lvc@cbnews.ATT.COM (Lawrence V. Cipriani) (11/19/88)
Yet another quarter passes at Ohio State University where I pay a lot of money for a book that is hardly used. So I figure there has to be a better way ... Why not have a Cheap Textbook Foundation? It would be along the lines of the Free Software Foundation. Through the cooperation of many authors texts could be written on virtually any subject. To begin start with something like Calculus or Physics, that just about all science undergrads need. Then if that works out, go on to other areas. The books would be written in a common typesetting language, say LaTeX, and stored on line. Who would write them? Who knows? The FSF has many people involved. I would think a lot of people would be interested in writing a book or part of one just for the fun of it. I am! As for production, copies of the books could be down loaded, printed on a high quality laser printer, then copied en masse, and then sold. So the $64,000 question is ... Would this produced books less expensively than the current system, would the books be of high quality? I don't have any idea about the cost. The quality issue is really up to the people that are involved, junk or masterpieces could be produced. Ideally they would be of high enough quality that universities would adopt them as texts. So, what do people think? Is this a worthwhile idea? What are the obstacles to implementing this? Do publishers have a lot of influence on what texts are chosen? -- Larry Cipriani, AT&T Network Systems, Columbus OH, Path: att!cbnews!lvc Domain: lvc@cbnews.ATT.COM
johnm@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (John Murray) (11/20/88)
In article <2219@cbnews.ATT.COM>, lvc@cbnews.ATT.COM (Lawrence V. Cipriani) writes: > Yet another quarter passes at Ohio State University where I pay > a lot of money for a book that is hardly used. So I figure there > has to be a better way ... > Why not have a Cheap Textbook Foundation? . . . Why not abolish the publishers' restrictions on importing textbooks into the US? So-called "International Editions" of many common US textbooks are produced by the same publishing corporations for sale in Europe and elsewhere, and cost maybe one quarter the price of the US edition. This is not related to copyright loopholes, as far as I know. Nor is it because of any direct government subsidy of textbook publishing. It seems to be simply a way of shafting the US student, who is accustomed to paying inordinate amounts of money for education in general. - John Murray (My own opinions, etc.)
elg@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Eric Green) (11/20/88)
in article <d4Bq6819Kg1010RPaVI@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>, johnm@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (John Murray) says: > In article <2219@cbnews.ATT.COM>, lvc@cbnews.ATT.COM (Lawrence V. Cipriani) writes: >> Yet another quarter passes at Ohio State University where I pay >> a lot of money for a book that is hardly used. So I figure there >> has to be a better way ... > Why not abolish the publishers' restrictions on importing textbooks into > the US? So-called "International Editions" of many common US textbooks > are produced by the same publishing corporations for sale in Europe and > elsewhere, and cost maybe one quarter the price of the US edition. There is, or at least was, a law regulating importation of printed material. I don't remember any details about it, alas... I've been thinking about a used textbook co-op for some time. What it would be is basically a used-book classified ad paper, bypassing the college bookstores with their 100% markup on used books. You might try organizing something like that on your college campus. Talk to the people at your college newspaper, your student government (if you can get their attention -- most student governments spend all their time organizing parties and pep rallies), your university administration, etc., if you really are serious about something like that (on retrospect, I don't need cheap books THAT bad...). -- Eric Lee Green ..!{ames,decwrl,mit-eddie,osu-cis}!killer!elg Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191 Lafayette, LA 70509
pjh@mccc.UUCP (Pete Holsberg) (11/21/88)
Doesn't the OSU Bookstore buy and sell used books? You should be able
to sell them back (silly, because they will probably be useful as
references later in your career) so that another student can benefit
from the reduced price.
--
Pete Holsberg UUCP: {...!rutgers!}princeton!mccc!pjh
Mercer College CompuServe: 70240,334
1200 Old Trenton Road GEnie: PJHOLSBERG
Trenton, NJ 08690 Voice: 1-609-586-4800bjornl@tds.kth.se (Bj|rn Lisper) (11/21/88)
In article <d4Bq6819Kg1010RPaVI@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> johnm@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (John Murray) writes: >Why not abolish the publishers' restrictions on importing textbooks into >the US? So-called "International Editions" of many common US textbooks >are produced by the same publishing corporations for sale in Europe and >elsewhere, and cost maybe one quarter the price of the US edition. A quarter of the price...this may be true in some places, but certainly not in others. I live in Sweden, a notorious high-cost country, and here the price of textbooks in computer science (my principal area of interest) is certainly not a quarter of the U.S. price. I'd rather say these books are more expensive here than in the U.S. I guess the same holds in other areas, like math. And yes, I'm talking about textbooks in English. The standard ones. Textbooks in Swedish (when available) are, by the way, hardly cheaper. Thus, the original idea about an on-line textbook archive seems like a great one to me. Just make sure that this archive has a mail request facility, so that we without FTP access can benefit too.... Bjorn Lisper
jeff@ndcheg.cheg.nd.edu (Jeffrey C. Kantor) (11/26/88)
One thing bothers me about this discussion. A quality mathematics or
technically oriented textbook is not an easy thing to write. It can require
intense effort over an extended period, with classroom testing, reviews,
and the like. What's in it for the author? Well, for one thing, financial
renumeration which can be fairly reasonable for a well-received textbook.
