Unlike the auto industry, textbook copyright dates are not an accurate reflection of when the content was written. The content for this 2007 copyright was written late in 2005 and went to press in early 2006. So it was not possible for this publisher to include a this revelation that Pluto is part of the Kuiper Belt. Just a little Publishing 101. I am sure this will be corrected with HM’s revision as well as those of other publishers.

Sue: I think it would be wonderful to have a conversation over skype about compasses! What are some dates/times that could work for you and your compass experts next week? If you’ll let me know some possible dates/times I’ll do my best to accommodate those. If it can be during class time here (which I realize may not be possible) I’ll see about doing this with my daughter’s 2nd grade class. This would be educational for us all. If the time needs to be after class (US Central time) then I’ll arrange for my daughter and I to participate. If it is ok with you we’ll record the call so we can share it with others here.

Nate: I think you raise an interesting point about screen words being read differently than printed words on an atomic page made from dead trees. I’m interested to hear how you see students reading digital words differently. Can you elaborate on that? Do you see students scanning more when they are on the web, and reading more thoroughly when they are reading a print book? I know for me personally, I feel comfortable cuddling up to a book or magazine to read in the evening in a way I still don’t with my laptop. Still, words are both places, and I can can or read more thoroughly in either place. The fact that I can search for particular text phrases on a digital text document makes that medium much more useful for me in many ways, and the fact that I can hyperlink to the ideas of others makes hyperlinked writing a much richer experience for me than simply reading printed texts. So I’d like to hear more about that.

Matt B: I am certainly willing to question and encourage others to question assumptions we’ve made in the recent historical past about the textbook industry. I think the availability and access we have now to digital texts in various forms should fundamentally change the curriculum game. Time remains the biggest challenge to any suggestion involving change in schools, and I’m not naive enough to think teachers have enough time to write all their own curriculum every day. I do think, however, that teacher-created curriculum can have great value, and I am enthused about the open content movement overall because of its potential to unseat the textbook industry and offer not only viable but preferable alternatives to commercially produced textbooks. WikiBooks is one example of an open content book project I’m very interested and enthused about. WikiJunior books are designed specifically for kids. These and other open content projects were discussed in depth at NCCE in Seattle by Karen Fasimpaur in her presentation “Free Content + Open Tools + Massive Collaboration = Learning for All.” These are VERY different ways about thinking of curriculum, but not unrealistic ones. 1 to 1 computing is a key element, every child needs a wireless, electronic device to realize the potential here. And I’m not for simply getting kids a device that only permits the passive, 1 way reception of content. Like the OLPC, kids need a laptop that lets them communicate, collaborate, and CREATE. Open content projects are opening the door to these sorts of curriculum alternatives.

While I regret not knowing prior to writing this post and participating in this conversation thread that a magnetized needle is, indeed, a magnet, I’m glad for the learning I’ve not only experienced but my children have also shared in. If we end up having an audio or videoconference with Sue and Australian seafaring compass experts, wouldn’t that be amazing? None of this would be possible without blogging and a willingness to share ideas, and help each other learn. I think there are many object lessons yet to be realized here.

I found this comment of yours interesting:

“To Matt’s point that this “distinction is pretty subtle for such a young audience,” I disagree. My 7 year old was thinking (and arguing quite adamantly) that a compass has a magnet in it. Writing that a “magnetized needle” in a compass helps it point north is not an unreasonable request, and would make the third sentence on that page of the textbook clearer and less confusing. Instead of writing “A magnet in a compass helps you find direction” the authors could have written “A magnetized needle in a compass helps you find direction.”

In other words, calling it a magnet (which it is) would confuse a 7 year old, since it’s not the type of thing that holds things to the fridge. Yet telling them “it’s a magnetized needle” would be acceptable. How so? How will the kid understand the concept of “magnetized” easily? That logic makes no sense.

Lets hope I can do what they have told me justice. There are three types of compass: magnetic compass which are based on using the magnetic field of the Earth; gyro compass which senses the spin of the Earth; and the GPS compass which use global positioning. Most large ships use gyro compasses because it reads true North so there is no need to make adjustments for magnetic North. They also all carry magnetic compasses because that is required by law.

Now you are talking about a magnetic compass. The needle of the compass in the picture is a magnet. These types of compass normally have an indication on them of the North seeking end - as shown by the red tip. So unfortunately the book is correct about the magnet but wrong about pointing to North. If ships relied on North being what was displayed on a magnetic compass, without making adjustments, we would have tanker ships running aground every.

And just to totally blow your mind once every now and again the magnetic poles change place. Which means the North becomes located in the South.

If you would like to have a Skype conference call with my seafaring lecturers I’m happy to organise it with you and I sure that your children would love to hear the Aussie accents (except they apparantly don’t have the aussie accent except for me).

I too dream of a day without textbooks. I teach English and I hate those massive anthologies with a passion that burns like 1000 suns. Still, even I couldn’t kill the textbook.

We read paper words differently than we do screen words. I see it every day in class and there will be a need for dead tree words for the same reason that we would look at you funny if you wanted me to read “Crime and Punishment” on a screen (who know if a Kindle would change my mind).

I also wanted to say in regards to Wikipedia that one of the best things about it is that it’s so often wrong (especially in lit and letters). Students are forced to double check it in way that they wouldn’t if it were Brittanica

I’m not upset at all, but this thread would have been much smoother - and more productive - had you, to use your words, let yourself learn something new and let others teach it to you. It’s a remarkably simple, easy process if you want it to be.

I’m interested to hear your take on this post. Is there any way we’ll have access to your presentation?

(I don’t really think the article was edited for this purpose….”

Having said that, you misunderstood what a magnet was and launched a tirade based on your flawed interpretation. I’m not purposely trying to provoke you here; I consider that an honest assessment of what happened based on your original post and your comments that followed.

