News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Oct. 7
Many observers, both in academe and in the publishing industry, believe it’s only a matter of time before electronic textbooks become the norm in college. Some campuses in particular may already be getting a glimpse of the future through partnerships with individual publishers or with consortiums.
Such deals tend to offer students a choice in addition to their current options in the hope that they’ll opt for the cheaper alternative. In contrast to that model, and through a partnership with the publisher John Wiley & Sons, an experiment soon to be underway at the University of Texas at Austin will shift certain classes entirely to e-textbooks.
Beginning next semester, for the initial pilot phase of one to two years, the university will cover the electronic materials for the approximately 1,000 students enrolled in a handful of courses in largely quantitative subjects such as biochemistry and accounting. By purchasing in bulk on a subscription model, the university initially hoped for a “per student per book” cost of $25 to $45. (Wiley hasn’t publicized a final price range, so it’s unclear whether it will be that low.) The idea of the “beta test,” as the university dubs it, is to see how students and faculty respond to e-textbooks and to decide whether they could be deployed on a larger scale.
Most of the biggest textbook publishers already offer some or all of their catalogs in electronic form, but e-texts remain a relatively small portion of the overall market. What remains to be seen is how the publishing industry alters its business models — which many readily admit will have to change — and whether the companies are in for a shift along the lines of that seen in the music industry, as some have predicted.
“The industry knows that their model, their former model ... is changing, and changing before their eyes,” said Kevin Hegarty, vice president and chief financial officer of UT-Austin, who is managing the partnership for the university.
Obstacles to widespread adoption range from technology concerns to questions about whether students or, perhaps more importantly, faculty members will warm to the idea of reading (and taking notes) on screens rather than on printed paper. The ubiquity of laptops hasn’t ushered in an era of electronic-only textbooks, and a new generation of e-reader technologies may or may not encourage students to change their reading preferences.
At UT-Austin’s campus book store this semester, for example, e-books were available for 198 courses representing an estimated enrollment of 15,531 students. About a month ago, when the numbers were calculated, only 55 were sold — or about 0.35 percent of all potential e-textbook buyers.
So, to test-drive new models and observe students’ preferences, campus-wide pilot programs have been cropping up over the past year. Most recently, the University System of Ohio, in a statewide program, is creating a partnership with the publishing consortium CourseSmart, which has deals in place with campuses across the country as part of its effort to jump-start an e-textbook market based on a subscription model. Unlike the Texas partnership, no courses are moving entirely over to e-textbooks, although professors will be eligible for financial incentives to reduce textbook costs for their students.
The UT-Austin pilot also differs in that it is currently with a single publisher, although if the beta test is a success, officials hope to sign deals with other companies as well. Like Ohio’s initiative, the focus is mainly on cost reduction, so students in courses at UT that are part of the program will be able to opt out of the e-textbooks — by paying a fee to have the campus store print a bound copy on demand. Hegarty estimated that students would have to pay somewhere between $20 and $40 out of pocket for that option. (Many of CourseSmart’s prices run at least double that amount, but their e-books are mainly marketed to individual students, not whole classes or institutions.)
“This pilot aims to improve student outcomes, provide students with equity of access to the most current materials and increase faculty satisfaction and efficiency while respecting faculty independence and freedom of choice in the selection of course materials,” Bonnie Lieberman, Wiley’s senior vice president and general manager for higher education, said in a statement released Monday. “Our primary aim is to improve learning and teaching outcomes while significantly lowering the costs of learning materials for students.”
She added: “Wiley has a longstanding relationship with the university through our UT system-wide license for our major portfolio of journals, our significant professional and trade book business and our traditional textbook sales. In moving aggressively into a digital model for learning materials, we see this as a logical and very welcome evolution of our relationship with UT.”
Students in participating classes will have two ways (besides printing their own copies through the campus store) to access their textbooks electronically. They can download to their personal computer an e-book that will be usable for the duration of the license, or they can access the materials online through a service called Wiley Plus, which offers additional tools for students and faculty. The downloadable e-books have features like searching, note taking and highlighting; the online versions boast added functionality such as interactive tutorials, quizzes and grading tools for faculty.
“This is the most advanced of our pilots,” said Christopher McKenzie, vice president and director of institutional sales at Wiley. “We have discussions ongoing with a number of different universities, consortia and [institutions], but this is the most significant in terms of those that have been nailed down and agreed to.”
The Root of All Prices?
The genesis of the beta test wasn’t a corporate board meeting, but an academic with a theory.
