Skip to main content

About independent publishing



When Gianfranco and I set about writing The Language Teacher Toolkit around 2015 we had a publishing choice. Should we seek a traditional publisher or should we go our own way and self-publish through Amazon? (At that time their independent-publishing arm was called Createspace; it's now called KDP.)

We opted for independent-publishing for a few reasons:

Royalties. Self-publishing offers much higher royalties (over 60% per book as opposed to around 10% when you go with a publisher). This financial incentive had to be weighed up against the possible kudos and marketing advantage associated with being with a well-known publisher.

Publicity. We were well known enough on social media to be able to publicise and share our work. We had both been sharing resources freely for a few years, Gianfranco via TES, myself via my website. So we did not see the need to get support from a publisher. In the end, independent publishing has not been an issue as all our books have done very well indeed. In addition, my feeling is that a publisher does not add much more value when it comes to marketing.

Independence. When you go with a publisher they may impose certain limitations on what you can do, notably word length. For example, my Routledge book Becoming an Outstanding Languages Teacher (2017) had to be limited to around 200 pages. That was part of the brief for that series of books. (Incidentally, I was approached to write that book after The Language Teacher Toolkit had done well.)

Speed! When you self-publish, once your manuscript is ready, checked and edited (always get a good editor if you do this - I was grateful to education writer Martin Robinson for telling me this at the outset), you simply upload your pdf and cover material to KDP (or another service) and the book is checked for formatting and published within hours. When you go through the publisher the process can be frustratingly long, and not necessarily with any gain in quality. Alas, minor errors get through both with self-published books and those from a known publisher.

Print quality. As far as I can make out, print quality from KDP is broadly on a par with traditionally published books. We've had the very occasional issue with poor printing, but I imagine this is the case in general. Amazon have print works in various countries, including Australia now after a long absence. They effectively 'print on demand'. Note that anything in colour costs much more to print, so it reduces any profit margin. You can use pictures, but you can only do traditionally bound paperback and Kindle. If you decide to do a Kindle version, it's wise to enlist the help of a service who can convert your pdf or Word file into a suitable e-book format. You could go Kindle-only, but we find that the vast majority of our sales are in traditional print form.

Downsides?

Well, I am aware that Amazon's reputation is, shall we say, mixed. But its ubiquity and popularity mean that your work can spread far and wide quickly. Since our prime aim was not pecuniary, but to share our knowledge and enthusiasm about research and classroom practice, then it has been a good choice. In addition, when you register to publish a book on KDP you can opt for what they call 'expanded distribution' which means that your book can be picked up by other distributors and book shops. So you might find our books in other book stores. There are a few alternatives to Amazon, but they don't have the same reach.

The process of preparing the Word document of your text can be tricky. Just as an example, you have to ensure that the margins are acceptable for printing. KDP provides ready-made Word templates for different size books and these templates can be fun to work with, shall we say. But there is a mass of help online from self-publishers, so it shouldn't be too off-putting.

Final word

Our experience with The Language Teacher Toolkit (2016) meant we didn't hesitate to independently publish Breaking the Sound Barrier: Teaching Language Learners How to Listen (2019) and Memory: What Every Language Teacher Should Know (2021). I also independently published my 50 Lesson Plans for French Teachers. (I must give a major shout-out to my wife Professor Elspeth Jones, an experienced editor in the field of Higher Education who had edited, formatted and proof-read all our books.) 

If you are a language teacher with great ideas or resources to share, you can consider self-publishing.  It's not so different to selling on TES or a service like Teachers Pay Teachers, except that many teachers do seem to like a book format. Be meticulous and take great care with editing and proofing. 

Do contact me if I can offer any help. I'm no expert on the technical detail, but I might be able to offer some general advice.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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).

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,

The 2026 GCSE subject content is published!

Two DfE documents were published today. The first was the response to the consultation about the proposed new GCSE (originally due in October 2021) and the second is the subject content document which, ultimately, is of most interest to MFL teachers in England. Here is the link  to the document.  We are talking about an exam to be done from 2026 (current Y7s). There is always a tendency for sceptical teachers to think that consultations are a bit of a sham and that the DfE will just go ahead and do what they want when it comes to exam reform. In this case, the responses to the original proposals were mixed, and most certainly hostile as far as exam boards and professional associations representing the MFL community, universities, head teachers and awarding bodies are concerned. What has emerged does reveal some significant changes which take account of a number of criticisms levelled at the proposals. As I read it, the most important changes relate to vocabulary and the issue of topics