Extremists among those following the thematic units/authentic texts discussion on the ACTFL list right now might go so far at this point as to start looking for links between ACTFL’s position on this subject and the textbook companies.
Robert Harrell has said:
…read in context, the ACTFL statement in the Skills Map is a statement that thematic units are the organizing principle … and authentic texts are the materials to use….
Extremists would read that and say, “Wait a moment! Both the organizing principle and the materials to use suggested by ACTFL just happen to be things that are able to be put into packages and sold!” Indeed, it is a fact that most if not all textbooks used are arranged around thematic units, and that they are usually very expensive, so that reveals a possible conflict of interest in ACTFL.
Further, if texts are altered, which (please correct me if this is not accurate), they could not be sold as easily as if they were bought and packaged in a form that could be copyrighted and then easily sold. The way I understand it, although I’m not really sure, teachers can alter and simplify texts when they plan instruction for their classes without copyright infringement, but there is no profit there for anyone because nothing is sold in the form of classroom sets. Authentic texts are easier to copyright, repackage, and sell. I really don’t know if this is true, I’m just exploring a theoretical line of reasoning here.
To restate: thematic units and authentic texts are different in the sense that they can be sold. What cannot be sold are arguments about pedagogy. It follows that the textbook companies would be perfectly happy to see continue, on all the foreign language discussion sites, arguments about pedagogy that kick up lots of dust and last a long time. When we teachers get into arguments about pedagogy, then any arguments about content (thematic units) and materials (authentic texts) stay off the radar and while we argue about teaching ideas, the textbook companies, with ACTFL’s help (is ACTFL a corporation?) can sell books out of the glare of the spotlight. Again, mere speculation.
That is exactly what happened with the Realidades representative who flew out with Mimi Met to my school district years ago while Mimi gave a day long training to 300 teachers that was less of a training than a “how to” lesson on how to use the newest Realidades textbook. Mimi didn’t even bother to rename her handouts. All the handouts we got said that the training was in Cincinnati when othe one she was doing with us was in Jefferson County, CO.
Mimi was in front of the group all day, lecturing on the use of the book, and at every break the crowd rushed to the Realidades guy at his table who was literally in the back of the venue under a balcony kind of in the shade, with all his wares displayed and sales were made. Dale Crum and I figured out that day as well that Mimi didn’t really get TPRS, but I’ll stop that part of the story here.
But I do want to add that I will never forget that experience because I really remember how much I wanted to learn from Mimi how to be a better teacher and all I got was how to be a better user of Realidades. Isn’t it also true that Helena Curtain is also connected to big book interests? I don’t know for sure, and until now I didn’t care. Now I care. And of course we know that June Phillips has been publishing books for decades and decades; I remember seeing her name on books I used over 30 years ago.