Michael Granof is the Ernst & Young Professor of Accounting at the McCombs School of Business at UT-Austin, and himself a Wiley textbook author and chairman of the highly regarded campus book store, the University Co-op. He publicized his diagnosis of the textbook market’s ills, at least as perceived by students who pay the steadily rising prices and faculty members who resent churning out new editions every few years, most recently last year in a New York Times op-ed.
“The basic theory is this: that textbooks are very expensive mainly because of the used book market,” he said in an interview.
Rather than assume (correctly) that books will always be resold, in increasingly organized and sophisticated fashion, he argued, publishers should switch to a model based on licenses that expire, charging less for each license.
“Here’s how it would work: A teacher would pick a textbook, and the college would pay a negotiated fee to the publisher based on the number of students enrolled in the class. If there were 50 students in the class, for example, the fee might be $15 per student, or $750 for the semester. If the text were used for 10 semesters, the publisher would ultimately receive a total of $150 ($15 x 10) for each student enrolled in the course, or as much as $7,500,” he wrote in the op-ed.
“In other words, the publisher would have a stream of revenue for as long as the text was in use. Presumably, the university would pass on this fee to the students, just as it does the cost of laboratory supplies and computer software. But the students would pay much less than the $900 a semester they now typically pay for textbooks.”
According to that model, publishers would stop trying to recoup their costs for a book in a single semester and undermine the used book market by releasing frequent new editions and adding CDs with online and multimedia extras, Granof said. Instead, they’d get a steady stream of revenue from legitimately issued licenses, whether in e-book format or as print-on-demand copies.
“Every three years I got to come up with a new edition. What a waste of time,” he added in the interview.
The Times article, especially, “caught people’s attention,” he recalled. Interested publishers, including Wiley and Pearson, contacted the university, and Granof helped bring the stakeholders to the table. The final pilot as announced by the university has significant support from the student leadership, which has backed cost-saving measures in the past, as well as key figures in the administration.
Looking Ahead
Granof doesn’t pin the future of the textbook industry on e-textbooks per se; it’s the structure of the market that’s the problem, he said.
“The textbook market is changing. There’s no question that textbook sales are going down throughout the country, and publishers [have] been surprisingly un-innovative. And the publishers think that electronic books are going to solve all of their problems.”
Instead, Granof predicts that switching to e-textbooks en masse could lead to the kinds of intellectual property issues and widespread piracy seen in the music industry. “So far, students don’t like electronic books. My scheme doesn’t depend on the use of electronic books. They can get a hard copy,” he said.
Frank Lyman, the executive vice president for marketing at CourseSmart, said the benefit of this kind of model is that when institutions commit to purchasing materials for 100 percent of students enrolled in a course, they can get good prices from publishers. There are a “number of institutions kind of looking at the model, and they’re going to try and see how students react,” he said.
While he said CourseSmart has some smaller-scale pilots in a similar vein at for-profit institutions, the consortium mainly focuses on partnerships in which college students are provided with e-textbooks as another, cheaper, option. Noting the 80 percent satisfaction rate among students who use e-textbooks from CourseSmart, he said, “I think if you required 100 percent of students in any course to take digital, it could be more students [will be] dissatisfied.”
Added Wiley’s McKenzie, “The pilot phase is really proving the concept, and that’s why the mutual work we’re doing together to evaluate its efficacy is really important, because we have our own internal surveys that show very, very high satisfaction for example with Wiley Plus, and this is really validating that with a major prestigious university.... Beyond that, what we’re looking at doing is turning this into a new business model for our relaionship with the University of Texas ... looking at this as a way for the future for learning materials and how they’re [provided] and paid for on a campus.
“I think it’s inevitable that it’s going in this direction.”
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
I am an adjunct professor and a college bookstore director. My biggest concern with this article is how will the cost of e-books be controlled once the used book market is out of the picture?
I am all for saving the students money, but it needs to be a long term fix.
Brenda, at 10:36 am EDT on October 7, 2008
Why not just embrace the “itunes” model for textbooks? Teachers could select, and pay for, content from a range of sources and create “itextbooks” specifically tailored for their classes. This approach is clearly the best for students and for learning. The problem now is that people look at the issue through the eyes of the authors and publishers, not the “consumer.”
Peter Hutton, at 11:05 am EDT on October 7, 2008
This is a good example of college stores giving students their choice of educational media — whether it be hard copy texts, e-texts, or something in-between.
Beginning next month, students at seven other colleges will be able to visit their local bookstores or college web sites and access the DVD of their choice.
These stores have signed on with NACS Media Solutions LLC, a service aggregator, that will enable them to meet college students’ increasing demand for digital content at affordable prices.
NACS Media Solutions LLC will begin offering its member stores access to digital entertainment through touch-screen kiosks, with the move to digital educational material coming in July 2009.
