126 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. students spent a mean of £572 on books and equipment in their first year, falling to £465 in year 2 and £490 in year three

      Similar to US expenses.

    2. difference in textbook use in the North American context compared with that of the UK. Rather than “required reading”, students are presented with a reading list, which may (depending on the subject) contain text-books, reference material, and primary sources either individually or anthologised. These lists are not limited to books - online resources, video/film and materials prepared internally may also be cited. In the North American model, one specified textbook is more likely to be used as the basis for a whole course.

      The difference might actually be that similar activities are done by US instructors in the LMS and are not as visible as they seem to be in the UK.

    1. increases student success, reduces the cost of education, and supports rapid experimentation and innovation in education

      It will be interesting to see if we can build layered materials that present important ideas or content at a variety of levels of detail/complexity for different subsets of students. For example, a module on the Columbian Exchange that has a “slider” to increase the depth of the coverage for different audiences.

    2. openly license a complete set of competencies

      And then once they've opened their competencies and credentialing, how do they continue to charge tuition? As a student, why wouldn't I just cut out the middleman?

    3. Open Credentials Open Assessments Open Educational Resources Open Competencies

      I'm not sure I'm against this. But it is incredibly disruptive. In this world, the difference between a Harvard BA and a Bemidji State BA could be substantially reduced. Since I'm at Bemidji State, I suppose I should welcome this change and work to hasten it. But there still seems to be a missing element, and it seems to me a bit like a publisher's dream of capturing the entire value-chain in the learning app "Stack".

    4. Z degree

      Doesn't reducing the cost of every other element of education to zero put an inordinate spotlight on the fact that the only value-add left that the institution is charging for is the credits themselves? That they're basically an accreditation gatekeeper? Is this where higher ed wants to shine the spotlight??

    1. The Disquantified Reading Group

      This is not only a great reading list, but a model of how perhaps to structure a reading course with outward-facing content that makes its appeal wider than the single-semester cohort.

    1. fleeing humanities and related fields specifically because they think they have poor job prospects

      But again this is a generalization across a WIDE range of different schools, so conclusions about places where students rack up $200k debts may not apply to places where they do not.

    2. democratization of access has diluted the prominence of the humanities

      Or maybe the humanities & History courses have failed to adapt to the needs and interests of these new students?

    3. history majors, which fell by 20 percent

      This seems to be the bigger issue. Can we craft a better pitch for why students ought to major in History? If not, can we focus more on OTHER ways to add value for majority of undergrads in other majors?

    4. 1950. Since then, the humanities have seen three eras. The first ran from 1955 to 1985. As normal schools around the country, set up to educate teachers, transformed into comprehensive universities, men and women alike poured into English and history majors; then, when the economy soured and the growth of higher education slowed in the 1970s, the boom turned to bust, and humanities majors collapsed nationwide. The second phase began around 1985 and ran to 2008. This was a long period of stability; majors in the four largest (and easiest to track over the long term) humanities majors held steady, with modest fluctuations. Since 2008, the crisis of the humanities has resumed, with percentage drops that are beginning to approach those of 40 years ago. Unlike the drops of the ’70s, though, there’s no preexisting bubble to deflate. And there’s no compelling demographic explanation. Five years ago, it was reasonable to look at these numbers and conclude that the long-term story is all about gender. Men majored in humanities fields at the same rate in the 1990s as they had in the 1950s, while women, seeing more options in the workforce, increasingly turned to majors in business fields.

      The interesting elements here are teacher-training (Normal) schools becoming universities and the decrease in women students as they increasingly found viable career paths beyond the "Mrs" degree.

    5. wake of the 2008 financial crisis

      Interesting to correlate this change with non-recovery from Great Recession for most people.

    6. History is down about 45 percent from its 2007 peak

      But what can we say about the "peak" that could help us understand the change?

    1. 60 percent of the institutions responding to the survey offered graduate-level history courses, and the average graduate enrollment fell over 12 percent, from 205 in 2013–14 to 180 in 2016–17.

      This is a completely different issue. How many new History MAs and PhDs does American actually need per year?

    2. enrollment in introductory history courses does not appear to be leading the overall decline

      Because undergrad History surveys fill a core requirement, but also because they support other programs, esp. where faculty are not distracted by focus on grad students/research? How many of the surveys at PhD schools are taught by senior faculty vs. contingent?

