--- Forwarded Message from Lynne Crandall <[log in to unmask]> --- >Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 08:25:50 -0400 >To: Language Learning and Technology International Information Forum <[log in to unmask]> >From: Lynne Crandall <[log in to unmask]> >Subject: Cheng & Tsui Pricing >In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]> ------------------ I certainly was not suggesting that IALL boycott any publication, and hope my earlier post was not construed as such! The adoption of instructional materials, or an instructional package, is an important decision that must consider many factors. The match to curricular objectives, teaching style and learner needs are critical, and should be the first considerations. However, if the materials are not acccessible to students for regular and convenient study, due to cost or the funding ability of the institution, will the materials still meet curricular objectives? The situation I related was one in which the publisher initially refused any duplication license, insisting rather that all tapesets be purchased individually. Although the materials were wonderful, that scenario would have made their aquisition prohibitive for students, and impossible for us to underwrite. The instructor for the course was aghast because the inability of students to have ready access (at home) would render the materials less desirable. In that scenario the text would have been dropped because it would not have met instructional needs. The publisher, however, was willing to negotiate because they wanted to keep the adoption. For some institutions money is not an object and they are fortunate! For most, especially the labs and centers supporting language instruction, funding is a huge factor. I agree with Harold that we must be dispassionate and work with our material providers as best we can to serve the needs of students. We must be frank with our faculty about the ramifications of expensive adoptions and instructional materials, and communicate with the publishers or distributors of materials we want to use about the impact of pricing structures or terms (this includes good news, too!). I think it comes down to priorities. If the materials are the best fit and the conditions of use are agreeable, then it is worth the asking price. One wouldn't substitute say, zinc for oxygen in a chem lab, no? But the match must be the right or best match. And if it isn't, especially if it is due only to use restrictions or cost, then we must let our providers know! If we don't tell them, who will? --Lynne --- Excerpt: --- Forwarded Message from Harold Hendricks --- >Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 15:47:50 -0600 >From: Harold Hendricks Daniel Tom wrote that he will let Ted Yao know about the controversy. It's too late. Ted believes that IALL is boycotting his textbook based on one of the messages sent to this listserv. I hope no such boycott is seriously being considered. My hope is that we will not let emotion get the better of us to the detriment of our programs and students. --- end of excerpt ____________________________________________________________________________ Lynne Crandall University of Michigan Language Resource Center Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1275 734-647-0762 [log in to unmask]