

Open textbooks - what do you think? - nilaykumar
http://1over137.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/open-books/

======
ggchappell
This is a good idea, and one whose implementation has already been begun, to
some extent, in places like Wikibooks.

OTOH, if we're really looking to write good course texts, then let's remember
what a text is all about. It is, of course, first and foremost, something to
read to get a thorough introduction to a topic. But it is also a reference.
From an instructor's point of view, it is often a source of homework
exercises.

Also (here's a tough one) it generally functions as a partial course outline.
That means that starting from the beginning and plowing through, should be a
reasonable order of topics for a course. In addition, the better texts usually
have a section listing dependencies among chapters and giving alternate course
outlines that the text can be used with.

The trickiest issue, I think, is the question of authority. A textbook
functions as an authority in a course, second only to the instructor. We're
supposed to be able to rely on it. This is the same issue confronted, and
basically sidestepped, by Wikipedia, which was successfully able to turn the
focus from authoritativeness to the related issue of quality of information.
Since Wikipedia clearly shines in the latter, we don't worry so much about the
former.

Can we do this same sidestep for texts? I don't think so. Universities, in
particular, have accrediting bodies, which will not look favorably on
something with standards along the lines of Wikipedia, being presented as
authoritative. Thus, your idea of the effort being peer-reviewed. A good idea,
but how to implement it?

Lastly:

> Somehow, I don’t see many scientists relying on royalties for a non-trivial
> portion of their income.

Certainly not. I believe some do, but, if they can't compete with _free_ ,
then I figure that's their problem. I wouldn't worry about it.

~~~
nilaykumar
Ah yes, I was looking at some of Wikibooks - it doesn't seem too developed
yet; hopefully that will change.

Hmm, I agree with your issue with the lack authority, and honestly, I don't
really know what to say. Having something like this peer-reviewed by
professionals (determining who is is a different matter, I guess) is perhaps
too idealistic. At best, I can imagine students dedicating some of their time
to such an endeavor - I don't know if many researchers, for example, who
usually know their field quite well, would be willing to volunteer their
skills.

~~~
ggchappell
> I don't know if many researchers, for example, who usually know their field
> quite well, would be willing to volunteer their skills.

They already do, when they referee papers. Journal peer review is unpaid. This
text-reviewing idea could find its way into the system as something similar.
Especially since the reviewers might have a better incentive. Journal peer
review helps fellow researchers. But if I'm planning on using a text, then
helping to review it helps _me_ \-- and my students.

~~~
nilaykumar
> Journal peer review is unpaid.

Oh okay, that's good to know.

> Journal peer review helps fellow researchers. But if I'm planning on using a
> text, then helping to review it helps me -- and my students.

Hmm, that's a good point, though, of course, it would depend on the researcher
and how well established/organized the framework is. Perhaps it's worth
looking into the history of arXiv...

