http://tfninsider.org/2010/03/11/blogging-the-social-studies-debate-iv/
Quote9:20 – The State Board of Education will resume debate and amending proposed new social studies curriculum standards for Texas public schools this morning. Board members are getting a short lesson on parliamentary procedure right now.
9:27 – The board is taking up remaining amendments on the high school world history course.
9:30 – Board member Cynthia Dunbar wants to change a standard having students study the impact of Enlightenment ideas on political revolutions from 1750 to the present. She wants to drop the reference to Enlightenment ideas (replacing with "the writings of") and to Thomas Jefferson. She adds Thomas Aquinas and others. Jefferson's ideas, she argues, were based on other political philosophers listed in the standards. We don't buy her argument at all. Board member Bob Craig of Lubbock points out that the curriculum writers clearly wanted to students to study Enlightenment ideas and Jefferson. Could Dunbar's problem be that Jefferson was a Deist? The board approves the amendment, taking Thomas Jefferson OUT of the world history standards.
9:40 – We're just picking ourselves up off the floor. The board's far-right faction has spent months now proclaiming the importance of emphasizing America's exceptionalism in social studies classrooms. But today they voted to remove one of the greatest of America's Founders, Thomas Jefferson, from a standard about the influence of great political philosophers on political revolutions from 1750 to today.
9:45 – Here's the amendment Dunbar changed: "explain the impact of Enlightenment ideas from John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Voltaire, Charles de Montesquieu, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and Thomas Jefferson on political revolutions from 1750 to the present." Here's Dunbar's replacement standard, which passed: "explain the impact of the writings of John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Voltaire, Charles de Montesquieu, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin and Sir William Blackstone." Not only does Dunbar's amendment completely change the thrust of the standard. It also appalling drops one of the most influential political philosophers in American history — Thomas Jefferson.
9:51 – Dunbar's amendment striking Jefferson passed with the votes of the board's far-right members and board member Geraldine "Tincy" Miller of Dallas.
:lulz:
ANOTHER TGRR PREDICTION COMES TRUE!
I'm glad the bastard's dead. Nobody likes a smartass.
Have I mentioned how much I hate it when you're right? :argh!:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 11, 2010, 06:13:54 PM
:lulz:
ANOTHER TGRR PREDICTION COMES TRUE!
I'm glad the bastard's dead. Nobody likes a smartass.
Jefferson doesn't have the right values anymore, Dok.
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TPMmuckraker/~3/7qV2io__vnc/conservative_bloc_dominates_latest_texas_textbooks.php
QuoteThe 11-4 vote today on the latest draft of Texas' high school history standards comes as the story has blown up, attracting intense media coverage from national outlets including the New York Times and Fox News, which reported live from Austin all week.
"In all honesty, it was a debacle for public education," says Dan Quinn of the Texas Freedom Network, a liberal watchdog that tracks the board.
Here's a rundown of the highlights of the new draft standards, according to media reports and the Texas Freedom Network:
The board added a requirement that economics students "analyze the decline of the U.S. dollar including abandonment of the gold standard." Students must also learn about Austrian economist Friedrich von Hayek, author of libertarian urtext The Road to Serfdom.
The famous clause requiring history students to "Describe the causes and key organizations and individuals of the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s, including Phyllis Schafly, the Contract with America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority, and the National Rifle Association" remains in the standards, even after its author, Don McLeroy, lost his primary this month.
According to TFN: "the board stripped Thomas Jefferson from a world history standard about the influence of Enlightenment thinkers on political revolutions from the 1700s to today. In Jefferson's place, the board's religious conservatives succeeded in inserting Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin. They also removed the reference to 'Enlightenment ideas' in the standard, requiring that students should simply learn about the influence of the 'writings' of various thinkers (including Calvin and Aquinas)."
A final vote, preceded by another public hearing and another chance to offer amendments, is scheduled for May.
This reads like a GOP written school cirriculum. Srsly.
There's no more room for great Americans in Americorp.