I really wonder, if after all expending the effort required for a good
text, there are very many potential authors willing to distribute their
work for free?
--
Jeff Kantor
US Mail: Dept. of Chemical Engineering
internet: jeff@ndcheg.cheg.nd.edu University of Notre Dame
uucp: iuvax!ndmath!ndcheg!jeff Notre Dame, IN 46556 USAsysop@stech.UUCP (Jan Harrington) (11/26/88)
in article <2219@cbnews.ATT.COM>, lvc@cbnews.ATT.COM (Lawrence V. Cipriani) says: > > > Why not have a Cheap Textbook Foundation? It would be along the > lines of the Free Software Foundation. Through the cooperation of > many authors texts could be written on virtually any subject. To > begin start with something like Calculus or Physics, that just about > all science undergrads need. Then if that works out, go on to other > areas. The books would be written in a common typesetting language, > say LaTeX, and stored on line. > > Who would write them? Who knows? The FSF has many people involved. > I would think a lot of people would be interested in writing a book > or part of one just for the fun of it. I am! > As the author of several textbooks, this gives me nightmares. There is more than you might think involved with the creation of a textbook. First of all, textbooks are "reviewed." That means that the manuscript is sent to various people who might use it in their courses for critiquing. The book is read for technical accuracy as well as style, readability, etc. Part of the cost of producing a quality text lies in paying decent honorariums to good reviewers (the process takes a significant amount of the reviewer's time and effort). There are also special techniques used in textbooks. Writing review questions and exercises is a very difficult task. Many textbooks also come with "ancillaries" - aids for the teacher - including instructor's guides, student data disks, transparency masters, databases of exam questions, etc., etc. All of these take a great deal of expertise and effort to create. The publishers have little to say with what text is adopted in a given course, though their representatives are always trying to get books adopted. Textbooks are expensive because a great deal of care and effort goes into their writing and because the market for a text is relatively small. Desktop publishing techniques have cut down on the costs somewhat, and some books are being marketed at more reasonable prices for that reason. You should also look carefully at your college bookstore. Many mark up publishers' list prices significantly. So you want to write a book for fun? OK, write a book for fun. But writing a text is serious business. If you do it well, then you get royalties because the book sells. However, without the quality control of the review process, the textbook market would be flooded with even more drek than it already is. I sympathize with your having to pay for textbooks, but consider that a cost of going to college. The text was hardly used? How should a text be used? An instructor shouldn't necessarily teach directly from a text. Even if you're not assigned specific readings, find the chapters in the text that supplement what's going on in the classroom. In that way, you can get every bit of value out of the text and add to what happens in lecture. Jan Harrington, sysop Scholastech Telecommunications UUCP: husc6!amcad!stech!sysop or allegra!stech!sysop BITNET: JHARRY@BENTLEY ******************************************************************************** Miscellaneous profundity: "No matter where you go, there you are." Buckaroo Banzai ********************************************************************************
carl@aoa.UUCP (Carl Witthoft) (11/28/88)
With respect to the effort of the writers:
Yes it's true that the authors work pretty hard to produce the book.
And they oughta get paid for it.
Unfortunately, they often come out with 2nd 3rd, Nth editions to
ensure that all the poor kids can't buy a used text. (generally, at
least in math, the only thing that changes is the problem sets)
This is a major problem in the more competitive areas such as
introductory Calc, Chem, etc.
So what. A really well-written text can serve as a reference for
the user (you know, what we become after we graduate) for years to come.
--
Alix' Dad ( Carl Witthoft @ Adaptive Optics Associates)
" Axis-navigo, ergo sum."