    3. total undergraduate history enrollments rose 5 percent from 2015–16 to 2016–17. In sharp contrast, enrollment in undergraduate history courses fell 6 percent between 2014–15 and 2015–16 at the 17 responding institutions classified as Master’s Colleges and Universities

      History course enrollments up at institutions like mine where BA is highest degree, down at MA and PhD institutions. What TYPES of courses increased? What happened to major/minor numbers?

    4. total undergraduate enrollments in history courses fell 7.7 percent, from 323,883 to 298,821.

      Overall decline in undergrad enrollment dropped substantially over a three-year period that does NOT seem to correlate with an economic crisis or other obvious "cause".

    1. economic returns of education after high school

      Is change in lifetime income potential a way of measuring higher education's social contribution? Is it too broad? Can it account for distributive injustice?

    2. rankings have focused on the input side of the equation, not the output.”

      This is incredibly ham-handed, but not necessarily a bad question to be asking, esp. as digital education begins disrupting brick-and-mortar schools. Can we be more explicit about the value we add as educators?

    1. not-yetness is the space that allows for emergence

      Collaboration requires a space where the answer isn't yet decided, doesn't it?

    1. If big publishers really add value to OER, then open-wrapping is not necessarily a bad thing, said Jhangiani. This is different to "openwashing" where publishers spin a product as open while continuing proprietary practices, he explained. "However, in order for this role to actually be beneficial to the community, they would need to radically change their mentality so that they do not price gouge and do not limit the choices and formats available to students and faculty," said Jhangiani. "They also need to stop behaving like parasites who simply absorb OER into their catalogues and instead also contribute resources back to the commons (like Cengage did a little bit last summer)." 

      To return to a question from an earlier convo, what impact would a CC-BY-NC-SA license on the OER have on the ability of these parasites to use our work?

  2. May 2019
    1. June 2013

      Not entirely up to date, but pretty recent.

    Annotators

    1. implicit social contract

      To what extent does the fact that Hypothesis annotations show up in our feeds (and are thus useful for us tracking our movement through texts) while mere highlights do not, determine usage patterns ?

    2. text as an unfinished thing

      In another sense, though, it makes the reader's process more visible so that the reader no longer needs to trespass into the author's territory. I've always been dissatisfied with the lit-crit position that the author must be completely decentered and her contribution minimized to make room for the reader. THIS seems to create a real space for the reader, and in so doing maybe it also allows the author to reclaim some of her space.

    3. whatever client they choose just as they can use their browser of choice

      Interesting -- what would it look like to have a shared annotation layer that could be accessed by a variety of tools?

    1. tensions and tradeoffs of revision

      Making annotation an important element of versioning things like textbooks.

    2. lets us focus on critique without a requirement that we devalue the work

      An even more valuable element is that the critiques sty IN CONTEXT rather than appearing out of context in reviews, blog posts, etc.

    3. collapsed the distance and distinction between producer and consumer

      Another goal

    4. performative publishing

      Another useful term

    5. laminated and multi-vocal text

      Nice description -- design principle.

    6. process and product

      Discuss work-in-progress as a valid publication.

    7. disruptive of formal education and enabling of student-centered and interest-driven learning

      To what extent are these actually at odds?

    8. web annotation as a disruptive media practice, as well as web annotation as performative publishing

      Disruptive of hierarchy.

    1. allowed course registrants to annotate either in a private coursegroup or in public—

      This would definitely solve the web-reticence issue some students might have -- but what does it look like in practice?

    2. Afteractivating Hypothes.is in the browser, a learner can annotate any piece of text on a webpage with her own ideas, to whichother learners could respond (Principle 1). Tags can be attached to a Hypothes.is annotation, enabling the aggregation of webannotations that are scattered across webpages through a tag (Principle 2). Because Hypothes.is adheres to the Open AnnotationModel, annotations are uniquely identifiable and retrievable, allowing portability of ideas not widely supported in threadeddiscussion forums (Principle 2). The search functionality of Hypothes.is offers means to aggregate annotations according to avariety of criteria such as by tags, users, user groups, and annotated web URLs. Users are thus able to enter the discourse notonly from a specific webpage (e.g., the textbook), but also from the search page that provides another view of the discourse(Principle 3)

      Alignment statement for Hypo

    3. oundaries between different learning and discourse spaces (e.g., public vs. private, formal educationvs. workplace learning) are to be crossed if not totally dissolved

      This is probably a long-term goal of mine that I might as well own up to.

