While a proponent of digital textbooks and education technology, there are some concerns about ongoing education-related topics in the United States. One such concern pertains to the online news coverage thus far, specifically with regard to the states of California, Texas and Virginia.
Often, when textbooks have been been topical, the states of California, Texas and Virginia have appeared in the news. Each of those states has a state-level textbook selection process. Those states' schoolboards have, in the past, attempted to influence curriculum topics for the remainder of the nation. Today, however, any person or team can author and distribute digital textbooks for consideration by state and local school district decision makers.
There is an observed lack of coverage about some related topics including discussions from within the other forty-seven states, discussions from within organizations such as the CCSSO, as well as opinions from various other education-related organizations. While there was an observed large number of online news stories mentioning California, Texas and Virginia, some online news analysis indicated a startlingly low number of articles mentioning the remainder of states, for example the entirety of those in the Midwest region of the United States.
Furthermore, California's position about free and open source digital textbooks is neither economically sound nor advantageous to students with regard to their educational goals being met by short-, medium- and long-term digital textbook business, organizational, and manufacturing processes. California's stance, which can be described as a state policy including uncompensated labor, indicates that the software industry does not yet have sufficiently consolidated or visible lobbying or pro-labor organizations or representation available in Washington D.C.
It is my opinion that local decision-making processes empower parents and teachers. Parents and teachers are empowered by being or having their decision makers in their own communities, their own towns and cities, reviewing abundant options produced by scholars, scientists and other experts.
The behaviors of the federal government and of the aforementioned three states are infringing upon the processes of, systems available to, and options available to state and local decision makers in the remainder of states, in particular: Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.