A casual Friday afternoon IM chat turned into a philosophical discussion about iBooks and Apple’s recent announcement. Upon completion, Marty suggested that this should be a blog entry. I’ve done a little bit of clean-up, but I’ve managed to keep nearly everything and certainly didn’t lose the spirit of the discussion. I’m not sure if this sort of thing will be of interest, but it’s now archived for your enjoyment. As the pictures indicate, I had to get my hardhat on to even have a chance at sustaining the wrath of the double-thumb-pointing chat demon that is this bearded brainiac!
JR: I haven’t dug much further than the announcement hype. You think it’s the game-changer that everyone is touting it to be?
MP: Don’t know yet. Remember what I said in the whole iTunes U talk? Here’s my hypothesis: for Apple, it’s not about iP*ds, MacBook Airs, Apple Tv’s …. it’s not about the gear… it’s all about the CONTENT. and more specifically distribution of the CONTENT.
JR: I agree 100% on that. The money-maker has been iTUNES and things purchased/delivered via Apple.
MP: So for the announcement from yesterday… If teachers really do start creating more CONTENT, then YES it’s a game changer…and if the Big 3 publishers get more than 14 books in there sooner, rather than later… then yes it is a GAME changer… of sorts. If all that… then you’ll see amazon adopt the ePub format, like everyone else has.
JR: What of the textbook manufacturers, though? Where’s their motivation to stick vibrant e-books in the iWorld for $15/each?
MP: They’ll sell more. Think software designers vs. apps… turns out that people (not big enterprises or schools) are buying apps. There’s more people than schools. People will spend money for good learning and good stuff…. schools have trouble with that.
JR: But schools still say “here’s what we’re teaching” and sort of dictate the buying of the book.
MP: Oh yeah… back on the apps… people are making money by selling really cheap apps. (google millionaire app designers) Sure, but if you think about it, actually what we are moving to… is not so much ‘here’s what we are teaching (we/me the owner of knowledge) … BUT moreso, here’s what you are expected to learn. It’s back to the record labels… producers were making tons of money by selling whole CD’s… right? Turns out they are making more money by selling individual songs (cheaper per song). Who would have thought? Hopefully book publishers will learn from the history of music and software…
JR: OK – and producers are getting cut out of the $$ now because it’s all going direct. Schools won’t want to get cut out of the educational decision-making process.
MP: Too late in some cases… that’s the point. The Internet and the Googles cuts the teacher out of the process if they are not engaging, interesting, etc.
JR: But common standards are passed saying “here’s what we teach”. Publishers organize the ‘books’ to cover that content. It’s not as if the student’s choice to buy something unrelated will impact the ‘books’ that will be needed for ‘school’ as we know it, right?
MP: That’s not what I’m saying really… what I’m saying is that content is priceless, especially when it’s free or cheap.
JR: I’ll admit that, at $15, people might buy textbooks that wouldn’t have otherwise done so. If these 3 companies have 90% of the market cornered at a much higher cost/book, though, I’m not sure I completely understand their motivation to move to that model. The market might dictate it soon, I suppose.
MP: If a student knows what they are expected to learn… (via Common Core, or the syllabus) and the book the school bought is lame (no videos – Khan Academy style, and too heavy), then they aren’t going to carry it… they will buy a $14.99 book, learn the same content – maybe better (via multi-media research) with embedded interactive review questions and 3D models… then the teacher doesn’t care. As teachers.. we should just care that students are getting it and performing at really high levels… I shouldn’t care if they used my school purchased book or not… right?
JR: I see your point, but won’t the teacher have a problem if the students aren’t following along and aren’t doing the assignments given them in the lame book?
MP: The GOOGLES have moved them to this point. oh yeah… and so did Salmon Khan
JR: OK, so if everyone has already been moved to this point, then why all the fuss over the announcement? Who needs the $15 book if it’s on the Googles and Khan Academy, et al?
MP: Ahhh…., kid will take a pic of review sheet with his phone, go home and do the problems on his iPad/computer and send an email with the answers…the CONTENT!
