Rob Reynolds' blog, the xplanation, has recently become my "first-stop" resource for discussions of all things OER, ebook, and trends in higher education. One of his recent posts sheds a lot of light on what might happen (or needs to happen) to textbook publishers' business models with increased use of Open Educational Resources on campuses throughout the country. The research project that led to this blog is based on replacing the traditional textbook with library subscription ebook content. This works out great for both the students and the library: the students don't spend a dime on their "textbook", and the library increases resource awareness and ebook database use. As a librarian, I appreciate the moments when we can position ourselves to be a critical component of course delivery, and embedding library subscribed content into a course to replace the traditional textbook is a huge win on that front. However, I'm over the fact that textbook alternatives should only be library resources.
OER's like the textbooks available via Flat World and the like can get a lot of flack for lacking credibility, authority, etc. Yet, I saw Jeff Shelstad speak at the 2010 Charleston Conference (presentation breakdown by ebook guru Sue Polanka here), and he did a fantastic job conveying the benefits of not only the Flat World Knowledge content, but OER content in general. The content available via Flat World does come from authoritative sources, just like our traditional textbooks. Are accrediting teams really going to weigh in on the "vettedness" of our textbooks (please argue/comment if you have an actual answer to the rhetoric)? Shouldn't they (the accrediting bodies) appreciate our willingness to evolve and meet student needs over our adherence to textbook traditions/norms? I'm not going to lie: starting this evolution from traditional textbook to etextbook in the Marketing classes on our campus has gone so smoothly due to the fact that we have replaced the traditional text with copyrighted, "vetted", textbook-like content available via our ebook database subscriptions. However, I'm ready to push the envelope and explore the other, non subscription based, options out there.
The two main goals for this blog space are to 1) discuss advances in textbook alternatives for higher education and 2) share/compile a list/database of those alternatives (so PLEASE, send us your suggestions!). Point is, there's a LOT out there already, and as we see in news stories/blog posts almost DAILY at the xplanation, The Chronicle, and Inside Higher Ed, this conversation is only beginning. What effect will OER's have on textbook publishing practices? What effect will using subscription ebook aggregators as textbook content have on publishers? Honestly, I'm both excited and scared to find out. I finish this post in the midst of the HarperCollins announcement that they will only lend ebook titles to libraries for 26 "checkouts" before the titles become unavailable in ebook format. Clearly, the way in which users interact with content is changing rapidly, and publishers are reacting...sometimes prematurely or irrationally.
Showing posts with label publishers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label publishers. Show all posts
Friday, February 25, 2011
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Student Loophole or Opportunity for Publishers to Create A New Textbook Model
Currently, there are subscription-based electronic databases that legally house 1000's of complete textbook titles that can be accessed by both students and faculty. One example is Books 24x7, which mainly focuses on business and IT discipline titles.
Out of curiosity, I have worked with library faculty to develop embedded links to this database to offer students a textbook option that delivers high-quality textbook content electronically... At no cost to them. With a clear course plan of key terms and concepts that students need to achieve course objectives, we mapped each key term and concepts, via embedded links, back to no less than 16 textbooks housed in the Books 24x7 ebook database.
This exercise has been an amazing learning experience for me as an instructor and as a consumer of textbooks.
For many faculty, textbook reps show up individually, present us with updated editions of textbooks that are accompanied with any number of course supplements that include, companion websites, test banks, power points, videos, sample syllabi, etc., etc.
In general, this model has worked... Faculty receive vetted content to share and distribute to students and student expectations are met because they receive a syllabus, a required textbook and marching orders for the course.
This is not a poor model, but it is difficult for me not to only question this model but to challenge it by providing students with an option that satisfies or exceeds course objectives, becomes a "click away" for users, requires no additional money from students and takes advantage of an existing electronic library resource.
It's silly to even say, "things have changed." Available high-quality content for numerous disciplines is not only readily available but can be fed to us based on individual interests via RSS feeds and simple permanent URLs.
Linking students to key terms and concepts in my current Introduction to Marketing course may be a short-term loophole that only current and near-future students can benefit from. Surely, publishers who contribute licensed content to Books24x7 did not envision their texts being accessed in such a way, and my fear is that, as much as I would love this model to catch on, if it does, publishers may be less willing to participate in these ebook aggregators. In the meantime, I will continue to improve this model with colleagues to maximize the potential for sharing relevant content from existing ebook databases.
However, I realize there is still a large market of my colleagues that benefit the traditional textbook model. My challenge would be for publishers to reevaluate their model to identify how they can develop and sustain a system where electronic textbooks from multiple publishers that support multiple disciplines can be available to students and accessed in this manner without the loophole closing.
Out of curiosity, I have worked with library faculty to develop embedded links to this database to offer students a textbook option that delivers high-quality textbook content electronically... At no cost to them. With a clear course plan of key terms and concepts that students need to achieve course objectives, we mapped each key term and concepts, via embedded links, back to no less than 16 textbooks housed in the Books 24x7 ebook database.
This exercise has been an amazing learning experience for me as an instructor and as a consumer of textbooks.
For many faculty, textbook reps show up individually, present us with updated editions of textbooks that are accompanied with any number of course supplements that include, companion websites, test banks, power points, videos, sample syllabi, etc., etc.
In general, this model has worked... Faculty receive vetted content to share and distribute to students and student expectations are met because they receive a syllabus, a required textbook and marching orders for the course.
This is not a poor model, but it is difficult for me not to only question this model but to challenge it by providing students with an option that satisfies or exceeds course objectives, becomes a "click away" for users, requires no additional money from students and takes advantage of an existing electronic library resource.
It's silly to even say, "things have changed." Available high-quality content for numerous disciplines is not only readily available but can be fed to us based on individual interests via RSS feeds and simple permanent URLs.
Linking students to key terms and concepts in my current Introduction to Marketing course may be a short-term loophole that only current and near-future students can benefit from. Surely, publishers who contribute licensed content to Books24x7 did not envision their texts being accessed in such a way, and my fear is that, as much as I would love this model to catch on, if it does, publishers may be less willing to participate in these ebook aggregators. In the meantime, I will continue to improve this model with colleagues to maximize the potential for sharing relevant content from existing ebook databases.
However, I realize there is still a large market of my colleagues that benefit the traditional textbook model. My challenge would be for publishers to reevaluate their model to identify how they can develop and sustain a system where electronic textbooks from multiple publishers that support multiple disciplines can be available to students and accessed in this manner without the loophole closing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)