The first place to publish my “top ten edtech books list of 2021” will be in my newsletter, Digital Education. I was all set to compile the list this week, when I received three more books to review. I may be able to review these in the next few days, because I’m a fast reader. However, given how I set about reviewing books on education technology I doubt it. In that case, my best books of 2021 will be published in 2022. Ho hum.

Just a few more words on this topic. My “top ten” may comprise fewer than ten. Let’s put it this way: I'm not going to include a book just to make up the numbers. Which begs the question: why would a book not make it onto the list?

I’m adopting a different approach this year. In previous years I’ve published lists of books I’ve reviewed, only excluding those I thought were real turkeys. Fortunately, I think only one came into that category, because it was completely unreadable. But this year I’m going to try using a “comparative advantage” approach. In Economic theory, even if someone is better than someone else in everything, it may still be worth their while to not do everything if they are comparatively better at one thing than another.

For example, let’s say I am a writer, and also a dab hand with emulsion paint. I might even be a better writer than you and a better interior decorator than you. However, I’m probably a better writer than I am a decorator, and if you are a better decorator than you are a writer, it makes sense for you to paint my house while I write your newsletter.

So, applied to books, I’m thinking that even if I gave a book I reviewed a rave write-up and five stars, it might still not make the list if a book I deemed deserving of four stars is comparatively better.

I’m not sure how, or even if, this will work out in practice, but I’m thinking along the following lines. I’ve just received a book about algorithms and data structures. I might think it’s brilliant (I don’t know because I haven’t even opened it yet) and give it a five star rating. I’ve also received a book about things to do with a computer. Suppose I end up giving that “only” four stars. It might still be included at the expense of the algorithms one because, overall, it’s more general and therefore relatively more useful to more people. See what I mean?

Anyway, as I say, this is the approach currently under consideration here at Freedman Towers.