The seven college stores signed on to serve as pilots for the first stage are: Aztec Shops Ltd., San Diego State University Bookstore, CA; CU Book Stores, The University of Colorado-Boulder; New York University Book Stores, New York; T.I.S. College Bookstore, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign; Student Stores, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; Bowling Green State University Bookstore, OH; and UCLA Store, Los Angeles, CA.
An additional 10-25 stores are expected to participate by spring 2009.
Charles Schmidt, Director of Public Relations at Nat’l. Assn. of College Stores, at 12:00 pm EDT on October 7, 2008
The Student PIRGs have been working to drive down the cost of textbooks for five years. Our recent report, Course Correction, http://www.maketextbooksaffordable.org/course_correction.pdf, details the pitfalls of the e-textbook model. Unless the subscription model for supplying textbooks allows students to both access the book on-line as well as get a printed copy, be able to get a printed copy becasue the format is straightforward enough to do so, and pay significantly less than they currently would for a regular text, then it is not a model that satisfies. In particular, our analysis of Course Smart showed that its model currently doesn’t fit this criteria.
E-textbooks are too expensive. The e-textbooks we surveyed cost on average exactly the same as a new hard copy of the same title bought and sold back to the bookstore. The e-textbooks we surveyed cost on average 39% more than a used hard copy of the same title bought and sold back online.
Printing is costly and difficult. Printing was limited to 10 pages per session for each of the e-textbooks we surveyed. Buying and printing half of an e-textbook was three times the cost of buying a used hard copy and selling it back to the bookstore, for the books we surveyed.
E-textbooks are difficult to access. Students have to choose between using the book online or using it offline – they cannot do both. Most (75%) of the e-textbooks we surveyed expired after 180 days, so students do not have the option to access their books in the future.
Rich Williams, Higher Education Associate at US PIRG, at 1:00 pm EDT on October 7, 2008
Having worked as a teacher and a textbook editor, it is my experience that most students will print out the electronic files from their e-books, so they don’t have to read online. Somehow no one figures the printing cost into the equation or the subsequent effect on the environment. The winners here may be companies that supply toner, printers, and copiers.
Linda Scharp, at 1:30 pm EDT on October 7, 2008
I am intriqued. Perhaps I am just ignorant (and if so, perhaps you and all other people here will enlighten me) on how you have been assigned, or bid yourself to obtain, or otherwise been relegated this essential and potentially conflicting responsibility.
For example, if YOU wrote the best possible sources of material for your courses, did you have to abbrogate your works?
In my opinion, anything which enables students to afford an education should be lauded, as long as attribution is maintained.
DFS, at 4:00 pm EDT on October 7, 2008
Reading this article—especially the bit about publishers licensing textbook use—reminded me of another article:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
pgb, at 4:05 pm EDT on October 7, 2008
Rich touched on a key dissatisfier for the students, especially for those texts that a student wishes to retain indefinately(degree related or Masters courses).
While this pilot at UT is focused on forced adoption of e-texts by cost elimination and effecting initial purchase cost of texts, the publishing industry refuses to modify their business model and is actually reversing it by limiting a student’s ability to keep and use the textbook however long they choose.
Digital Rights Management requires a student that has downloaded their e-book to be “tethered” to the internet or other network that allows it to authenticate the e-book each time it is opened, or in rare cases, periodically. If this authentication is not accomplished, the e-book cannot be used. This also limits the ability to use the e-books on stand alone devices or multiple PCs. Many publishers just place their hard copy text into a highly restricted.pdf file and call it an e-book. These files do not contain additional interactive content or related web resources that would compel the market to adopt on its own. This restricted file removes most features excepting highlighting and notation, and you loose all of your notes or highlighting when the “license” for that e-text expires, whether in a semester, year or degree.
Additionally, many students have complained about having to stare at and perform so much reading from a computer screen. And while the benefits for portability exist for multiple courses/texts, have you tried to read your laptop screen outside on a sunny day?
I think e-books hold promise, though not without a strong motivator from the market to help publishers understand their model won’t be accepted much longer.
mdm, at 8:45 pm EDT on October 7, 2008
I am an undergraduate and typically take 15 credits a semester. Each three credit course has somewhere in the range of 50-100 pages of reading per week. While I would love that reading to be a little cheaper, no way do I want to read up to 500 pages from a computer screen every week. No way!
bleary eyed undergrad, at 4:50 am EDT on October 8, 2008
Gilbert at Harvard (Gilbert, C. (2005). Unbundling the structure of inertia: Resource versus routine rigidity. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 741-763.) in his study of the difficulty of newspapers to adapt to the new digital media market, identifies one key driver of the slow adoption of this. Universities and publishers are guilty of Resource Rigidity — the unwillingness to alter current resource investments and, most particularly, the fear of cannibalizing current business models. Typically, new entrants, unencumbered by the “tyranny of the incumbency” view the new model as an opportunity rather than a threat. Universities and publishers must cannnibalize the old model before a new entrant does it to them and they go down the road of the music industry and the video store industry.