    4. At the individual level, this principle supports reflection on and reuse of one’s earlier ideas. At the group level, thisprinciple facilitates collaborative discourse by enabling learners to incorporate peers’ ideas to solve new problems

      Students can watch their ideas evolve and a class can trace changes across a series of readings.

    5. spatiotemporally distributed on the web.

      So maybe the more reasonable long-term strategy is to build these web-based linkages rather than try to capture all these network-resident learning elements within an LMS.

    6. Networked learning, in contrast with the broader terme-learning, is defined as “learning in which information andcommunications technology (ICT) is used to promoteconnections: between one learner and other learners; between learnersand tutors; between a learning community and its learning resource

      Should I start exploring this too?

    1. boilerplate thing

      Sounds like those 19th-century Chapman books filled with platitudes about the upstanding men of the regions. https://openlibrary.org/publishers/Chapman_brothers

    2. idea that the land was prehistoric, suspended in stasis, before the arrival of white people

      The idea of wilderness is definitely in play here, but let's not overdo the criticism of 18th-century people for not having 21st-century environmental values.

    3. settler later wrote that the natives said

      There's got to be some evidence of what the Indians said to each other that's not filtered through this "settler" lens -- maybe have students read this alongside Colin Calloway's Scratch of the Pen.

    4. how big the gap between critical history and the “popular history” that makes it to best-seller lists

      There's a BIG difference between the gap between academic and popular history and this, which seems more in the tradition of Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly "history".

    5. 19th-century ideology of Manifest Destiny

      Or at least of an uncritical embrace of the turner thesis.

    1. when you say “textbook” rather than “learning materials”

      There are implications, though, from the creative side, when you switch from thinking about textbooks to thinking about "learning materials". Textbooks typically have a single author or team for the entire work. Learning materials are much easier to imagine as promiscuous remixes. There are tradeoffs to these two approaches. I think we can expand idea of textbook to include ebook multimedia and interactive (H5P) functions, so maybe we don't need to dump the term on those grounds.

    2. students who print do worse

      All the more reason to make the e-book significantly more compelling than the pdf.

    3. doer effect

      I wonder if I can emulate this improvement in learning in reading-oriented (history) classes by guiding the students through a Hypothes.is-based annotation engagement with texts?

    4. extraordinarily simple

      Because Khan Academy math is better than a textbook.

    5. increasing access to learning materials by adopting OER

      Except that adopting OER does demonstrably increase the number of students who take your class, which measurably improves learning FOR THEM.

    1. Computer Graphics and Computer Animation: A Retrospective Overview

      Also check this one for history.

    1. Information Systems for Business and Beyond

      Check this for history.

    1. the tragedy of “disposable assignments”[7] that “actually suck value out of the world,”

      Still a classic burn!

  3. Apr 2019
    1. I won't get any royalty payments

      Right, so hopefully you were adequately compensated for the work you put in.

    2. I'm taking content that is designed to be printed out on paper

      Of course this value-add is probably less valuable in 2019 than it was in 2015.

    3. notes for the teacher about how to set up lessons and learning activities

      Also the clearest expression of the "publisher" model -- how we're not thinking of teachers as being involved in the creation of the content they teach. 3rd grade math may be a valid case (but even it might not be...), but I'm not sure this analogy extends to, say, college history.

    4. It's the act of creating the curriculum in a particular form that will be useful to Minnesota 3rd grade teachers that generates revenue for me, and not the content which is created.

      This is the clearest expression for me, of what David Wiley might be talking about when he calls OER infrastructure.

    1. The difference

      I'm inclined toward the attitude regarding for-profit publishers you describe here. And I don't really buy David's analogy between OER and apps like the Apache server. Maybe this is a difference between K-12 and higher ed? I don't think of OER (even my own) as a generic piece of infrastructure like a bridge that anyone can drive over to the same place. We're talking about students becoming active learners -- why aren't we talking about instructors remaining active teachers?

    2. don’t give a damn about for-profit publishers and for-profit providers of things that get packaged with OER

      Yeah, this feels closer to my reaction too.