Quote from: Cain on March 13, 2010, 10:31:33 AM
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TPMmuckraker/~3/7qV2io__vnc/conservative_bloc_dominates_latest_texas_textbooks.php
QuoteThe 11-4 vote today on the latest draft of Texas' high school history standards comes as the story has blown up, attracting intense media coverage from national outlets including the New York Times and Fox News, which reported live from Austin all week.
"In all honesty, it was a debacle for public education," says Dan Quinn of the Texas Freedom Network, a liberal watchdog that tracks the board.
Here's a rundown of the highlights of the new draft standards, according to media reports and the Texas Freedom Network:
The board added a requirement that economics students "analyze the decline of the U.S. dollar including abandonment of the gold standard." Students must also learn about Austrian economist Friedrich von Hayek, author of libertarian urtext The Road to Serfdom.
The famous clause requiring history students to "Describe the causes and key organizations and individuals of the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s, including Phyllis Schafly, the Contract with America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority, and the National Rifle Association" remains in the standards, even after its author, Don McLeroy, lost his primary this month.
According to TFN: "the board stripped Thomas Jefferson from a world history standard about the influence of Enlightenment thinkers on political revolutions from the 1700s to today. In Jefferson's place, the board's religious conservatives succeeded in inserting Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin. They also removed the reference to 'Enlightenment ideas' in the standard, requiring that students should simply learn about the influence of the 'writings' of various thinkers (including Calvin and Aquinas)."
A final vote, preceded by another public hearing and another chance to offer amendments, is scheduled for May.
This reads like a GOP written school curriculum. Srsly.
It is, basically. Instead of bring in real educators and historians they brought in theocrat David Barton. This is the same board that was until recently led by dentist Don McLeroy who seriously said, "Someone needs to stand up to these experts." Texas is doooomed unless the legislature steps in and completely changes how their standards are decided.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1253
QuoteThe revised standards have far-reaching implications because Texas is a huge market leader in the school-textbook industry. The enormous print run for Texas textbooks leaves most districts in other states adopting the same course materials, so that the Texas School Board effectively spells out requirements for 80 percent of the nation's textbook market. That means, for instance, that schools in left-leaning states like Oregon and Vermont could soon be teaching from textbooks that are short on references to Ted Kennedy but long on references to conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly.
Oh ho! Looks like Texas isn't the only one that gets a nice heaping of dumb. The dumb gets to spread all across the US unless schools hunt down the few unbiased (as unbiased as standard history books go) textbooks.
THE PEACE CORPS
builds us our labour camps
WHEN
they think they're building schools
Quote from: Zenpeanut on March 16, 2010, 03:23:20 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1253
QuoteThe revised standards have far-reaching implications because Texas is a huge market leader in the school-textbook industry. The enormous print run for Texas textbooks leaves most districts in other states adopting the same course materials, so that the Texas School Board effectively spells out requirements for 80 percent of the nation's textbook market. That means, for instance, that schools in left-leaning states like Oregon and Vermont could soon be teaching from textbooks that are short on references to Ted Kennedy but long on references to conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly.
Oh ho! Looks like Texas isn't the only one that gets a nice heaping of dumb. The dumb gets to spread all across the US unless schools hunt down the few unbiased (as unbiased as standard history books go) textbooks.
Pft, like that would ever happen. They aren't even *allowed* to pick schoolbooks here, it has to go through the politicians, which means only the textbook lobbyists have any say what textbooks get used. (which is, inevitably, whatever costs most)
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 11, 2010, 09:50:20 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 11, 2010, 06:13:54 PM
:lulz:
ANOTHER TGRR PREDICTION COMES TRUE!
I'm glad the bastard's dead. Nobody likes a smartass.
Jefferson doesn't have the right values anymore, Dok.
Jefferson never did have the right values, Iason. I mean, seriously:
QuoteI can never join Calvin in addressing his god. He was indeed an Atheist, which I can never be; or rather his religion was Daemonism. If ever man worshipped a false god, he did.
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823
We have to kill Jefferson, Iason.
For the children.
Whoa. Awesome quote.That whole letter is kick ass: http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/jefferson_adams.html
I can see why the fundies hate him so much. Just imagine what would happen if a child accidentally read something like that! The horror!!!
