Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Mike Elgan's picture
Mike Elgan

The World Is My Office

Education reform: Let's start by burning all the textbooks

President Obama wants to simultaneously improve education while getting costs under control. School districts are so stressed financially that they're laying off teachers and ending valuable programs. Here's one modest proposal from the tech blogosphere: Get rid of paper textbooks in favor of digital books and materials for high school and college students as a way to both improve education and cut costs.

Paper textbooks are problematic in two ways: First, they're paper. Second, they're textbooks. Let me explain.

What's wrong with paper?

All the standard arguments against paper books are especially true for textbooks. Paper requires the cutting down of trees, transport of trees, paper, then books and the use of toxic inks. Paper books are bad for the environment. But textbooks are constantly being replaced with new editions, with the old ones rendered unusable, and can't be sold used or even stocked in a library. Because teachers require new editions, the old editions are useless and end up in landfills.

Meanwhile, the strongest argument most people use in favor of paper books, which is that they enjoy the pleasure of curling up with a "real" book, is hard to swallow with textbooks. They're generally not read for pleasure, but in late-night cram sessions.

Also: Books are heavy. Have you seen students' backpacks these days? They tend to be back-breakingly heavy.

What's wrong with textbooks?

Textbooks can cost a fortune. A typical textbook that might cost $24.99 at Barnes & Noble might be sold to schools or directly to students in college bookstores for $200. Schools and teachers often require the most recent versions, which have been updated with minor changes, thus forcing schools and students to pay for books rather than reusing older ones. 

The high cost has little to do with the cost of production, and everything to do with monopoly pricing. Many textbooks are required by someone -- a school board, and state board of education, a teacher, professor or department head. Once it's required, you've got a monopoly pricing opportunity. Students *have* to buy the book regardless of price.

But the worst thing about textbooks is that they've evolved into bland, unreadable products of interest group politics. Schools are trying to teach students to be literate, and to develop an ear for good language, then we force-feed them these hideous textbooks, which tend to be so stripped of blood and guts and heart (one definition of bad writing) that reading and learning become some kind of forced march through the educational-industrial complex, rather than the journey of discovery they're supposed to be.

In a better world, teachers would choose reading materials from the millions of available online titles. If they chose a textbook, fine. But instead of some bland, committee-approved, unreadable textbook about Plato, why not have the students actually read Plato? It's both superior and free.

Of course, electronic books wouldn't stop controversy. But it could push the controversy down to the local level. Rather than tiny minorities of religious people, politically sensitive people or other groups forcing blandness and stupidity on an entire state, only the local school districts should be having these battles in the places where those interest groups exist. Elsewhere, schools could be free to assign real books.

It's worth pointing out, by the way, that pushing decision-making down to the level of the individual is precisely why, say, capitalism works better than centrally planned economies, and why, for example, more people get more value out of the Wikipedia than the Encyclopedia Britanica. Maybe school curricula should also take a cue from Hayek, and push the decision-making down to the individual instructor? Electronic materials would make that extremely workable.

Why electronic is better

Students are already online and electronic. They're mobile and digital. An electronic book can be read in more places. For example, if a college student works part time on some manual labor job, he or she can listen to their books and get more studying in than would be possible with paper books. They can read on their iPhones on the bus, or read in hundreds of other situations where they wouldn't have their giant, bulky textbook.

The text size can be increased, which helps visually impaired students.

Electronic editions could be updated at nearly zero cost. They could be subscribed to by schools, saving taxpayer money. That way, a college teacher wouldn't have to require the bookstore to stock the new version and dump all the used books. The electronic version would always be updated.

And here's a radical idea. Why not ban books altogether for some courses. Why not place the burden of finding sources on the student. Isn't it better to teach them to fish, rather than giving them one? (The best students do that anyway, supplementing assigned materials with those they find on their own.)

Rather than banning the use of Wikipedia, as some schools do, why not require contribution to it? 

Some of the best universities in the world place complete course materials, including video podcasts of lectures, online. What possible reason would some podunk college have to not take advantage of course material from, say, MIT, whenever possible (other than instructor ego)? There's a whole new universe of educational content resources -- most of it free -- that has emerged in the past few years. Why are schools still pretending that the Internet never happened?

So that's my proposal: Ban all paper textbooks and go electronic. Students could choose to read on PCs, phones or Kindle-like readers. If students don't have some kind of reader, libraries and computer labs do.

And once schools go electronic, let's stop torturing students with textbooks, and introduce them to the real world of intellectual content out there.

Embracing real books online can help solve the education crisis, the financial crisis and a large number of other crises.

A global recession and educational funding crisis makes the perfect time to wrench our children's minds away from the textbook industry, the politically correct anti-intellectuals, special interest groups and the bureaucratic mindset that is wrecking education.