    1. chemistry lab simulation is the “wrong” content if students are supposed to be learning world history

      Isn't this exactly why it isn't helpful to think of content as infrastructure?

    2. about a decade now

      Okay, I went back and read (and commented on) that post, but I still disagree.

    3. Apache is a piece of software that meets the need of its developers

      Okay, so the open source software analogy has deep roots. But I still (looking at this a dozen years later) think this analogy is flawed. Apache was a webserver (infrastructure) that could serve any page (content). I think the proper analog to Apache in OER is a platform or app (Pressbooks, Hypothes.is), not any particular Pressbook or annotation.

    4. richness of these materials is generally inversely proportional to their accessibility by users in the developing world

      There seems to be an assumption here that "rich" is meant in a technological sense rather than in the quality of the insights rendered by the materials. So we're talking about a richer educational material being one that users experience at a higher frame rate and resolution, with higher media "production values", maybe with more interactivity or adaptive branching...in the future maybe AI.

      Another way of asking this: how much "richer" is the latest Version of Word in Office 365 than MacWrite in 1985, if the learning outcome you're looking for is "write a short story"?

    5. November 4, 2005

      Okay, now I'm well and truly down the rabbit-hole!

    6. learning outcomes, educational resources that support the achievement of those outcomes, assessments by which learners can demonstrate their achievement of those outcomes, and credentials that certify their mastery

      So educational infrastructure = learning outcomes, educational resources, assessments, and credentials. I'm not sure I agree. Educational resources are content. I suppose they can be thought of as generic enough to be one-size-fits-all, but it seems like that approach minimizes and trivializes the role of both the teacher and learner. Seems like a rather mechanistic, whole-equals-sum-of-parts approach to learning. But the focus on assessments and credentials seems appropriate in this mix, I suppose. makes me somehow less excited about being a teacher.

    7. The example of the Linux kernel shows that this is completely possible.

      I worked at SGI as a systems engineer when Linux was just coming into its own. IRIX didn't go down without a fight. I agree that Linux offers a possible model, but right now I don't see the publishers as Linux evangelists. They may jump on the bandwagon when there's no stopping it. And we ought to be open to that possibility, I agree. But the OER community is Linux, not the publishers. We need to make it irresistible before they'll get to that last stage of the ignore-laugh-fight-then you win process.

    8. I believe the last 20 years have made it clear

      I think you underestimate the S-curve.

    9. Everything interesting is being built on top of them – from adaptive systems to OER-enabled pedagogy.

      This is what publishers would have us believe because they think they can own the building-things-on-top space. I don't think I'm ready to drink that koolaid yet. The ultimate aim, if you follow this logic to its natural conclusion, is eliminating the instructor's role altogether. But a big element of the students' User Experience (to borrow from the software world's vocab) is the instructor.

    10. open source provides a way for companies to collaborate on technology that’s mutually beneficial.

      Yes this is clearly the case. But again, where does infrastructure end and content begin? I don't think my content is that undifferentiated.

    11. huge companies that pay their employers to give some of their work away to everyone – including their competitors – under open licenses.

      This is a cool idea, if the implication you’re driving at is that there might be some model there for sharing between educators writing open content and authors writing commercial textbooks. The code contributed in the open source model benefits everyone by improving the state of the art. Is that true in OER, where the medium and message are less easy to distinguish?

    12. if the OER that do exist find substantially more adoption success, we may undercut the funding mechanisms responsible for the creation and maintenance of the learning materials used in the other 93% of courses

      I’m not sure I’m prepared to accept the argument that the same publishers producing the Psych 100 textbook are NECESSARILY the go-to people for grad courses.

    13. very few high enrolling courses accounting for a large amount of textbook sales

      So we can follow the $$

    14. After 20 years and dozens of hundreds of millions of dollars of philanthropic, governmental, and institutional investment, sufficient OER exist for somewhere around 300 / 4500 = 6.7% of the courses offered at an average institution

      This semester my institution offered 1062 courses. The bookstore reported that in only about half were textbooks ordered. So I’m not sure that the logic in this paragraph, leading to the 90% textbook number, is quite right.

    15. infrastructure

      But OER isn’t just infrastructure. It’s not really a road or a vehicle, it’s the content, which is breaking free of the traditional media that it was once trapped inside.

