be even more immediate. Moreover, states without textbook boards constitute
smaller markets, since publishers must win approval at the individual district
or school level. Therefore, states without boards have less influence on
publishers, who orient their best efforts toward the large states with adoption
boards. California and Texas, in particular, directly affect publishers and
textbooks because they are large markets with statewide adoption and active
lobbying groups. Schools and districts in nonadoption states must choose
among books designed for the larger markets.^28
Textbook adoption processes are complex.^29 Some states, such as
Tennessee, accept almost every book that meets certain basic criteria for
binding, reading level, and subject matter. Tennessee schools then select from
among perhaps a dozen books, usually making district-wide decisions.^30 At the
other extreme, Alabama used to adopt just one book per subject for the entire
state. State textbook boards are usually small committees whose members have
been appointed by the governor or the state commissioner of education. They
are volunteers who may be teachers, lawyers, parents, or other concerned
citizens. The daily work of the textbook board is typically performed by a
small staff that begins by circulating specifications that tell publishers the
grade levels, physical requirements (size, binding, and the like), and guidelines
as to content for all subjects in which they next plan to adopt textbooks.
Publishers respond by sending books and ancillary materials. Meanwhile the
board, with input from the person(s) who appointed them and sometimes with
staff input as well, sets up rating committees in each subject area—for
instance, high school American history. The staff holds orientation meetings for
these rating committees, explains the forms used for rating the textbooks, and
then sends the books to the raters.
Usually one formal meeting is set up for publishers’ representatives to
address the rating committees. Large states may hold several meetings in
different parts of the state. At these meetings the representatives emphasize the
ways in which their books excel. For the most part representatives push form,
not content: they tout special features of layout, art work, “skills building,” and
ancillary material such as videos and exams.
Rating committees face a Herculean task. Remember that the recent books I
examined average 1,150 pages. In a single summer, raters cannot even read all
the books, let alone compare them meaningfully. Raters also wrestle with an
average of seventy-three different rating criteria that they are supposed to