Friday, December 20, 2024
HomeOpinionsRe-imagining the academic textbook model

Re-imagining the academic textbook model

The model is broken. We can rebuild it. We have the technology.

einkvsprint_deborahoomen

Textbook prices have increased 102 per cent from Dec. 2001 to July 2013.

Recreational books, on the other hand, decreased 1.5 per cent during the same time period. Perhaps unsurprisingly, student debt has increased as well.

According to Statistics Canada’s Survey of Financial Security, student debt grew 44.1 per cent from 1999 to 2012.

While many other factors are contributing to this rise, the inflated cost of textbooks deserves a fair share of the blame.

The current model in higher education is particularly egregious because the technology needed for a more cost-effective model not only exists, but is being widely adopted and used in other content industries.

When Radiohead released In Rainbows in 2007, they opted to do so in a non-traditional way.

Instead of using conventional marketing techniques to lead up to the release and distribution of the physical album, Radiohead promoted and sold a digital copy of the album on their website through a pay-what-you-want model.

Through removing most of the costs associated with the marketing, production, and distribution of the album, the band allowed consumers to value the album’s content. This experiment, generally regarded as a success, helped artists and consumers understand the value of content in the digital age.

The emergence of cloud storage further disoriented the pricing model of digital content.The popular movie streaming service Netflix adopted a business model somewhere between Blockbuster and a SaaS (Software as a Service).

Instead of having the consumer pay to rent each movie individually, Netflix offers the consumer the option to pay a monthly fee for unlimited access to its database of movies.

With this model, the consumer never actually owns the movies, nor does he quite rent a copy of them. Through cloud storage, he can experience a movie at home in a manner similar to one in a theatre. The model reduces cost, increases convenience, and meets the needs of the consumer through reimagining content access.

If Radiohead and Netflix could properly meet the shifting needs of a market through alternating their business model, then what prevents universities from doing the same?

It is not difficult to imagine Dalhousie adopting a similar model for its textbooks. Consider a professor offering her students the option to pay a semester fee to access a database of digital books. Under this system, students “stream” the required textbooks on their mobile devices or download them to a supported mobile app.

The costs associated with licensing digital content could be managed through coordinating with Dal libraries and negotiating with current eBook vendors. This model would supplement the vast amount of material currently found through Dal’s database subscriptions and the growing volume of open access information available online.

The sticking point of this issue is often the claim that books are somehow different than products like movies and music. It is argued that the tactile nature of print is often easier to read, mark-up, and, perhaps, understand than the digital form.

These arguments are possibly true, yet, their validity does not negate the need for a digital textbook model. In fact, an alternative business model would force publishers to reduce their current prices on print textbooks to stay competitive.

It would offer another way to access content, while benefiting those students that wish to purchase the physical textbook.

These changes are not revolutionary. Many professors and instructors at Dal have already adapted to current technology. They use content management systems like Blackboard, their own publications, and library subscriptions to offer students access to affordable digital content.

While these professors ought to be praised, adopting an institutional policy that mandates a digital access option is another matter entirely.

Doing so would combat the perception that higher education is stubbornly resisting the current technological landscape and would work to disperse the conservative, risk-averse, and inflexible stench clinging to academic institutions.

It would announce to the student body, a major stream of revenue for universities like Dal, that they are more valuable than publishers.

Daphne Koller, one of the founders of Coursera, said, “Content is about to become free and ubiquitous.”

Trying to reconcile this statement with textbooks that routinely cost $150 is an exercise in futility. The digital world has both revalued and redistributed content, and the current textbook model unfairly forces the costs associated with outdated information technology on the student.

If the current higher education model hopes to stay competitive in the future against the rising tide of Silicon Valley start-ups, it needs to change. Offering an alternative textbook model that embraces the future would be a good place to start.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

Most Popular

Recent Comments