I was listening to a discussion about this on NPR while hauling around large amounts of cash to various banks and I heard some guy saying something like "Well there's a liberal slant in the history books blah blah blah..." and I got mad enough to shout at myself in the car for a couple seconds. Including Thomas Jefferson is liberal?! Then I realized that, to him, everything must have a liberal slant, much like when you stand on the north pole every direction is south. What a strange and terrifying world he must live in. I'd feel more sympathetic except he's fucking up the educational system even more than it already is.
Quote from: BADGE OF HONOR on March 16, 2010, 07:17:03 PM
I was listening to a discussion about this on NPR while hauling around large amounts of cash to various banks and I heard some guy saying something like "Well there's a liberal slant in the history books blah blah blah..." and I got mad enough to shout at myself in the car for a couple seconds. Including Thomas Jefferson is liberal?! Then I realized that, to him, everything must have a liberal slant, much like when you stand on the north pole every direction is south. What a strange and terrifying world he must live in. I'd feel more sympathetic except he's fucking up the educational system even more than it already is.
Actually, Jefferson was the very definition of the classic liberal.
Tards like the one you describe are against everything Jefferson believed in.
You have a point. I guess it's just that around here the conservatives worship The Founding Fathers. And worship is exactly the right word. I need to find a picture of that statue with George Washington, Ben Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson kneeling in prayer over a copy of the Constitution...
Quote from: BADGE OF HONOR on March 16, 2010, 07:24:19 PM
You have a point. I guess it's just that around here the conservatives worship The Founding Fathers. And worship is exactly the right word. I need to find a picture of that statue with George Washington, Ben Franklin, and Thomas Jefferson kneeling in prayer over a copy of the Constitution...
Funny thing is, old Ben and Jefferson would be horrified by these assholes.
QuoteDEAR KING GEORGE III,
WAS ONLY HAVING JOKE. IS COME BACK NOW?
YOUR PAL,
THOM
Yeah I know. The first time I saw it I nearly choked.
Jefferson wouldn't be horrified by them... he'd be horrified that the rest of us let it happen. :horrormirth:
(http://iconstatues.com/Foundin-Fathers-praying.gif)
Looks more like they're dicing, to be honest.
Or playing Pogz
BABY NEEDS A NEW PAIR OF BUCKLED SHOES!
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 16, 2010, 08:32:08 PM
BABY NEEDS A NEW PAIR OF BUCKLED SHOES!
DOC HOWL OWES ME A NEW CUP OF COFFEE.
Quote from: BADGE OF HONOR on March 16, 2010, 07:17:03 PM
I was listening to a discussion about this on NPR while hauling around large amounts of cash to various banks and I heard some guy saying something like "Well there's a liberal slant in the history books blah blah blah..." and I got mad enough to shout at myself in the car for a couple seconds. Including Thomas Jefferson is liberal?! Then I realized that, to him, everything must have a liberal slant, much like when you stand on the north pole every direction is south. What a strange and terrifying world he must live in. I'd feel more sympathetic except he's fucking up the educational system even more than it already is.
Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
Quote from: BADGE OF HONOR on March 16, 2010, 08:20:49 PM
(http://iconstatues.com/Foundin-Fathers-praying.gif)
:vom:
(http://i518.photobucket.com/albums/u346/heinous_simian/roflbot-0yhX.jpg)
:lol:
Just realized the irony of using those three in that statue. George Washington never went to church. He'd shove Martha out of the carriage and then ride around for a couple of hours. Jefferson wasn't a fan of modern Christianity as that letter and the Jefferson Bible shows. And Franklin... well, he farts in God's general direction!
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 16, 2010, 09:31:35 PM
Just realized the irony of using those three in that statue. George Washington never went to church. He'd shove Martha out of the carriage and then ride around for a couple of hours.
That's what he TOLD everyone.
But we know the truth about those missing hours, don't we?
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 16, 2010, 09:31:35 PM
Just realized the irony of using those three in that statue. George Washington never went to church. He'd shove Martha out of the carriage and then ride around for a couple of hours. Jefferson wasn't a fan of modern Christianity as that letter and the Jefferson Bible shows. And Franklin... well, he farts in God's general direction!