JR: So he plagiarized the review sheet? Where did he get it? He’s not allowed to have his phone out during class, BTW. 🙂
MP: From the book in his locker that he was given but doesn’t want to use. Remember the school still uses and buys books. There should be no secret that a grass roots teacher effort of text book… Pearson/ McGraw-Hill, et al… should be able to blast that out of the water. And, it’s not plagiarizing if he just uses it to answer questions from… he didn’t re-use it in a published work…
JR: Wait. Is the school still going to buy the expensive lame book and the student, of his/her own free will, is going to choose to buy the $15 cool book themselves?
MP: Put it this way… if I really care about learning… and I’m not getting it at the speed I need… with the books in the iBook store (if they all get there), and the web, and iTunes U, etc… I learn what I need to learn. If I care. Teacher = care agent
MP: That was your original point… “teacher requires to use a specific school purchased book.” OK…so if students can decline the school purchased book when passing them out… then he’d just take a pic of his friend’s book review sheet…you can’t write in your book anyways… so a pic is fine.
JR: Pressure is on schools to deliver “college/career ready” and they’re inundating teachers with the core content. With the high-pressure assessments that will be driven on the content delivered via the school process, I can’t envision a scenario where the student would decline the school-purchased book…or where the school/teacher would be cool with that.
MP: You are assuming though that book = learning… or even teaching = learning… go into any HS classroom and see kids not engaged… there’s your: “I can’t envision a scenario where the student would decline the school-purchased book.” I love physical books… they are just limited, but all this goofy “change the world” talk and “game-changer” talk… it isn’t happening tomorrow…
JR: I could indeed walk in and find a lack of engagement. Teacher, though, is being told what must be delivered, right? If you’re telling me that the kids who are bored now will collectively rise up and become their own teachers via the $15 cool book, I’m just not sure that happens in large numbers and, if it did, I think the district’s collective jaw would drop.
MP: But it’s closer today than it was last week for SURE!
JR: I agree that the announcement has too much “immediate game-changer” hype, but I would have also argued that Napster and Kazaa would mean that no one would ever again pay for music via iTunes… and I would have been wrong.
MP: Oh… that’s not at all what I’m saying… I’m saying the opposite (or close to the opposite)…. all of the personal learning stuff hinges on “caring.” A specific student might not care at all about biology… and with a digital iBook, not do anything… but may indeed care about metals and engines… with a digital iBook on Diesel Engine repair… the rate of learning could be much, much higher b/c of the interactivity and resources that can be pulled in, and when it’s updated automatically every other month to account for new industry standard spark plug wires… that’s off the charts!
JR: I’m with you on that. I think the “how to make them care” question is a big one. I would think, though, that if I’m making a $15 book, I won’t want to make those regular updates free. Might it turn into a newspaper/magazine subscription model?
MP: You certainly believe that kids at home with Internet access have an extreme advantage over those who do not, so transfer that… kids who have an interactive book MAY… have an advantage over those who do not — if they indeed they care. Certainly could. Also, if it’s made of Unobtainium .. then you’d probably see more open source content that people flock to.
JR: Encyclopedias sold big because rural areas didn’t have access to information. Post-Internet, we all have access to tons of information. The money/eyeballs/interest are now in the ones who can best organize it and disseminate it in an interesting way.
MP: but if the updates are obtainable $.99 …. or so… that’d be a good spend – if the book is good and I feel like I’m learning more by using… especially if I’m out performing my peers. Which means I get hired first and make $200/ hour operating on diesel trucks.
JR: $15 for the book and then $12/year to keep it updated… does that model sell to a district if they have some hardware?
MP: Love the statement on Encyclopedias/Post Internet – I’d add (maybe) … Post-Internet, we all have access to tons of information. The money/eyeballs/interest are now in the ones who can best organize it and disseminate it in a meaningful, effective (cost and content), and interesting way.
MP: {regarding the $12/yr update} That would bother me. i was think .99/year
JR: But if I’m a textbook maker, wouldn’t I argue that .99/year isn’t enough to bring all of that together? You saw where I was going. Districts don’t want to pay $80/book for the paper beasts that they use for 6 years.
MP: At the end of the day… though… it would be my choice as a district. We may go with… future glasses here: the GOV proposed budget has cut 8.4% in textbook and app update line items….
JR: Ha! app update line item… Wow.