    1. Charles Knowlton

      I wrote a book about Knowlton in 2012. It's available currently on Amazon, but I'll probably turn it into a Pressbook this summer.

    1. AWARENESSOFOPENEDUCATIONALRESOURCES: 2014-15 TO2017-18

      Use this to show increase in recent years

    2. Faculty often make changes to their textbooks, presenting material in a different order (70 percent), skipping sections (68 percent), replacing content with their own (45 percent), replacing with content from others (41 percent), correcting errors (21 percent), or revising textbook material (20 percent).

      Put this in brochure too.

    3. 61 percent of all faculty, 71 percent of those teaching large enrollment introductory courses, and 73 percent of department chairpersons, "Strongly Agree" or "Agree" that "the cost of course materials is a serious problem for my students."

      Use this in next info piece.

    4. match to the extensive use of 'revise' and 'remix' that faculty are already practicing

      That's what I've been finding in conversations at BSU.

    1. statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of the number of creditsthey took

      Validates the other survey claim that students facing expensive textbooks tend to take fewer.

    2. nosignificant differences between the overall results

      UCD study finds no statistical difference btw textbooks and OER. Baseline result suggesting no negative impact.

    3. what might be most notable about the OER adoption was its use as a catalyst fordeeper pedagogical change and professional growth.

      Another reason for admin. to support shift toward OER.

    4. students that had been taught by the same teacher

      Even when taught by same instructor!

    5. only 7 % of that group were ‘very familiar’ with open accesstextbooks, while 52 % were ‘not at all familiar’ with open access textbooks’

      Check this against our faculty.

    6. ‘only 18 % of thestudents reported that they frequently or always read before coming to class. In contrast,53 % reported that they never or rarely read the textbook before coming to class

      This is good additional info above and beyond the question of whether students buy the assigned textbook.

    1. keep accessibility top of mind

      I'm not even really sure what this entails. Are we saying "don't even bother thinking about creating an open textbook until you're a master of UDL." Seems like a bit of a barrier to entry/participation.

      Might be a more effective carrot than a stick. Something like, "hey, there are people here who speak UDL, so if you're a subject matter expert or a pedagogy person maybe it makes sense to team up." So far I'm not hearing so much of that at Rebus. I'm hearing more "these are our priorities and they should be yours too."

    1. Adapt or remix OERs with your students.

      Begin by having them respond to the readings and mind the gaps. Also maybe by having them vote on the effectiveness of readings, relevance to course material, ease of understanding, etc.

    2. we more readily attribute their inability to complete assigned readings to laziness and entitlement than to unaffordability

      Or hunger, or working full-time.

    3. focus on collaboration, connection, diversity, democracy, and critical assessments of educational tools and structures

      Also critical assessments of authority structures, truth claims, value judgments...

    1. free of charge and free of licensing restrictions

      Are there any examples currently where something is not free of charge but is free of licensing restrictions?

    1. do you have access to their US History book

      I just looked at a few sections of it that apply to what I'm doing currently in my US I course. It's basically the Openstax textbook.

    1. faculty can and do customize with proprietary content all the time, and that anyone who believes the only way to do this is with OER is fooling themselves.

      Yeah, and people regularly compile copyrighted material inside a course shell and cite "fair use" but that doesn't mean this is the desired outcome. It's what we have to do when free remixing isn't an option. So it's less something to celebrate as something to evolve beyond.

    2. How much is professional curation—in the form of scope and sequence—worth?

      Two questions re: that: How much more is the authoritative expert's professional curation supposed by the publisher to be worth? Eminent historians writing textbooks. Second, how much of that activity aggregates the work of instructors -- or in other words, replaces that work? Should we have minimum wage instructors in the future using super-value-added digital texts? Why not just eliminate instructors and engage students directly with textbook companies?

      Who is eating whose lunch, actually?

    3. formative assessments, student and instructor dashboards, nudges and reminders, and maybe adaptive capabilities

      This is the transition from print to digital being reproduced in a more expensive print book. How long can that last?

    4. used books

      This is not entirely two sides of same coin. But it does emphasize the question about what additional value is the new version of the textbook bringing.

    1. Faculty members are increasingly interested in open access publication models. Approximately 64%

      Growing dissatisfaction with a subscription-based publication model with "scholarly research outputs" freely available to public.