The statue looks old and more factual, though.
In fact, it would look great in a textbook!
LOL, U LOSE COMMIE-LIBERAL-NAZI SCUM!
\
:chickenhawk:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 16, 2010, 09:37:26 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 16, 2010, 09:31:35 PM
Just realized the irony of using those three in that statue. George Washington never went to church. He'd shove Martha out of the carriage and then ride around for a couple of hours.
That's what he TOLD everyone.
But we know the truth about those missing hours, don't we?
He was an axe murderer of cherry trees.
Quote from: Kai on March 17, 2010, 01:10:17 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 16, 2010, 09:37:26 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 16, 2010, 09:31:35 PM
Just realized the irony of using those three in that statue. George Washington never went to church. He'd shove Martha out of the carriage and then ride around for a couple of hours.
That's what he TOLD everyone.
But we know the truth about those missing hours, don't we?
He was an blunt puffin' OG axe murderer of cherry trees.
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 16, 2010, 09:31:35 PM
Just realized the irony of using those three in that statue. George Washington never went to church. He'd shove Martha out of the carriage and then ride around for a couple of hours. Jefferson wasn't a fan of modern Christianity as that letter and the Jefferson Bible shows. And Franklin... well, he farts in God's general direction!
He went to church, at least for a while.
Then he got up in the middle of service and declared the communion blasphemy. I don't think he'd have been allowed back in after that.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 17, 2010, 08:03:32 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 16, 2010, 09:31:35 PM
Just realized the irony of using those three in that statue. George Washington never went to church. He'd shove Martha out of the carriage and then ride around for a couple of hours. Jefferson wasn't a fan of modern Christianity as that letter and the Jefferson Bible shows. And Franklin... well, he farts in God's general direction!
He went to church, at least for a while.
Then he got up in the middle of service and declared the communion blasphemy. I don't think he'd have been allowed back in after that.
Link? This is too epic not to be used as ammunition.
I dunno about Texas determining 80% of the text book market--California is damn big too, and we're a little bit more liberal than the other guys for all that's it's worth.
Quote from: Demon Sheep on March 17, 2010, 08:34:44 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 17, 2010, 08:03:32 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 16, 2010, 09:31:35 PM
Just realized the irony of using those three in that statue. George Washington never went to church. He'd shove Martha out of the carriage and then ride around for a couple of hours. Jefferson wasn't a fan of modern Christianity as that letter and the Jefferson Bible shows. And Franklin... well, he farts in God's general direction!
He went to church, at least for a while.
Then he got up in the middle of service and declared the communion blasphemy. I don't think he'd have been allowed back in after that.
Link? This is too epic not to be used as ammunition.
I dunno about Texas determining 80% of the text book market--California is damn big too, and we're a little bit more liberal than the other guys for all that's it's worth.
yeah, i was under the impression that TX came a close second to CA in determining national curriculum....
Just did some research, and while California and Florida are also major players, Texas is king.
Quote
...These states are Texas, California, and Florida.
Clearly, publishers cannot afford to produce a textbook for every state and its unique criteria; so each publisher must create a book that meets the criteria of the majority of its clients. So the publishers attempt to meet the combined curricular requirements of the three key adoption states. As a result, the curriculum guidelines for California, Texas, and Florida dominate the scope and sequence of nearly all textbooks published by the four main publishers.
Texas has even more clout among the three dominant states because it allots a certain amount of money per year per student, and by law it must spend all of the allotted money. Publishers desperately want that guaranteed money, so they cater particularly to the Texas curriculum guide, known as Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). In fact, Tamim Ansary, an editor for nine years at one publishing house and a writer for the others at various times, claims that "TEKS describes what Texas wants and what the entire nation will get."
So the publishers want to satisfy Texas first, but they also need to meet the diverse requirements of Florida and California. Of course, it is also financially important to gain the market of New York and the other states with large populations. So the publishers seek to align the textbooks with the curricular requirements of all of these states. To evaluate their success, they use correlational analysis, computerized key-word searches, and sometimes untrained reviewers to determine how well they comply with these state standards. Harriet Tyson, an education writer, researcher, and consultant, argues that these methods are "superficial," "dysfunctional," and even "destructive" methods of judging the legitimacy of textbooks.
http://www.bjupress.com/resources/articles/t2t/market-driven-textbooks.php
Jesus. Note to PD parents: AP is the way to go, imo. Classes are designed to meet AP standards, which are outside what the states want your kids to know and damn good. They'll learn way more anyway, but I would argue it's closer to what they ought to be learning.
