From: Mary Murrell <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 09:32:31 -0500

I'll add a dimension to this discussion through the case of my niece,
who complained to me about the high price of her textbooks when she
was heading off to college. I offered to find cheaper copies for her
than those available through her university bookstore.  Lo and behold,
I discovered that she was taking courses where enrolling for them
meant signing up for what Chuck describes below.  In short, the course
had been designed by the publisher and the in-room instructor would be
guiding the students through it or adding supplemental discussion (or
who knows what).

As "faculty" are more and more often underpaid, undersupported
adjuncts--75% of instructional staff according to the AAUP's recent
report--shouldn't we expect even more of this?  The "textbook" prices
are really additional course fees, outsourcing the costs of
instruction to the publishers to be recouped through the students
paying even more than for their "textbooks."

I'm with Sandy: don't blame the publishers. They might very well be
solving problems for universities even if they are, once again,
ripping off the students to do so.



On 05/12/14, LIBLICENSE  wrote:
> From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sun, 11 May 2014 10:06:26 -0500
>
> Calling this model "coercion" is a misnomer. Students may have no
> choice in the matter, but when did they ever have a choice? What
> makes the textbook industry unique is that the publishers do not sell
> to the end users but to intermediaries, i.e., professors, and these
> intermediaries have as much freedom as any other buyer to turn down an
> offer. This does not amount to "an offer they can't refuse." So,
> blaming the publishers for being creative about the ways they offer
> their products seems misdirected. If anyone is to blame here, it is
> the professors who succumb to the temptations the publishers offer
> them. No one is holding a gun to their heads. This might be coercion
> if the professors were receiving kickbacks from the publishers, but
> Chuck has offered no proof of such skullduggery.
>
> Sandy Thatcher
>
>
> > From: "Hamaker, Charles" <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 11:58:28 +0000
> >
> > Publishers have something new under the sun. The major textbook
> > providers have created websites to "enhance" their educational
> > textbook offerings. The only fly in the ointment is that along with
> > the publisher's website ,student purchase of website access
> > accompanying the text is not optional but mandatory, much like a lab
> > fee.
> >
> > If the student doesn't access the website homework assignments, she
> > can't pass the course or in many cases, take the tests.
> >
> > For most classes a defined percentage of the final grade is
> > determined by website participation. Sometimes the course is marked
> > as "hybrid" at the bookstore or on the course description. Sometimes
> > not. Some classes are now noting such content is 50% of the course,
> > and may reduce classroom contact hours because of the website
> > experience.
> >
> > Students are being told if you don't have website access (usually
> > registration rights that come with an "access card)" then you can't
> > pass the course. Publishers can provide deep discounts if the purchase
> > of textbook and/or website access are "mandatory" i.e. guaranteed.
> >
> > The University of Minnesota bookstore instituted a program that
> > simply billed a student if they signed up for a course using McGraw
> > Hill content that has such enhanced content. No choice.
> >
> > For my take on this you might want to see my editorial in Online
> > Searcher magazine
> > http://www.infotoday.com/OnlineSearcher/Articles/Searchers-Voice/Coercion-96759.shtml
> >
> > Librarians with expertise in negotiating with publishers for econtent
> > and licenses (there is normally for both faculty and students, a EULA
> > required to sign on) need to be in the discussions on every college
> > campus surrounding such arrangements.
> >
> > Content created by both faculty and students on the website usually
> > becomes the publisher's property to do with as they see fit.
> >
> > Chuck