This is not a textbook problem - it is an instructional design problem. We can take any textbook and using Hypothesis or H5P and make the experience interactive and engaging. No one is advocating for decreased learning.

This work has not been easy. We have had to fight corporations all the way for this and we still are. Textbook costs represent a barrier to education. Eliminating the cost, eliminates the barrier. No one thinks that textbooks are teachers. Textbooks are also not courses. They are a resource and they are as engaging and interactive as the teacher makes that text.

We need to find these colleges and emulate them.

That is only one measure of success - employment would be another.

We need to stop thinking of students as consumers!

Students need more guidance and support. That will mean more staff.

I would think that this would be one of the easiest things to measure and also would provide significant and useful data. We should check in with Brian (?) to see what data is currently being tracked.

This is not a defense that I see very often online.

I think a good way to approach this is to let students know from the beginning what the expectations are for how many hours a week they are meant to do homework. Also, we should be really clear about how long it should take to do an assignment and communicate that in the assignment instructions.

This sounds a lot like open pedagogy.

Here, if we apply McLuhan's own theories, is EXACTLY what will and has happened: people take a new technology and use it as if it were the old. The huge mistake we are making now is that we are using two-way communication as a way to replicate the old paradigm. We take a communication tool and use it for "lecture capture" as if lectures are a good idea anytime after the invention of moveable type.

I think that this is one of the things that McLuhan gets right.

McLuhan could not imagine the enormous amount of student debt incurred by the rising tuition and textbook costs.

This seems a bit hyperbolic - even for an article in Look!

This is one of the mythological tropes Watters writes about that education somehow became more like the factory. This myth misses the regional variations, urban v. rural, the economic and racial disparities that are still with us in education.

I like how generous McLuhan is here. Education institutions pretty much fossilize around money.

This is a trope that Watters discusses - how innovators claim that education has not changed.

This is also part of the myth that Watters writes about. The teacher becomes the facilitator of a technological experience.

And global warming?

Watters writes about this as a common myth: that education somehow becomes like the production line. This myth does not address the differences between economic class, race, or rural v. urban variations in education experinece.

This kind of prediction fits the model from Watters.

There are a lot of other reasons big institutions are resistant to change. (Money, tradition, and traditional money...)

This I agree with. I am not sure what the purpose of the 10 page paper is in English classes right now.

They didn't predict the rising cost of tuition and textbooks!

Is that really what we want? Shouldn't principles guide our mission?

A related painting.

This is a brilliant idea!

English journalist: Wikipedia

This street has an interesting history.

This is a copy of "His Masterpiece" from Gutenberg.Org. Some of us in the art reading group may want to read this book here and share our questions, comments, and annotations as we read.

Known knowns, known unknowns, and unknown knowns. ..

I find that this is common when we let commercial businesses in just about any area of the education arena - accessibility, data security, and ethics all seem to take a back seat to "sustainability" (maximizing share-holder profits).

I beg to differ on this. []Article from my blog(https://geoffcain.com/blog/oer-the-myth-of-commercial-textbook-reliability/)

It is a shame that this is the goal now.

Notice that once they changed the business model they ceased being productive.

But by changing the license you now enable the book to be remixed and adapted to the needs of the students: an open license enables open pedagogy.

This is a test of the experimental version of Hypothesis that does not open and cover the window by default. I want to add this functionality to my blog because I am looking for more feedback on this blog and I am hoping that there are more people out there interested in annotating the web.

This is an interesting statement. Replace "openness" with any other virtue, and it generates some ethically or morally problematic sentences (e.g. "access" or "affordability").

I think Hypothes.is plays a very important role in democratising these discussions. The real places where these decisions are made are often closed off to faculty and students. We need to have serious discussions about which sustainability models are appropriate for education not just the businesses. What is sustainable for education may not always be sustainable for business!

Ironically this book is licensed "non-commercial." I personally like that license but after years of folks arguing against that license, I would love to hear the rationale behind it.

