whole mechanism of textbooks (and books in general) is

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

________________________________________
From: Eugene H. Spafford [spaf () mac com]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 4:01 PM
To: David Farber; ip
Subject: Re: [IP] Re:       BitTorrent now being used for piracy of textbooks

As noted, the whole mechanism of textbooks (and books in general) is
changing.

It used to be that authors toiled over texts to present distilled
information about their expertise -- often hard-won, and usually with
careful research.  The resulting books were valuable for self-study,
for teaching, and especially for reference.  Books with valuable
content and organization were treasured not only for classes, but for
later reference.   Years later it is possible to go to a particular
book to find an algorithm, scientific constant, or quote that is needed.

Over time, we have seen trends that have eroded the model -- and more
quickly than most have realized.

First, computerized type-setting and faster printing allowed a lower
barrier to entry for printing.  Small publishers could get a profit
from a smaller press run, and enticed many new authors to write books
on topics where they perceived demand.  Some also turned to cheaper
materials -- high-acid, low density paper, cheap glue binding, paper
covers -- that result in books that wear faster and don't hold up to
repeated use or storage as a reference.  I look at my reference
library (about 800 books) and see many recent publications of very
limited utility and likely short life-span.  Nonetheless, we see this
flood continue because there is a profit to be made and few of the
audience read enough of the books to distinguish good from bad, so
there continues to be a market.   Plus, books with errors or are
incomplete aren't a big deal anymore -- put the errata on line, or
wait for the next edition (sound like the software problem?).  With
Google, Yahoo and Wikipedia, many people don't feel the need for
physical references on their shelves any more.

(Aside -- our new buildings with (small) faculty offices are being
constructed with limited bookshelf space.  Faculty are told to either
take books home or donate them to the library.  The image of a learned
professor surrounded by books is also becoming passé.)

As a (former) author, the question is why would I write a book in this
environment?  Well, it certainly isn't for the money.  As Mary Shaw
noted, there isn't a lot of return.  I co-wrote a couple, plus many
book chapters,  and although they sold well, I can't say I made a lot
of money.  It certainly didn't cover the time away from family, and
the permanent damage to my hands (which has limited my ability to
write much of anything over the last decade).   Many current academic
colleagues -- particularly the ones who don't write books -- don't
judge them as too significant.  Furthermore, using some of the poorer
books out there as metrics, they don't value the scholarly effort some
of us put into our writing, either.

The textbook publishers are in business to make money.  So, the ones
producing the better textbooks need more incentive to offer authors,
plus a bigger profit margin to cover fixed expenses with sales of
fewer books.   Not all their books are hits, either, so they have this
balance between bringing out new titles and sustaining the long-term
balance.   The result is that costs creep up, even if they are trying
to contain them (and I doubt they are as rapacious as the media
publishers).


So, as an instructor, what do I do?  I can certainly assign essays and
work off the WWW, but how do I find the best ones in an area where I
may not be a top expert?  The input of an editor and/or co-ordinating
author who expertise I can judge would be a help, but I don't get that
from Wikipedia or Google.

Do I want to be teaching fundamental principles from "The Big Dummies
1-2-3 Guide to C++", 19th edition, knowing that my students are going
on to program critical infrastructure and national defense
applications?   I would rather include sound pedagogy, reinforcement
of material on critical algorithms and data structures, issues of
ethics and law, and more that is in some of the more carefully-
designed textbooks.   But then I have students who balk at the $100
differential and they don't get it when I explain they are paying for
quality: they're focused on getting through school as quickly and
cheaply as possible to get a job.  Unfortunately, many of them carry
that over as a work ethic -- do it is as quickly and cheaply as
possible to get it out the door. :-(

If we are trying to advance any scholarly field, we should all be
working from common terminology and well-documented experiments and
facts.   How can we trust something we find online that has no author
or reviewers listed, or else they are pseudonyms, or people we have
never heard of?   Is that a stable foundation on which to build future
science with confidence?

And what happens 20 years from now when researchers try to go back to
underlying principles and results, and cannot find canonical versions
of texts to verify that they have been cited appropriately because
there are dozens of versions stored electronically....and which may
differ in both subtle and significant ways?

The same problems have been happening with journals and conference
proceedings.  People don't understand that the money they pay goes
towards making a fixed archival copy, and to help ensure that there is
some quality control in what is published.


I'm sure I sound like a crusty old Luddite to a few people reading
this.   I know all the arguments about the cyber revolution making
knowledge quickly available, at how we can avoid cabals and politics
by publishing new results quickly, about how scarce funds can be spent
on items other than books, and how even 3rd world scholars can have
instant access.  I've also heard the arguments about "many eyes"
fixing problems in publications and code, and it has been proved
specious, and is part of the reason we have a "we'll fix it in the
next release" attitude.  I'm certainly both a vendor and a customer in
the vast marketplace of ideas enabled by all our innovation.

Yet, as a scholar and educator, i worry how to ensure that all our
students get the best, most correct materials, that our researchers
use correct and commonly-available results, and that we document our
progress in correct and archival formats for generations to come.   I
don't see a cost-effective, workable model yet.  What I do see is the
same problem I see in many other enterprises, and especially in
software systems development -- the whole rush to cheap and fast
because people don't understand the lasting impact of quality.


I think those problems are part of the whole discussion, and textbook
costs are only part of the issue.




-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com