{harvard,ima}!bbn!aoa!carl
54 CambridgePark Drive, Cambridge,MA 02140 617-864-0201
"disclaimer? I'm not a doctor, but I do have a Master's Degree in Science!"matloff@bizet.Berkeley.EDU (Norman Matloff) (11/30/88)
In article <684@stech.UUCP> sysop@stech.UUCP (Jan Harrington) writes: >As the author of several textbooks, this gives me nightmares. There is more As the recent author of a textbook, I'd like to give an alternate point of view. >than you might think involved with the creation of a textbook. First of all, >textbooks are "reviewed." That means that the manuscript is sent to various >people who might use it in their courses for critiquing. The book is read >for technical accuracy as well as style, readability, etc. Part of the >cost of producing a quality text lies in paying decent honorariums to good >reviewers (the process takes a significant amount of the reviewer's time >and effort). I found the reviews to be not only unhelpful, but downright harmful. There was not much consistency among them, at least in my case. Reviewers liked some features and didn't like other features of my book, but the several "like-lists" were almost totally disjoint from one reviewer to another, and the "dislike-lists" had the same problem. Several reviewers loved my exercises, "the best part of the book," while others characterized the exercises as "too difficult" and in the case of one reviewer, "contrived"! [I did however delight in the fact that for one particular facet of my book, the VAST MAJORITY of the reviewers said, "I like this, but nobody else will," quite a remarkable irony! :-) ] Another problem was the "dumbing-down" that we are starting to hear about grade-school and high-school books; some reviewers want this trend in the universities! >The publishers have little to say with what text is adopted in a given course, >though their representatives are always trying to get books adopted. Textbooks A real problem is that almost all publisher's sales reps have no technical background at all. How can they sell a book? >are expensive because a great deal of care and effort goes into their >writing and because the market for a text is relatively small. Desktop Yes, these SOUND LIKE reasonable explanations for the high price of textbooks. But oligopolistic market structure is a much better explanation. The plain truth is that publishers "have students over a barrel" -- the students MUST buy the books, and so the publishers can to a great extent charge what they want. Here is a little experiment you can do to see this: There are a great many softcover books on "Unix for programmers" on the market. Most are intended to be sold to nonstudents, but the one by Paul Wang is aimed as a textbook for university courses. It is of very similar content to other books, but is considerably more expensive (check this yourself). >a text is serious business. If you do it well, then you get royalties because >the book sells. No author will refuse royalties, but even with the high book prices, it's just not **financially** worth the time and effort in the majority of cases. I would claim that most authors of textbooks write the books because they feel that they have something special to say, not because of the money. >I sympathize with your having to pay for textbooks, but consider that a >cost of going to college. The text was hardly used? How should a text be >used? An instructor shouldn't necessarily teach directly from a text. Even >if you're not assigned specific readings, find the chapters in the text that >supplement what's going on in the classroom. In that way, you can get every >bit of value out of the text and add to what happens in lecture. Yes, excellent points. I would add the following: Consumers of texts in engineering/CS will end up with salaries which are in the upper strata among American incomes -- and before even reaching the age of 30! [Check the statistics if you are skeptical about this; it's true.] In that light, a few lousy dollars for a textbook is really a small investment that pays big dividends. Norm Matloff
c60a-2di@e260-2d.berkeley.edu (The Cybermat Rider) (11/30/88)
In article <547@aoa.UUCP> carl@aoa.UUCP (Carl Witthoft) writes: >With respect to the effort of the writers: >Yes it's true that the authors work pretty hard to produce the book. >And they oughta get paid for it. >Unfortunately, they often come out with 2nd 3rd, Nth editions to >ensure that all the poor kids can't buy a used text. (generally, at >least in math, the only thing that changes is the problem sets) >This is a major problem in the more competitive areas such as >introductory Calc, Chem, etc. >So what. A really well-written text can serve as a reference for >the user (you know, what we become after we graduate) for years to come. I think the main reason the Nth edition is published is simply because developments in the field concerned demand a new edition. As such, a "really well-written text" might serve as a reference for years, but it wouldn't be UP-TO-DATE...... Of course, that's not gonna stop me from keeping EVERY text I'm using now.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Adrian Ho a.k.a. The Cybermat Rider University of California, Berkeley c60a-2di@web.berkeley.edu Disclaimer: Nobody takes me seriously, so is it really necessary?
trow@tank.uchicago.edu (Jon Trowbridge) (12/01/88)
In article <17563@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> c60a-2di@e260-2d.berkeley.edu (The Cybermat Rider) writes: >I think the main reason the Nth edition is published is simply because >developments in the field concerned demand a new edition. This is certainly valid in the case of more advanced texts, but when was the last time there was a major development in introductory Calculus? All the first-year Calculus books that I've seen recently look like they were designed for visual appeal instead of content. How much do things like splashy color covers, fancy production values, elaborate layouts and slick graphs and diagrams add to the cost of a textbook?
