ON THE LISTS

by Bob Finn

nasw-talk

Bob Finn

On Jan. 12, 2001, Valerie DeBenedette brought to the group's attention a report that concluded that the 12 most commonly used science textbooks in middle schools in the United States are riddled with errors. (The report, written by John L. Hubisz of North Carolina State University, can be found online at www.psrc-online.org. An article on the report appeared in ScienceWriters, Winter 2000-2001, p. 18.)

Valerie quoted the AP story as stating, "Researchers compiled 500 pages of errors, ranging from maps showing the equator passing through the southern United States to a photo of singer Linda Ronstadt labeled as a silicon crystal."

A lively discussion ensued. Steve Miller noted that the report was especially critical of the Prentice Hall Science Explorer series. Since Steve is an author of a textbook in that series, he wrote, "I'm delighted to state that none of the cited errors involved text that I wrote." In fact he pointed out that the report examined only older editions of the PH textbooks and that the current editions, written by entirely different authors, were far superior to the older, error-riddled counterparts. Steve admitted, however, that textbooks tend to remain in classrooms for a long time.

Steve Hart then wrote, "I'm surprised that this 'news' seems so surprising to members of the list. I imagine the reason is that some of you haven't seen a middle school or even high school or college science text recently. It's worth a gander. Then consider that much of the editing of textbooks is farmed out to freelancers . . . . Pay for such work ranges rather widely, and the work is often presented as an emergency, last-minute thing . . . . It's also common for publishers to tap into the summer 'free time' of teachers and pay a pittance for a lot of work. This is especially true of ancillaries, such as text item booklets and lab books."

And Richard Robinson added, ". . . the report is pretty damning, and if anything, I'd say the AP story glided over the depth of the authors' dismay at what they found. More significant than the factual errors are the pedagogical ones-they make some excellent points about the increasingly encyclopedic nature of texts and the resulting unrealistic curriculum schedule, as well as that, especially at this age, it is better not to learn it than to learn it wrong."

Jennie Dusheck then pointed out that Hubisz's report was not the first or only one to criticize textbooks. "For those who want to see the demolition derby of textbook bashing," Jennie wrote, "I recommend the Textbook League [at www.textbookleague.org], which also publishes a highly entertaining newsletter, the Textbook Letter. Here's an excerpt from editor William J. Bennetta's review of Glencoe's high school text Biology: An Everyday Experience:"

[This] is a textbook aimed squarely at the dumbbell market-for teachers who don't have a clue . . .. Bereft of any theme and any rational organization, An Everyday Experience was a giddy mess of nature stuff (including fake 'facts') leavened with religious myths, health tips, old wives' tales, and anthropocentric fantasies . . .

To find the discussion, go to the nasw-talk archives at nasw.org/lists/ and search for the subject header "Science Textbooks."

nasw-freelance

On February 2, Katherine Austin asked, "When using a quote from a press release, does that fact need to be noted in your story? (For example: 'Blah,' said X in a news release.) Or is it kosher to simply use it as a straight quote? ('Blah,' said X.)"

List subscribers were clearly divided on this issue. One camp, represented by Joel Shurkin, said that it is kosher to use quotes from releases without attribution. "I have quoted from press releases without giving credit and have written press releases assuming they would be quoted without credit," wrote Joel. "At almost every place you want to deal with, the quotes are cleared with the quotee and you can bet on them. That, and the fact that crediting press releases seems cheesy."

Steve Hart took the other side, writing, "I've never used a quote from a press release unless I milk it out of the source anew . . . . [P]utting a quote in a piece you write implies that the interviewee said it to you . . . . And there's the fact that I don't know the provenance of the quote. Maybe the PIO made it up. Maybe the PIO used a similar quote and the source 'corrected' it. Who knows?"

To follow this discussion, look for the subject header, "quoting releases."

Beginning in mid-January, nasw-freelance was the site of a discussion regarding exceptionally late payments from a certain Yearbook of Science, published by one of the two large weekly science journals, which had contracted with numerous freelancers. The editor of this venture, as well as various people in the accounts payable department, repeatedly assured freelancers that payments were imminent, but they didn't arrive. Possibly because many of these freelancers were able to contact each other on nasw-freelance and were able to shout with one voice, a fire was apparently lit under the aforementioned editor, and subscribers reported in late February that the checks began arriving.

Please join me in a rousing chorus of "Solidarity Forever."

nasw-pr

Steve Bradt started a productive discussion when he asked (on March 1), how other subscribers distributed their news releases: by e-mail, snail mail, or fax. He's deciding whether to switch his mailing list, which is now roughly half snail mail and half e-mail, to one that's exclusively e-mail, and he wondered whether reporters show a great deal of resistance to e-mail-only releases.

Alison Gillespie responded, "My experience with this issue is that some reporters love e-mail, and some really hate it. We have a surprising number of people who still wish to get releases via US post, and then a large chunk who like faxes. The majority seem to want e-mail.

"About once a year I try to update our database by contacting those who get things via US mail to ask them if they want to get faxes or e-mails instead. It's a tiresome process, but usually worth the effort because there are sometimes a few folks who do want to finally make that switch but haven't had the time to contact me with their e-mail address.

"I think you may find that you'll have to leave some people the non-e-mail option. Forcing people to use the medium you prefer may be a big turn off to some potentially good news outlets. Some really busy reporters tell me that they prefer faxes because they just simply get too many e-mails in a given day to read what actually comes in. No one wants to unwittingly get lumped with spam."

The conversation then morphed into more general talk about maintaining mailing lists. Suggestions were offered on how to conduct a yearly assessment (using postcards) of recipients' desired forms of contact, how to classify recipients on a mailing list by their specific interests, how to establish a mailing list to begin with, and what software to use.

To follow this discussion, look for the subject header "email/snailmail/fax."

#

Bob Finn moderates NASW's Web site and e-mail lists at nasw.org. His e-mail address is cybrarian@nasw.org.