Stephen Griffith, at 8:05 am EDT on October 8, 2008
Forcing ebooks on students under the guise of saving them money will cause more problems than it solves. Ebooks are, or should be, a new medium with wonderful opportunities for innovation, but that innovation is less likely to happen if cost cutting and protecting profit margins are the primary drivers.
For a good review of the challenges in moving from paper to screen, (re)read The Myth of the Paperless Office (026269283X).
Bob Martinengo, at 9:40 am EDT on October 8, 2008
Having spent a large part of my life in a company that is synonymous with copy, but which also invented and pioneered much of the technology used in the digital age, I am intrigued by the dialogue and viewpoints brought forth. The flexibility and power of the digital media is a boost the teaching profession and must be embraced to harness the minds of our next generation. But as has been pointed out, the value and portability of the paper is still there.
We must look at opportunities to connect the two and do so in an affordable manner. Here are two thoughts. Cost — Having students print their e-books on their local desktop or at the college library will quickly eliminate any financial benefit. Models must include cost effective print models using existing production print infrastructure that exists on most campuses. Flexibility — why constrain to a single publisher — digital media allows us flexibility to combine and take best of breed, even self author. Publishing these both digitally and in printed form must be comprehended. And why not extend that thought to having the ability to individualize font size, merge teachers comment’s/markup, etc. By the way, preventing unlawful copying is less of an issue with the latest security print capabilities.http://www.linkedin.com/in/robertbarclay
Robert Barclay, Education Industry Marketing at Xerox Corporation, at 1:25 pm EDT on October 9, 2008
I understand that we might not all like to read in on the screen, but many students can only access rinted materials with the use of screen readers...the availability for etexts for books has been requested for years. I am glad that publishers see the advantage, but hope we don’t end with only one option. The advantage will be the possibility to decrease the costs of books....are we going to see that option? I hope so!
Gail, at 10:35 pm EDT on October 11, 2008
Have you evr tried to read a book online? The real winners will be the guys who produce copy paper.
Tony Offret, at 4:50 am EDT on October 17, 2008
the simple fact is —-this is coming NOW.
either change the textbook model or have your entire business go down the tubes the same way mp3’s have devastated the recording industry. Right now — i can download free textbooks that are far superior to the one i buy for $200.fix it now — or else .....
Ωωεη, now, at 8:05 am EST on November 17, 2008
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Cornell University, located in Ithaca, New York, is an inclusive, dynamic, and innovative Ivy League university and New ... see job
Northeastern University, founded in 1898 and located in Boston, is a private research university that is a leader in ... see job
Position Number: FY 08-191 Reports to: Student Media Director Scope: To supervise, plan and coordinate the activities of the ... see job
The Pennsylvania State University invites applications and nominations for a creative and dynamic Director for the Penn State ... see job
This is a professional position that serves as the lead science, health and research communicator in News Services. Reporting ... see job
Position Number: FY 08-146 Reports to: Director of Environmental Health & Safety Scope: To provide skilled assistance in ... see job
“E-Textbooks for All”
October 6, 2008
I teach as an Adjunct Professor, and this semester one of the colleges where I teach decided to experiment with CourseSmart. I am impressed so far with the concept of electronic textbooks.
Personally, I like the idea of the portability of the electronic version. Portable that is, as long as I have access to a computer. this comes in handy when travelling, or if the book has been left at home or in the office. Don’t laugh, my students have said this already!
Another good feature of this is having the ability to project maps and images form the book onto the SmartBoard (for classrooms so equipped).
Don’t sell the students short; many use laptops in class and it is not unusual to see most with the book’s web page on-line. I have noticed that students with laptops are more prone to have a web site opened that is tied to the class or lecture material.
I love books, but this new innovation has many pluses. True, SmartCourse is costlier than several other providers, but they seem pretty decent. I am in favour of giving studnets as much of a break as possible so if this helps so be it.
Taking notes is the same now as when I use a regular book. So I have not seen any changes in my teaching style.
What college deans and division chairs need to be aware of is the rapidity of changing editions. Sometimes, a department is advised that edition X is the text and the on-line version turns out to be edition Y.
Daniel Padovano
Daniel Padovano, at 9:42 am EDT on October 7, 2008