ech@poseidon.ATT.COM (Edward C Horvath) (12/01/88)
From article <684@stech.UUCP>, by sysop@stech.UUCP (Jan Harrington): > As the author of several textbooks, this gives me nightmares. There is more > than you might think involved with the creation of a textbook... Jan, your article is thoughtful and informative. But you're wasting your breath. The same arguments have been advanced about free software -- i.e. you will get what you pay for -- but either you think your time and effort are worth something or you don't. If "information should be free" and anyone who sells information is somehow "immoral," then it is not only software but textbooks, newspapers, the contents of all libraries that should be free. Also all the lectures given by all the professors. Shucks, it's just information and ideas, it should be free. And consulting ought to be free, too. After all, if I need information and expertise that I don't have, to make a better product, that will make the world a better place, and you have that expertise, you ought to be morally bound to provide it. Free, of course, it's just information. The real blind spot of the Free Whatever Foundation is a failure, or a refusal, to recognize that there is some value-added in the reduction of an algorithm to practice, in the correlation, organization, and exposition of the information in a textbook, in the interpretation of raw data into comprehensible presentations in editorial content of publications. And that the QUALITY of the effort to organize/reduce to practice/ interpret the raw data is quite variable, and depends on talent and sweat. As soon as you concede that not everyone can do the job equally well, and that there is a cost associated with handling information effectively, economic and political forces inevitably arise that tend to assign the most talented practitioners to the most "critical" needs. If ANYBODY could write a Lotus, or a Feynman lecture, on the first draft, there'd be little market pressure to reward the better authors. Like democracy, the market is the worst method for making sure quality products are available -- except for all the others. If you want to donate your time and talent to a good cause, you have my admiration. But that is YOUR choice. You do not have the right to dictate that I, too, am morally obligated to donate my time and effort. And you certainly don't have the right to impose your morality on me, nor to justify stealing the fruits of my labor because, by your lights, I should have given them away anyway. I own my labor, and I will set the price of my labor; YOU can take it, negotiate it WITH ME, or leave it, or go into competition. If you steal it, it is YOU who are morally bankrupt. =Ned Horvath=
elg@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Eric Green) (12/01/88)
in article <17563@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, c60a-2di@e260-2d.berkeley.edu (The Cybermat Rider) says: > In article <547@aoa.UUCP> carl@aoa.UUCP (Carl Witthoft) writes: >>Unfortunately, they often come out with 2nd 3rd, Nth editions to >>ensure that all the poor kids can't buy a used text. (generally, at > I think the main reason the Nth edition is published is simply because > developments in the field concerned demand a new edition. As such, a > "really well-written text" might serve as a reference for years, but it > wouldn't be UP-TO-DATE...... That is certainly true in Computer Science... for example, an Architecture course I recently took used Tannenbaum's book, written in ?'82?. In the same year David Patterson published his article "The Case for a Reduced Instruction Set Computer." Needless to say, Tannenbaum's book spouts the "conventional wisdom" of the time (make instruction sets larger to make programs smaller, and you'll have a faster machine). Unfortunately, so does the professor ;-) (but that can be excused, since his main area of specialization is object-oriented systems). However, I have a Calculus textbook from the 1950's. I have two editions of a recent Calculus textbook. Between them all, I can find a number of notational differences, but the content is almost identical. Mathematics, Chemistry, Physics, none of them change much or far at the introductory level. The process of integrating and differentiation hasn't changed much in the last hundred years, except that now we have computer programs that can do some of the grunge work for us. But such programs are not even mentioned in introductory Calculus anyhow. So while there are obviously places where the technology changes so fast that you need new editions every year (but don't get them), it's obvious that there's only one reason for edition changes for introductory math and science courses: GREED. -- Eric Lee Green ..!{ames,decwrl,mit-eddie,osu-cis}!killer!elg Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191 Lafayette, LA 70509
dross@umn-d-ub.D.UMN.EDU (david ross) (12/01/88)
In article <6284@killer.DALLAS.TX.US> elg@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Eric Green) writes: > >However, I have a Calculus textbook from the 1950's. I have two >editions of a recent Calculus textbook. Between them all, I can find a >number of notational differences, but the content is almost identical. So let's all go back to using Courant and John :-) -- _ _ _ David A. Ross (Dept.Math.&Stat.,U.ofMN,Duluth) / \/ \/ \ BITNET: dross@umndul UUCP: dross@ub.d.umn.edu / /--/--/ (...all the opinions expressed herein are facts, /__/ / \ hence they belong to nobody, least of all me...)
