As you may well have noticed, we’re currently in a recession. It’s affecting all of us, from the poorest writer to the states themselves. There’s a theory in economics that an economic downturn acts a little like a natural brush fire; the weakest gets burned away, and the strongest are forced to pare down, streamline and become more efficient. The companies that thrive and prosper will be those that are able to adapt to the new climate most rapidly, and especially those that are able to use technology to make themselves more profitable.

This doesn’t, however, just apply to companies and individuals. The state of California has been having budgetary problems for a while now, and recently the electorate voted down the latest proposals from Sacramento. So, the state is being forced to adapt to survive. This being the case, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger wrote an editorial for the San Jose Mercury News outlining his proposals to switch schools away from paper and onto electronic books.

Here’s the money quotation:

Last year, the state earmarked $350 million for school books and other instructional materials. Imagine the savings schools could realize by using these high-quality, free resources. Even if teachers have to print out some of the material, it will be far cheaper than regularly buying updated textbooks.

Now, there’s a real part of me that will be sad when books finally go the way of vinyl, but the education of large amounts of children is no place for sentimentality. If the State of California is going to look for ways to bring the system of education into the twenty first century, then this is surely something to be welcomed? It’s being rolled out for Mathematics and the Sciences first; these are the areas in which it makes most sense; after, Auden is going to be Auden this year, next year and beyond, but Science and Engineering change particularly rapidly at their cutting edges. You can see it; each year, the electronic text books are refreshed to reflect the latest thinking, rather than a whole new edition being put out.

The main problem is that for the poorer pupils, it focuses learning in schools. Not every family is able to afford a computer or an electronic reader to allow their children to study at home in the evening, or during the school holidays. Also, this might remove parental interaction in the educational process. Obviously, there’s another argument that says that kids spending more time in school is not necessarily a bad thing, but still. As always, it’s imperative that the level of education is not dependant on familial income.

Whilst these are not to be ignored, they shouldn’t put off attempts to improve the overall level of education by increasing the use of information technology in schools. So, I welcome these new proposals, if for no other reason than it’s a step forward. I’ll leave the last word to Arnie:

As the music and newspaper industries will attest, those who adapt quickly to changing consumer and business demands will thrive in our increasingly digital society and worldwide economy.