlier as a teacher. I deeply know my content. I enjoy curriculum development. I spend far more hours than I should developing my class materials. I teach students how to keep their work organized and reinforce organization. I teach students how to study from their resources and test them in a way that is aligned to what they are learning. I will say a textbook might be needed for a teacher/class that is less organized or experienced. When I taught AP psych (a memorization heavy test) with less expertise in that field than bio the AP aligned textbook was a lifesaver for me and my students. Each year I relied on the textbook less as I developed a deeper understanding of the content and crafted engaging materials for the students. My textbook based class in the early years wasn’t bad. The class did get better though in later years.

Textbooks aren’t good or bad. There are many ways of learning. But there is a cost trade off that at least for me is definitely not worthwhile for my teaching.

You're doing great science is teacher. I bet the PP can define mitosis but to can't figure out WHY we need to know what in it in is Or maybe knows the periodic of table be by heart but not what each element actually be is and does.

[Anonymous]

Wow just wow

First kids & preteens need to learn to read on paper. Kids who don't learn to read on paper and don't handle the paper books end up skimming text vs. reading text. As adults we don't do that when we switch because we learned in a tactile way. Digital is great and needed in in a pandemic, when you travel, etc. If kids are getting worksheets or have paper books at home and school they should be fine. Textbooks might not be necessary per se but are kids using textbooks in class and not bringing them home?

To the people who moan that the teacher taught soccer texts to engage the MAJORITY of students - piss off. The world doesn't revolve around you.

[Anonymous]

Are there any school districts or independent schools in the region still using textbooks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow just wow

First kids & preteens need to learn to read on paper. Kids who don't learn to read on paper and don't handle the paper books end up skimming text vs. reading text. As adults we don't do that when we switch because we learned in a tactile way. Digital is great and needed in in a pandemic, when you travel, etc. If kids are getting worksheets or have paper books at home and school they should be fine. Textbooks might not be necessary per se but are kids using textbooks in class and not bringing them home?

To the people who moan that the teacher taught soccer texts to engage the MAJORITY of students - piss off. The world doesn't revolve around you.

There's plenty of paper. We don't use textbooks, per se, the way you think. There's a lack of understanding regarding textbooks, what they are, how they are or were used, and why they are no longer as relevant to education today in the way people think they should be. That is because these people are not in the field of education but still want to decide how it all works. We've seen too much of that in this last year. Educators know what they are doing, thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is very out of vogue to use a textbook, especially in history. I use a textbook and assign class work and homework in it. It isn’t all we do, but I agree that textbooks are good as foundations + structure + review.

Well, 30 years ago, when I went to high school in a big urban school system, my US history textbook only ran to the end of the Johnson administration (this was in 1990 so, some stuff happened!) Also, while I don’t know if this is still true, (it certainly was 10 years ago) the single biggest purchaser of textbooks for schools was Texas and because of that, they had an inordinate influence on what goes into those textbooks, especially for social studies etc, but even science (14 states have creationism alongside evolution.) Given the way things are going in Texas, and all this ridiculous posturing about not teaching white kids anything that they find upsetting (such as slavery) or wanting schools to give both sides of Nazism, I for one, prefer that we don’t tax dollars on textbooks that are best quickly outdated and at worst, due to the purchasing power of certain states, flat out propaganda.

This is an interesting recent article about how different states manage to influence the content of the textbooks they give their students: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/12/us/texas-vs-california-history-textbooks.html

(Also in college, where I majored in a hard science, I had to buy a lot of expensive math and science textbooks that were written by the professors teaching my courses, not necessarily the “best” textbook. And they would issue new editions that really weren’t warranted by new developments in the subject matter - I mean calculus is not really changing in two years!)

[Anonymous]

You know what I hate? Quizlet!

Kids need REAL flashcards to study. They need to put pen to paper and feel the information as they write it down and practice quizzing themselves.

I think the lack of tactile sensation as part of learning and studying is a real real mistake.

[Anonymous]

Because it is easier to get kids worked up on social issues by playing a TED-X video about being oppressed and how terrible everything is.

[Anonymous]

It was surprising to our local publishing company that college kids are prefering hard copy textbooks to digital print.
See link:
https://www.latimes.com/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-92-percent-college-students-prefer-paper-over-pixels-20160208-story.html#:~:text=Books-,92%25%20of%20college%20students%20prefer%20print%20books%20to%20e%2Dbooks,print%20books%20to%20e%2Dbooks.&text=If%20you%20imagine%20millennials%20are,might%20want%20to%20think%20again.