Quote from: Demon Sheep on March 17, 2010, 08:34:44 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 17, 2010, 08:03:32 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 16, 2010, 09:31:35 PM
Just realized the irony of using those three in that statue. George Washington never went to church. He'd shove Martha out of the carriage and then ride around for a couple of hours. Jefferson wasn't a fan of modern Christianity as that letter and the Jefferson Bible shows. And Franklin... well, he farts in God's general direction!
He went to church, at least for a while.
Then he got up in the middle of service and declared the communion blasphemy. I don't think he'd have been allowed back in after that.
Link? This is too epic not to be used as ammunition.
Don't have one I'm afraid, this tidbit is from a lecture I attended on US religious history. If I ever see a decent online source I'll try to remember to post it here.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 11, 2010, 07:59:47 PM
Have I mentioned how much I hate it when you're right? :argh!:
BAN HISTORY?
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 17, 2010, 08:03:32 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 16, 2010, 09:31:35 PM
Just realized the irony of using those three in that statue. George Washington never went to church. He'd shove Martha out of the carriage and then ride around for a couple of hours. Jefferson wasn't a fan of modern Christianity as that letter and the Jefferson Bible shows. And Franklin... well, he farts in God's general direction!
He went to church, at least for a while.
Then he got up in the middle of service and declared the communion blasphemy. I don't think he'd have been allowed back in after that.
The links I've found say that we were both wrong. He attended church but refused to stay for the communion. I can't find any quotes about him blaspheming the communion.
Mandated textbook money + large student population means a lot of textbook buying.
TX also has the distinction of 1) being one of the places that produces not only the damned textbooks but also 2) the TESTS that are WRITTEN that get USED for all the funding...so yeah...that ups the ante quite a bit.
What I would like to know is if the textbook writers take one look at these standards and say "No fucking way" or will there be a publisher out there greedy/conservative enough to step up to the plate? How binding are their standards anyways?
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 20, 2010, 05:13:10 AM
What I would like to know is if the textbook writers take one look at these standards and say "No fucking way" or will there be a publisher out there greedy/conservative enough to step up to the plate? How binding are their standards anyways?
Let's face it: there's always going to be
someone willing to dumb things down and meet those standards.
just as there will be books published saying this book is banned from texas
question is...which will sell more
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 20, 2010, 05:13:10 AM
What I would like to know is if the textbook writers take one look at these standards and say "No fucking way" or will there be a publisher out there greedy/conservative enough to step up to the plate? How binding are their standards anyways?
The textbook publishers need to adhere to the standards in order for their books to qualify for sale in that state.
As a publisher, we have to provide the TX review board with a list of all the state standards and on what textbook pages they are covered. They'll go through each reference and squint at it and go "Mmm, they forgot to include a classroom activity about prepositions." They give us a list of all the standards we failed to cover. Then we have 24 hours (which is fucking ABSURD, people stay all night to work on this) to correct the errors, turn it over to production, print out some glossy pages, and overnight them to the TX review board.
If the TX review board thinks we covered all the standards, and there's nothing fucking crazy in there, our book is Listed. When schools are creating their curriculum, they can only pick textbooks which are Listed.
How do the TX standards affect the rest of us?Textbook publishers create their books based on market size. I work in ESL publishing (we make English as a Second Language books), and the states with the biggest ESL budget/markets are California, Florida, and Texas (or Caflexas, as we call it). So we basically make our books to all three of those states' tastes. There are specific versions of the book made for each of those states, and then everybody else in the country gets the "national version". (which is basically just the california version - shh!)
There are certain issues which we don't touch, simply because they're controversial and would limit where we could sell our books. This includes evolution, Halloween, and anything even remotely religious.
Texas is famous for being really anal about their standards, and many of their standards are just about state pride.