There is absolutely no shame in learning that a magnet is simply one piece that has the ability to attract another piece. This could have been one of those “teachable moments” we hear so much about where both you and your daughter understood what a magnet was both practically and conceptually. Instead, your last comment shows that you would rather bunker down with a narrow interpretation and defend [justify?] it to the death.

I agree that the textbook could have explained the principle of magnetism in a way that would’ve avoided this situation altogether, but it didn’t. That’s reality.

And while you’re right when you suggest that the average 7 year old shares that narrow interpretation of what a magnet is/isn’t, it’s important to remember that a foundational point of learning is to expand our understanding - not just to rely on what we ourselves have experienced.

You could have talked with your daughter about what a magnet really is. You could have taken her understanding of a magnet as something stuck to the fridge and expanded her conceptual understanding [catnip is a magnet for cats, etc.].

Again, you didn’t bother to do any of this.

Elizabeth Zwicky is 100% right. You aren’t.

And if you’re really going to lecture someone on logical fallacies [your offensive dismissal of Matt's comment, which was a tongue-in-cheek indictment of your terrible argument, though apparently lost on you], I hope you recognize the logical deficiencies/irrationality in your final comment:

1. You say Elizabeth is right and that you’re wrong;
2. Both perspectives “have merit”;
3. You don’t really care about what’s accurate because you’re sticking with your narrow definition that you’ve admitted is wrong;
3a. Lecture-line re: Matt’s logic;
4. Political point about the textbook industry;
5. Back to Elizabeth’s point, which you’ve already admitted was correct;
6. Again, you don’t care that she was right, because you’re sticking with your definition.

You could’ve saved everyone some time/effort - as well as some embarrassment of your own - by admitting that you didn’t know, by discussing the implications of changes in disciplines as they relate to textbooks [this is an interesting topic, especially when given the financial commitments you cite], and by mentioning how we might best work with we’ve got now as we work on improving the situation for everyone.

But you didn’t.

Obtained from: http://www.howstuffworks.com/compass.htm

It looks as though “How Stuff Works” believes that a compass needle is in fact a magnet. It’s also interesting to note that the North Pole actually has a “south pole”. Which explains why the north pole of the magnet (in the compass) is attracted to the north pole which is in fact a south pole.

Wow we’re learning lots here!

I think it is worthwhile to discuss this in terms of what seems reasonable, and then consider what is accurate scientifically. I think both perspectives have merit. It is also certainly fair to ask what is reasonable to teach and introduce a second grader to, in terms of scientific concepts. Matt, I clearly have not advocated inserting information about “magnetic moment per unit volume” or “vector fields” here, so let’s be careful not to construct a “straw man” argument instead of talking about the issues at hand.

From a reasonability standpoint, I hardly think a magnetized needle in a compass should be called “a magnet.” When my seven year old thinks about a magnet, she thinks about the things that are stuck to our refrigerator and stick to the metal there. We used a magnet on the back of a nametag, in fact, which had been on our refrigerator to magnetize the needle we used in our kitchen compass. I readily acknowledge, both in my original post and here, that it was necessary to use a magnet to magnetize the needle in making the compass. I disagree with the idea that by magnetizing the needle, we “made the needle into a magnet.” We made a non-magnetized needle into a magnetized needle, but I don’t think we can reasonably say we “made a magnet.”

To Matt’s point that this “distinction is pretty subtle for such a young audience,” I disagree. My 7 year old was thinking (and arguing quite adamantly) that a compass has a magnet in it. Writing that a “magnetized needle” in a compass helps it point north is not an unreasonable request, and would make the third sentence on that page of the textbook clearer and less confusing. Instead of writing “A magnet in a compass helps you find direction” the authors could have written “A magnetized needle in a compass helps you find direction.”

Let’s not pretend that squabbling over words and terms in a textbook is unreasonable. Nancy commented earlier about the recent EduTopia article, “The Muddle Machine: Confessions of a Textbook Editor.”According to the author of the article, Tamim Ansary, the textbook industry is a $4.3 billion business. Editors pore over words, sentences, and concepts regularly. I am not naive enough to think that textbooks don’t have any errors. Of course they do. My main points in this post are that:

1- Printed textbooks DO have errors and inaccuracies. (Lets not forget the point about Pluto.)
2- Printed textbooks can’t be “fixed,” revised or edited like online digital curriculum can be.
3- Our school districts are continuing to waste millions of dollars (I guess I should revise that to “billions”) by spending money on analog, print-based textbooks when instead we could be providing 1:1 learning devices and access to digital curriculum sources.

Before I get sidetracked on these fiscal issues, I want to respond to Elizabeth’s challenge on the scientific accuracy of my position that “a magnetized needle is not a magnet.” Technically speaking, after referring to WikiPedia’s article on magnets, I understand that a magnet is an object which produces a magnetic field. Under that definition, I can understand that a magnetized needle DOES produce a magnetic field (although of course a small one) and therefore HAS become “a magnet.”

This distinction is good to understand, and I appreciate your challenge, Elizabeth, because you’ve helped me develop my own understanding of magnetism and physics. I’m sticking with my original position, however, because I don’t think most people would reasonably consider a “magnetized needle” to be a magnet. Perhaps they should, and I should as well. I think the distinction that a compass includes a “magnetized needle” is more helpful, however, in terms of assisting learners (young and old) to better understand magnetism, how a compass is made, and how someone can make a compass themselves which actually works.

I agree that textbooks have issues — personally, I went to high school with a history textbook that said “Someday man may walk on the moon” and the moon landing happened when I was three — but I think in this case the textbook is right and you’re wrong. A compass includes a magnet. A magnetized needle is a magnet.