Skip to main content

Selling is fine... so is sharing

I sometimes come across language teachers who object to buying teacher-produced resources on platforms such as TES. They believe that teachers should be freely sharing their work, not profiting from it. TES for a number of years was a place where you could share resources for nothing, but a while ago they decided to make some money for themselves and for teachers by giving the option to sell worksheets, PowerPoints and so on. TES continues to share free resources. Is selling resources something teachers should welcome or disparage?

To my mind making and selling resources, whether you are a practising teacher or a retired one like me, is just one form of publishing. If you write a textbook, you get a percentage from the publisher. No one finds this odd (apart perhaps from the low percentage you get - about 10% - you don’t get rich on writing language teaching books or textbooks). If you write a resource for TES or Teachers Pay Teachers (popular in the USA) you also get your percentage, but it’s far more generous - up to 70% on TES.

Now, if you work in a school, you need to check out who owns anything you write before you publish via TES (TES doesn’t own it, by the way). Notwithstanding that and other copyright issues, it’s entirely up to you if you want to reap some financial benefit from your work. No teacher should feel guilty about doing that. And yet teachers are often reluctant to sell because they are frequently not the entrepreneurial type and believe they should be freely helping their colleagues. That’s good too. It’s what I did before I retired from the classroom.

Let’s not forget too that teachers are not highly paid compared to many. They may actually need to supplement their income. They do so by giving private tuition, why not by marketing their resources?

Then of course you have those like myself who no longer teach in classrooms but who enjoy writing and helping teachers. Frankly I would be a bit bonkers to do it for nothing!

If I have an issue with TES it’s that you get a good enough preview to judge the quality of a resource (and purchaser reviews are not that numerous). There is clearly some overpriced material on there of dubious quality, not to mention examples of resources copied from elsewhere then uploaded as if they had been written by the uploader. It seems hard to believe people would do that, but they do. I would also imagine there is some blatant infringing of copyright with regard to picture use.

As regards the publishing of books, I can tell you that self-publishing, e.g. via Createspace (Amazon) which we used for The Language Teacher Toolkit is more lucrative than going through a publisher (40% versus about 7-10%). If you are well established on social media, self-publishing is easy to recommend - not only does it mean you are better rewarded, but also you can get the job done more quickly. You are the best publicist for what you write. You lose the services of editors and proof-readers, but this is not a problem if you can get help with this anyway.

In sum I see no reason to be judgmental about teachers who gain financial reward for their work. When there are so many freely shared resources out there, generally speaking, writers need to ensure their resources are of high quality and teachers who purchase need to be fussy, rejecting anything which is of poor value or doubtful quality.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).

La retraite à 60 ans

Suite à mon post récent sur les acquis sociaux..... L'âge légal de la retraite est une chose. Je voudrais bien savoir à quel âge les gens prennent leur retraite en pratique - l'âge réel de la retraite, si vous voulez. J'ai entendu prétendre qu'il y a peu de différence à cet égard entre la France et le Royaume-Uni. Manifestation à Marseille en 2008 pour le maintien de la retraite à 60 ans © AFP/Michel Gangne Six Français sur dix sont d’accord avec le PS qui défend la retraite à 60 ans (BVA) Cécile Quéguiner Plus de la moitié des Français jugent que le gouvernement a " tort de vouloir aller vite dans la réforme " et estiment que le PS a " raison de défendre l’âge légal de départ en retraite à 60 ans ". Résultat d’un sondage BVA/Absoluce pour Les Échos et France Info , paru ce matin. Une majorité de Français (58%) estiment que la position du Parti socialiste , qui défend le maintien de l’âge légal de départ à la retraite à 60 ans,