Let's burn the textbooks and go electronic. 

What People Are Saying

Online should not replace the classroom

Online education should replace tutoring, not the classroom. I believe that having an online education alone would not benefit the student, but limit them to a learning experience without a network of students and professors to help you find jobs after college. I'm a big fan of using online educational resources to replace the high costs of tutoring and test preparation courses like the Kaplan or Princeton Review. Sites like Thinkwell and MindBites will thrive in this area because they provide a cheap and accessible alternative to tutoring and go hand-in-hand with in-classroom teaching materials. Judge for yourself:

http://www.mindbites.com/category/5-education

We in our family got

We in our family got frustrated with the high prices of books as well and were really annoyed by the buy back program at the school book store that offered my daughter $1.00 for one of her used text books that the book store would turn around and sell for just a few dollars less than a new text. She and some of her friends at school were talking about creating a way of buy and selling their used texts from each other. So we created CC Book Exchange. CC Book Exchange is a free classified ads site for used text books. This will provide a place for students to sell and buy used texts. Of course, the issue of new editions continues to present an issue for the market of used texts. But we are trying to do our part to deal with the problem of expensive text books.

couldn't agree more!

I am 3 years out of college myself and I wish an online text was a feasible option for me - medical books are outlandishly expensive!

The textbook industry’s practices are something I believe everyone should be better educated about. For instance, university students in the US pay more for identical books than their counterparts in Europe, Asia, and Africa. New editions come out more frequently than when new Significant discoveries corresponding fields are found - culminating in misleading information to teachers who prescribe the newest editions to their classes.

I wrote about the now-standard textbook company practices at OrganicEdu.org, if interested.

Education

As a school librarian and teacher, as well as the parent of a high school student, I agree 110%. My students in school are familiar with technology and use it frequently in ways that we, the older generation, would not ordinarily think of. My son, a junior, reviews you tube lectures from Universities and rarely touches the assigned text books. As a classroom teacher, I find the books are boring and often poorly written and, unfortunately, frequently out of date.Using them means boring lessons and lack of engagement on the part of the students. Many teachers choose not to use them on a daily basis. (I am currently using textbooks to teach German that talk about Deutschmarks, a form of currency that has not been used for 6 years - a fact that does not go unnoticed by the students.) I prefer to download real German language material from German newspapers to read and listen to.
Using the money currently spent on textbooks to provide additional staff development to encourage and enable teachers to incorporate technology into the classroom, and to enable the students to use the technology they already have (download classroom lectures/power points etc onto the MP3 players that most of them already own) could have an amazing impact on how much and how willingly our children learn. We spend more time, energy and effort as teachers and administrators confiscating MP3 players and decrying social networking sites when we could be using these amazing tools to increase learning. As for the money made by text book publishers, they could certainly keep their share of the market by creating digital books, incorporated with multi-media presentations and moving with the times to ensure that our children are educated to enter the world of the 21st century.

Exactly My Feelings

These feelings are exactly the same feelings I have about printed textbooks. Why does it take so long to implement the most obvious solutions. There are so many reasons why like were mentioned that electronic or digital is a much better direction to head. My next contribution to the discussion is promoting online education. This goes hand in hand with electronic and digital textbooks. We wrote a similar article and talked about paperless books, if that makes sense, Online Education is Greener. I don't know why they don't start immediately making obvious changes in education and cutting expenses and increasing investments in individual students.

I'd just like to say that I

I'd just like to say that I read my big bulky textbook on the bus and train every day I go to class. If you really want to learn, you'll find a way to make it happen.

You also aren't really grasping the concept of why one reads a textbook about a literary work as opposed to the actual literary work. Reading a philospher's book doesn't mean you will understand a single bit of it. You need a textbook to explain the setting, the events which shaped the author's life, the use of linguistics and what possibly changed in translation, in addition to many other things.

There will never be a time when people don't need textbooks or analytical texts in order to understand a complex subject.

My say on the matter

I can imagine there are two main reasons paper textbooks are still used more often than digital textbooks. (1) The typical human doesn’t like to adapt, and (2) there are many students who do not have regular access to a working computer.

I believe reason 1 speaks for itself, so I’m going to address reason 2. Though you assume that most everyone has a computer or easily has access to one I have seen many schools (including my own high school) where a large number of the students (maybe not the majority, but enough to make an impact) come from impoverished families that cannot afford a good computer. Students may, of course, use public libraries, but most of these libraries do not stay open for long so your studying would be limited to the library’s operating hours.

The idea of having students look for sources themselves IS radical indeed, and somewhat flawed in my mind. To make sure that students find credible sources you would have to teach them how to check the validity of these sources, which would require class time that could be spent on other material. Though it may pay off to teach a man to fish, teaching a village is a much different venture.