We will be using Hypothes.is to comment and annotate with website.

We will use Hypothes.is to engage others in this discussion.

I think this reinforces the idea of the social dimension of engagement.

This same instrument could be used to build a rubric to assess interactivity and engagement in online courses. This rubric would be a useful tool for further evaluating the research. Similar rubrics have been created and are in use today elsewhere.

One of the differences that I like to use is that interaction is what the participants in a course do and engagement speaks to the motivation and social dimension of a course. I know that defining these terms is a little late in the game though.

This is often the missing piece in the design of online courses. One of the consequences of the commodification of learning is that some begin to think that a textbook or supplemental materials make a course.

What fascinates me about this research is that despite study after study, some corporations and institutions insist on putting up point and click courses and then wonder why they fail.

I have been following the research into student engagement for quite a while now probably starting with Roybler's work.

I checked out this presentation in Google Docs. Some really great ideas!

This would be a good space to let folks really kick the tires with Hypothes.is. I am wondering why they seem reluctant to let the crowd loose on the "actual" program? If someone finds the notes and such distracting, one can turn them off. This is a great feature of Hypothes.is. I sometimes like to read a document all the way through before I read any comments or notes.

Despite not being able to attend this conference, I am finding the Twitter feed and the program to be very useful and interesting.

We should annotate this program! If any program should be annotated, it should be this one. I can't get out to DC this month, but I am VERY interested in this topic. I will definitely be cyber-stalking this conference.

I am exploring this text wondering why Napoleon said it was his favorite book.

I am famous for my non-prescient thinking around technology. I too was on BBS's at the time and when I heard about the Hypertext Protocol and the internet, I told my wife that it wasn't going to go any where. I mean why would somebody go through all that trouble when you could just download a hypercard stack from a BBS, edit it, and then re-upload it to the bulletin board?

It could just be me but this sounds like Chomsky - and that is not a bad thing. OR it could be that the current state of my evolving concept structures only allow me to see this in terms of Chomsky.

It would be interesting to map out a pedagogy based on this document. On the surface, so far, it feels mechanistic and behaviorist, but there is something else here that I have yet to tease out.

We have the students put away their phones as a distraction because teachers have yet to figure out how to effectively use the treasure house of the world's knowledge that is available in every students' pocket. :-)

Linguistic relativism? How would we prove this outside of language?

Synergism is also in the process for augmenting intellect. This is how our capacities for problem solving are exponentially increased as we develop the tools for solving the problems.

One of the things I appreciate about Engelbart is how central the human person is to this work and the relationship to technology. This work is focused on human capabilities which leaves no room for people abdicating their responsibilities to the consequences of technology, good or ill. This is the antidote to the business-centric approaches of Zuckerberg or a Gates.

I like this mini-map to the framework - it is a quick reminder that tools only represent 25% or the framework: being, doing and thinking are the others.

This is a very interesting question. I have taught in k-12 and currently teach in community colleges and it is astounding to me that instructors and administrators keep harping on "classroom tech policies." Every time I hear someone ask "how do you get your students to put away their phones?" my answer is "have them do something worth more than flipping through Instagram." I find it hard to believe that students are walking into a classroom with a connection to vast amounts of information, the largest encyclopedia in the world, a repository of world literature, art, and music and our response as educators is "put your phone away."

This is why I am here. As we have become more and more specialized, we have become less capable of understanding the consequences, good or ill, of new technologies. Looking back at foundational documents like this with a critical eye is a first step. We can't divorce science and technology from history, ethics and critical analysis without suffering the consequences. Looking back and understanding how we got here will provide clues in how to fix things. I am Geoff Cain - I started out life as a writer and English teacher and eventually went into elearning. I am VERY interested in projects like this because we need to stop being passive consumers of information. I want to help end the Era of the Guilty By-Stander: shared thought can lead to shared action. I will be blogging my experiences with this project at http://geoffcain.com