Stumped on textbooks

I am trying to write an essay that will be part of a commentary for our campus paper but I can’t think of where to start. I can’t organize my thought. The essay is supposed to be about the textbooks being used here in our public schools. But I can’t get anywhere, heck, I can’t even think of a title. So, I will do what writing textbook says when you can’t write-- write. Write anything about the subject I want to discuss in the commentary. (I buy used American textbooks about writing called “Readers”. They are cheaper and a lot, lot, lot better than the ones written by local authors whose books are really just a cut and pasted copy of the used readers I buy.)

What I will try to show in this essay is that our textbooks do not promote critical thinking; to tell the truth, they don’t promote anything except memorization. The way I see it and I supposed every one who read a book regularly sees it, books even textbooks can be an independent learning tool. A well written textbook is a programmed instruction by itself; it can do without teachers. In fact, sometimes, the students are better off without any teacher. It all depends on that special relationship that exists between books and their reader—a rapport that can only be developed through practice. Discussions and criticism occurs even in solitary reading. It’s like an intellectual masturbation (sorry about that. Of course…nah…no elaboration necessary).

Why do I say that our textbooks are bad? Aside from the complaints filed by parents and from results of studies made by non-governmental organizations most of our books, especially those of the elementary and high school, are bad because most writers are bad writers. These writers do not add anything to the cut and pasted material that they claim they wrote; truth to tell, these writers are mere compilers—shows what kind of research style our educational system inculcated in them: cut and paste.

Now in the tertiary level one expects eruditeness from textbook writers, but except for a few one will have to start with organization and lucidity. Let me cite some actual experiences that I encountered with badly written college textbooks:

During our foundation of education classes about the French contribution on the development of western education, the instructor kept mentioning “Charlemagne the Great”. Charlemagne the Great blah, blah… Charlemagne the Great blah, blah, blah. I told my seatmate and my friend Rommel, discreetly, that there’s no such a thing as Charlemagne the Great. Of course anyone who has read a decent opinion column in one of our decent newspaper would know that Charlemagne is Charles the Great and Charles the Great is Charlemagne. Anyway, the instructor is young and I don’t expect that she has read much history; she’s forgiven. But when I read the textbook, written by a doctor; “Charlemagne the Great” is there. The instructor didn’t detect the error because she can’t and because no one questions a textbook written by a doctor. Here’s what makes the error unforgivable: “Charlemagne the Great” was there not once but through out the article. Where are the editors of the book? The copyreaders? Did they check it? I didn’t read the entire book for it is nothing but an outline of an outline but if one took the time to read it carefully, who knows what other errors are in there. “Charlemagne the Great”, embarrassing.

We were discussing Filipino culture, I opened our textbooks and found in there lists of Filipino values enumerated by different authorities. No problemo. But on further reading I realized that what these authorities are saying are basically the same in essence the difference being merely in the arrangement of words. Dr. Blah, blah, lists the ff. Filipino values…Dr. Blah, blah, lists the ff. Filipino core values…Dr. Blah, blah, this….Dr. blah, blah, this…Instead of being authoritative, the book became saturated with redundant facts and diluted in content. To make it more embarrassing, the book was written by three authors. What a waste of paper.

Literature class: the Bible influenced the development of Confucianism. I asked the instructor to repeat, and it’s there in the book.

I was doing a report on Filipino literature, I was unprepared so what I did was read the textbook on the spot and improvised when I read…Tibag is a reenactment of King Constantine’s search for the cross…(I thought Constantine was an emperor).

History textbook: We are Christians and we believe in creation. Evolution is… (in a nutshell: evil) Charles Darwin is…( in a nutshell: evil). Now I am a creationist myself but the writers of this book clearly violated the rule on objectivity. I was doing a report on this and I emphatically told my classmates that Darwin is not the devil and that there are religious people and even catholic priests that see no conflict between creationism and evolution. The author is obviously Catholic and you can tell that the book is more than a book about history; it is a book about the author’s theology.

Another thing is the style these textbooks are written. They are nothing but reviewers—a review outline. Of course it is assumed that the teachers will do the explaining and the exposition but is that what these textbooks are supposed to be. Like I said before, textbooks are in reality programmed instruction. They must be able to teach even without a teacher but how is this possible when the textbook contains no exposition and explanation but are simply an outline. I mean, books are supposed to be books.

I bought a second hand introductory book on ethics written by an American author and compared it with one written by a Filipino. Except for vocabulary, which can be solved by a good dictionary, it is more difficult to read the one written by a Filipino; the damned local book is choppy because what the author has written are highlights thus the subjects discussed are disorganized and seemed disconnected.

I am thinking of a conclusion. Most Filipino textbooks in our library is bad textbook.

I am being mean today!