XplanaZine

(This is a text summary of the He Said She Said podcast from August 25, 2005. This is a bi-weekly podcast that deals with a wide range of topic on Education and Educational Technology. The show’s host is Rob Reynolds and he is joined by Susan Smith Nash. The He Said She Said podcast is available every Tuesday and Thursday on Xplana Radio. Note: This text differs from the podcast and is not a transcript. Please be sure to listen to the podcast! P. S. — Sorry for the quality of this recording in some places. We had a less-than-desirable connection.)

The Internet has certainly been abuzz since the GAO published its report on textbook prices last week. This report showed that college textbook prices have increased at twice the rate of inflation and have followed close behind tuition increases. The report came on the heels of the usual volley of media articles on higher textbook prices ( Boston Globe and Utne , for example) and the usual responses from the AAP , but also generated insightful responses from publications like Inside Higher Ed .

Here is what Susan and Rob have to say.

She Said:

It’s easy to blame the textbook companies and accuse them of shameless profiteering. After all, how is it that Dover Thrift Editions can offer classics for less than 5 dollars, while an anthology or a reader is pegged at close to $100 ??

I think there are many factors at play, and here are a few of them:

Exit exams and other standardized measures of outcomes: Florida , Texas , and other states require students graduating with an associates degree to be able to pass basic competency courses, such as the FCAT. Colleges are measured on their students’ performance, so they certainly can’t afford to let their faculty go out and wing it, no matter how much high-quality, meta-cognitive, “deeper learning” may be going on. A good, robust textbook is an insurance policy. Even if the instructor is less effective, the students still have a fighting chance to pass their tests if they study the book.

Department or college-designed courses: Increasingly, course “shells” or “templates” are created in a central location, with a team of instructional designers who work with the subject matter expert. The faculty member is asked to follow the guidelines of the course. While some institutions allow quite a bit of flexibility, others do not, particularly for sections being filled at the last minute.

Having a textbook-based course shell saves the department time, money, and basically passes development costs off onto the student, rather than the department.

The textbook companies are leveraging development costs, and departments, strapped for cash and forced to offer online courses, are able to reduce their production costs and time, while feeling confident that the product is of standard quality.

Needless to say, this can result in demotivated professors, who see no need to add their own content, or, even, to add material to the discussion boards. The course just drives itself. Further, there is virtually no difference between a course at college A and college B — it’s great for degree completion colleges and transfers, due to standardization. It’s pretty uninspiring, though, for the learner who wants an experience that connects to his or her own interests, goals, and life experiences, and, who wants a transformative, inspiring, unique experience. (After all, they’re paying a premium for education, given the high cost of tuition.)

Distributed instruction in online courses: The ranks of professors who have invested in themselves to be adept at online instruction have solidified, and there are many instructors who have chosen to teach at multiple institutions of higher learning, at a distance through their online programs. This results in a need for a centralized curriculum and course content, and it reduces the flexibility of the professor. The textbooks provide a great opportunity to standardize the approach and to assure a consistent level of quality.

He Said

[As a context for my comments, you can read an earlier post related to textbook pricing]

Okay, Susan and I agree on a few things:

1. Textbooks do have value;
2. Textbooks with all of the ancillary content (Web sites, course cartridges, video, etc.) provide a solution for a medium common denominator learning experience when you’re talking about big courses with lots of sections taught by TAs;
3. As long as institutions and instructors are dependent on the current textbooks and the associated ancillary material as the core component of the classroom, textbook prices will continue to increase dramatically.

When it comes to the real culprit, we don’t necessarily agree. My take is that instructors are the only ones that can put a stop to rising textbook prices. I believe we have transitioned from a time when textbooks served as second-level support for the instructor (the core of the learning experience) to a time when textbook (and ancillary materials) are the core piece of the learning experience and are merely supplemented by instructors.

I don’t think we can blame that on publishers as much as we might like to. Administrators and instructors found it convenient to allow textbook publishers to do an increasing amount the instructional work. And now everyone complains because publishers say it costs more money to do instructors’ work for them.

Will Richardson has a great post on the potential for schools and teachers to regain control of content. I think it’s a smashing idea. I wish I believed schools and teachers were really going to rise up and do something.

It’s the only way we’ll see learning material costs go down again.

Broadcast Information

podcast feed
i-podder download