Wikipedia is mostly considered an unreliable source because of its dynamic nature. At any moment the article could be edited by anyone to say anything they wanted it to. This may be exaggerating a little bit, but that is really the main reason it is considered an unreliable source. What students CAN do is follow the references at the bottom of articles to use those as sources, which I often do myself. These normally tend to be credible sources, and thus acceptable.

My counter proposal is to, instead of going straight from paper to digital, to offer the alternative of digital more extensively. Despite the intrinsic flaws of paper textbooks, there are still solid reasons for them to exist in the world today. They are on the road to obsoleteness, but for now all we can do is push it along a little bit faster.

Books are already digital, What are you talking about?

WELCOME 21ST CENTURY
Enter 21st century, books are digital. The book is already digital. These days, since its very conception a book is born digital. The paper book is just one of the ways the book gets to you, but you can read a book in a computer screen or hear it on an audio book.

WHAT'S A BOOK
What's the book anyway? You mean the paper?
What's a song? an mp3 file, a track in cd, a track in a vinyl record? a track in a cassette?

I think you're talking about the content.
I would go physical if physical is required, and digital if digital is the way to go. There are no silver bullets.

LOWERING THE COSTS
I think I see your point, you're saying save money on paper, and lower the costs, distribution, upgrading CONTENT and everything else. But I don't think the cost of the book is in the paper, or even distribution. For a U$200 book that would be like 5%, if you go digital would you pay U$150 for the same book? The current distribution model for books doesn't support lowering margins.

DIGITAL DISTRIBUTION WORKS?
Publishers are no benefical institutions they exist to make money out of books. If the model is good enough, then books will be distributed in digital forms. I think it's working, I don't have hard numbers but amazon.com started with 90,000 books two years ago for the kindle, and now it has more that 240,000. If you look at prices, most digital copies of business books are U$3 or U$4 dollars cheaper than their hardcopy counterparts, that means you don't get much savings here.

We should strive to have a distribution model, that lets us have whatever form we want. BTW, we already do, if you like an e-book you can print it out at your expense, with some limitations of course, and with a "decent" text to speech you can hear it too.

IT'S ALL ABOUT PRICE, NOT THE FORM.
But then again... the price thing... I don't think it has to do with the paper... it has to do with the money making model of publishers, libraries, authors, and so on. If there's revenue in the distribution form, and it proves good, then you will see more books in digital form at better prices for the end consumer, but don't wait for U$1.00 copies of "Leadership in Organizations" by Gary Yukl, or, "Leadership: Theory and Practice" by Peter Northouse from the publisher.

Good article, and fantastic issue!!
--Ken

Hello Mike, I agree with

Hello Mike,

I agree with you and support your campaign elsewhere in the country and throughout the world.
Here in Brazil, the textbooks are very bad and to serve all kinds of corruption involving millions of dollars.
Are generally summaries of important issues, they do not report properly and not leave room for criticism from students.
I agree not only with the use of electronic books as well as the construction of powerful and updated libraries in all schools.

Massive Factual Errors

Your article might've ended up a little better off if you'd bothered to do a little factchecking first.

That $200 textbook does not, under any circumstances, cost $24.99 at Barnes & Noble. You're comparing the prices of trade books (mass produced to sell at extrememly large volumes and priced accordingly) to textbooks (specialized books selling substantially fewer copies). It's an apples-to-oranges comparission. Pick any $200 textbook. Go look it up on Barnes & Noble and check their price. Still a $200 textbook . . .

As I alluded to above, those prices are largely determined by the publishers, and are substantially higher than trade books because of the very few copies they expect to sell. They want to profit. They're not going to magically stop wanting to profit just because the material becomes electronic. In fact, most of the major textbook publishers already make e-versions of their texts available. At about half of the price of the paper edition, meaning that $200 text is still a $100 e-text. Most of them are licensed for use for a limited time only after which they "expire." They can't be shared, they can't be reused, they can't be resold as "used." So much for cheaper. Our public schools would have to pay for that $100 license every time a new student wants to use the book instead of buying the actual text once and then re-using it multiple times.

On top of all that, someone who writes about computers for a living should be familiar with the abuses consumers often face under corporate EULAs. You honestly think we're better off in a world where every book also carries an EULA?

Lastly, of course, as others above me have already pointed out, we have the blunder of endorsing the entirely non-authoratative "wikipedia" for use in an educational setting. Go read the wiki's articles on "Information Literacy" or "Source Authority." In the meantime, maybe you should stick to writing about whatever cool new gadget the kids are playing with this week and stay away from the serious topics.