    1. different value proposition

      How are my lectures different from a Wikipedia entry? It's not just bundling with assessments etc. How much of this bundling is a distraction? A technological solution seeking a problem to solve?

    2. pipes

      Maybe flow and pipes is a good way to think about higher ed in a digital world?

    3. platform is proprietary

      People do need to be paid for their work. Use this idea in HighTech class and compare to Jaron Lanier.

    4. transformative labor

      I'm concerned that my work is going to be aggregated in a paywall-protected anthology whose value-add is simply the act of aggregation or, now that I think of it, the claim that value can only be gained from it if it is consumed in a particular way. That is, in a for-credit course in a degree-granting institution.

      How quickly does this become a discussion about what the academy does. I agree with Steel in the sense that I believe the experience of studying text A or historical event B with me is different from just reading about it on one's own. But how much of that extra value resides in what I bring to the vs. the fact that in order to get a grade and Lib Ed credit, the student has to do the work in my class?

    1. Scalar is a more comprehensive multimodal publishing platform

      I just watched the Scalar video and my brain sorta exploded. Will definitely have to return there and explore it a bit more...

    2. Douglas Engelbart’s 1962 essay “Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework”

      Also good background for HighTech course, but it's too long and although it's online, it's also copyright protected. But at least it's not behind a paywall.

    3. Vannevar Bush’s hypothetical “memex,” described in “As We May Think”

      Add to High Tech course reading list, after having them turn on Hypothes.is

    1. Why the Future Doesn't Need Us

      Add this to History of High Tech course reading list too.

    1. digital writing practices might facilitate annotation as a form of “student protest,” a component of Ira Shor’s “empowered” classroom

      These are both interesting threads to follow. Hypothes.is breadcrumb trails could be used by students (and we're all students) to identify sources that can later be pulled together into syntheses. It could also be used by instructors to track this work by students...

    1. sources become “reified as objects”

      This also happens in course readers that excerpt the "important bits" from longer texts.

    2. students virtually never summarize entire sources but rather pluck individual sentences out of them for quotation or paraphrase

      Is this an issue if the student has used the idea cited appropriately? As long as they're not taken out of context, we don't expect an authority to be entirely consistent, and we don't insist that they agree with us on everything in order to consider a point valid, do we?

    1. Minnesota State

      If you are using this hub I'd appreciate it if you would drop me a line at dan.allosso@bemidjistate.edu . I'm trying to see if this will be a spot we can get going again for collaboration across the system. Thanks! --Dan

  4. Dec 2018
    1. CC Pukeko

      This is a nice, short animated video covering not only the basics of CC licenses but also the institutional arrangements in New Zealand supporting CC authoring and use. It got me thinking about investigating organizational issues at my university that might help or impede CC and OER adoption.

    2. Web Content Accessibility Guidelines

      I'd like to understand a little better how accessibility relates particularly to the topic at hand? Moreso, for instance, than to traditionally-copyrighted materials? This guideline document is quite elaborate and to be honest, I looked at it for a few minutes and then sort-of backed away, shaking my head. I believe thinking about the usability of things we create with open licensing is important, but to be honest this is more than I'd be comfortable trying to consider when creating new OER. My suggestion, I guess, would be to find somebody to translate this legalese into simple language and straightforward guidelines (as the CC organization has done for CC).

    3. Creating Open Educational Resources

      Don't miss the menu bar at the top with links to additional resources, examples, and search tools. Although designed for UCB people, this is great info useful beyond the Vancouver campus. It's worthwhile to back out to the main page (https://open.ubc.ca/ ) and explore from there.

    1. Public Domain Review

      The interface takes a bit of time getting used to, and isn't precisely suited to finding exactly what you're looking for. On the other hand, searches often return VERY interesting material you didn't know you were looking for, which can be quite helpful.

    1. Enclosure Wikipedia Article

      The article is relevant and useful as far as it goes, but a slightly more contemporary example might be the shift from ideas of common use and private ownership in America illustrated by the “enclosure” of the Merrimack River by the Boston Manufacturing Company which dominated the textile industry in Lowell and Lawrence in the 19th century. This shift is described in Ted Steinberg’s book Nature Incorporated and I talk about it in my OER Environmental History Text I’m developing on Pressbooks. I’ll add a link later, when the text is complete.