Photo from blog.georgetownvoice.com |
Richard Hull and Michael Lennie in their article Why E-Textbooks Just Make Sense agree with the thought that the high price of books is directly related to the used textbook stores. They say "perceived student savings from buying lower-priced used books is deceptive, because the used-book industry essentially forces publishers to prematurely publish expensive 'revised editions' for the primary purpose of reducing their losses from used-book sales." Hull and Lennie say that few course texts need to revised every three years.
Online texts, or etexts, may be the answer. Publishers often offer online texts, which can save the student quite a bit of money. Purchasing a text this way would give the authors and publishers some profit, and may stop some of the used textbook sales. The students, however, wouldn't be able to recoup any of the money at the end of the semester.
What are your thoughts? Do you feel that texts would become less expensive if students purchased more new texts? Should students purchase etexts? Would this require them to print out their texts if they are to be used in class? Many questions to ponder at the beginning of the semester!
Note: Thanks to Cheryl Bowman for today's blog information.
Does this strike anyone else as a chicken-or-the-egg argument? Maybe some of the more seasoned educators reading this blog can set the record straight, but my feeling is that the high cost of college textbooks predates the seeming-omnipresence of used textbook networks.
ReplyDeleteIt does seem a little like the chicken or the egg argument. The two or three year turn for revisions has been around a long time. I think that the shift to e-books is inevitable. Most of the book reps that I talk to are talking about the shift to online texts and materials. It seems clear that the money is being poured into that type of development. It will take awhile...but I'm convinced that some day we will hear a lot less of "Can I sell this book back?". They'll just buy the chapters that they need and be done with it.
ReplyDeleteWe used to have a term for 2 or 3 year turnaround when refering to manufacturing: planned obsolecense. Some areas of study need periodic updating, but not all. And why not update a text with a supplement? Not likely...
ReplyDelete