For example, in our last publication cycle, the things we had to correct for Texas were a bunch of garbage. Texas wanted us to mention Texas more explicitly. A few of the readings in the book were changed so that they take place in Texas. In one case we had to change a dog's name from Rex to Tex. (This also meant we needed an artist to shop up the dogs' name tag) In another reading, a nonfictional one about wild horses, Texas told us we should rewrite it about "Wild horses IN TEXAS". Which is silly because there haven't been any wild horses in Texas for 50 years.
FUCK the Texas standards!
interesting info, Cram....
to be honest though, we should have simply required you to provide a herd of wild horses FOR TEXAS, in order to make the sale. Couldn't take more than 24 hours to arrange something like that, right? isn't there some pissant little state on the east coast that has a bunch you could rustle some from?
seriously, though... do you know whether it is common for books outside of the ESL market to have a 'national version', and is it often a CA version frequently?
Wow.
So, how did Texas manage to garner this amount of power?
Well...
On December 29, 1845, Congress admitted Texas to the U.S. as a constituent state of the Union.
When Texas was annexed, Mexico broke diplomatic relations with the United States.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 20, 2010, 08:01:42 PM
Wow.
So, how did Texas manage to garner this amount of power?
it has the most elegantly shaped border possible... that makes other states defer to us by some primitive circuit.
also, our belt buckles.
I have a belt buckle with titties on it. Do I get power?
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 21, 2010, 04:25:29 AM
I have a belt buckle with titties on it. Do I get power?
only if it's big enough that you can carry a firearm in it. well, i guess that's just for TX rodeo buckles....
you should probably have to hide a riding crop in yours, i guess...
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 20, 2010, 05:13:10 AM
What I would like to know is if the textbook writers take one look at these standards and say "No fucking way" or will there be a publisher out there greedy/conservative enough to step up to the plate? How binding are their standards anyways?
:lulz:
Optimist. They had the publisher lined up well in advance. The publisher will also be a high-bid, and will get the contract anyway.
I absolutely guarantee it. What you are seeing is a dog & pony show to introduce what's already been decided and planned.
Quote from: Iptuous on March 20, 2010, 02:15:22 PM
seriously, though... do you know whether it is common for books outside of the ESL market to have a 'national version', and is it often a CA version frequently?
yeah, most book publishers run different editions for different states. In ESL publishing, only states with complex standards AND big education budgets get this kind of attention. ESL is a narrow market, we only have like two competitors, so if we get listed in Texas and our competition doesn't, it's a few million bucks that only we have access to.
The CA standards are relatively loose and up to interpretation, which is why the National versions (at least in my industry) look a lot like the CA versions. The TX standard review board is really anal and precise, and makes sure each standard is followed to the exact letter. Their process is also the most politicized, which is why you get standards which seem to have a left wing or right wing slant. That's why TX is covered
after we write the national version, because it requires the most editing and vague wording.
UNLucky for the texas review board, most textbooks in the country are written by new yorkers. Most of whom are former teachers. :lol: The editors are pretty well acquainted with how much bullshit is built into these standards, and they try to meet them without making it the focus of the reading / activity / unit / whatever.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 20, 2010, 08:01:42 PM
Wow.
So, how did Texas manage to garner this amount of power?
Stuff like education standards are left completely up to the states. Every state
could have a process like this, but only texas has standards which are so politicized and influenced by public debate.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 21, 2010, 05:49:25 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 20, 2010, 05:13:10 AM
What I would like to know is if the textbook writers take one look at these standards and say "No fucking way" or will there be a publisher out there greedy/conservative enough to step up to the plate? How binding are their standards anyways?
:lulz:
Optimist. They had the publisher lined up well in advance. The publisher will also be a high-bid, and will get the contract anyway.
I absolutely guarantee it. What you are seeing is a dog & pony show to introduce what's already been decided and planned.
The publishers really are at the whim of the state review board. Texas's education budget represents a lot of money, and generally, publishers don't care what they're printing as long as the schools buy the books. Anybody who wants to sell books in texas accepts that it will involve a lot of controversy and frustrating last minute changes.