fred@oravax.UUCP (Charles Mills) (12/02/88)
In article <605@poseidon.ATT.COM> ech@poseidon.ATT.COM (Ned Horvath) writes: > ...The same arguments have been advanced about free software -- >i.e. you will get what you pay for -- but either you think your time and >effort are worth something or you don't. The arguments have been advanced, but it's worth noting that in the case of free software, there are also large amounts of it available, and guess what? Some of it's terrible, some of it's medium, and some is the best of its kind. The quality, from where I sit, doesn't seem to be distributed markedly differently in free software from how it is in expensive software. >If "information should be free" and anyone who sells information is somehow >"immoral," then it is not only software but textbooks, newspapers, the >contents of all libraries that should be free. Speaking for myself, I'm not saying that `information should be free', any more than in buying a friend a drink I'm saying that `beer should be free'. I am merely contemplating giving some away. If I wrote what I thought was a ground-breaking calculus text, the main reward I would expect from it in any case would be the gratifying feeling of having helped to hold back the rising tide of ignorance. If my giving it away has the effect that more people read it, so much the warmer is this gratification. >Also all the lectures given by all the professors. Shucks, it's just >information and ideas, it should be free. I can't recall that I've ever known a professor who wasn't willing to give his ideas away at great length to any who would listen attentively--- and not many non-professors, come to that. >The real blind spot of the Free Whatever Foundation is a failure, or a >refusal, to recognize that there is some value-added in the reduction >of an algorithm to practice... Not at all--- at least not, as I've pointed out, for me. I don't propose to give the stuff away because I think it's valueless, or even because I don't think I could make money from it. I propose to give it away because that, I think, is the best way to make it effective in doing what I meant it to do. >Like democracy, the market is the worst method for making sure quality >products are available -- except for all the others. If you want it done right, do it yourself! The point is, the market isn't a method for making sure quality products are available, or a method for distributing them: it's merely a milieu in which to exchange them for other things of value. Very few authors, even of the best textbooks, make enough money off them for the money alone to justify their efforts: I think they generally have other benefits in mind, as I hinted above; and I think it's worth hoping, for an individual to whom those other benefits are important, that some such medium as the [Cheap, Free] Textbook Foundation (I propose the name be changed, anyway) may make it easier to obtain those benefits. >...If you want to >donate your time and talent to a good cause, you have my admiration. >But that is YOUR choice. You do not have the right to dictate that I, >too, am morally obligated to donate my time and effort. And you >certainly don't have the right to impose your morality on me, nor to justify >stealing the fruits of my labor because, by your lights, I should have >given them away anyway. I may have missed something (I have been away for a week), but I haven't seen anyone dictating any such thing--- and when I do, I'll join you in shouting them down. In any event, I don't see that the whole thing has really so much to do with morality--- unless, of course, someone is proposing to distribute *your* work for free without consulting you. -- fred (...!cornell!oravax!fred) *** No entity without identity! ***
vicki@emory.uucp (Vicki Powers) (12/02/88)
Yesterday I received a complimentary copy of a linear algebra book in the mail
(which I never asked for). This is a big book, list price $40. (The publisher
is North-Holland.) The company wants my input on the book, and is trying
to convince me to adopt it for a course. However, I am not teaching linear
algebra, and most likely won't be in the near future. This got me thinking -
is this habit of sending textbooks to academics contributing to the high cost?
As I look at my shelves, I see about 5 books that I got this way, and I've
only been teaching 3 1/2 years! I know of someone who was on a commitee to
pick a calculus book and who received many, many free (unsolicited) copies of
calculus textbooks. While I like receiving free textbooks, I wonder if
this practice is a good idea.
Vicki
--
Vicki Powers | vicki@mathcs.emory.edu PREFERRED
Emory University | {sun!sunatl,gatech}!emory!vicki UUCP
Dept of Math and CS | vicki@emory NON-DOMAIN BITNET
Atlanta, GA 30322 | daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU (Mr Background) (12/03/88)
I agree. Calculus 12th editions are absolutely useless and self-serving. As a matter of fact, my favorite introductory calc text is one I used in high school - 2nd ed of G. Thomas. (not Thomas and Finney, now in it 's infinity-th edition.... bleh) From: evwong@athena.mit.edu (Eric V Wong) Path: athena.mit.edu!evwong +------------------------------------------------------+ | Eric V Wong, Massachusetts Institute of Technology | | ARPA: evwong@athena.mit.edu BITNET: WONG@MITWIBR | | CIS: 72117,431 GEnie: E.WONG2 |
ech@poseidon.ATT.COM (Edward C Horvath) (12/03/88)
From article <6284@killer.DALLAS.TX.US>, by elg@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Eric Green): > ...it's obvious that there's only one reason for edition changes for > introductory math and science courses: GREED. (*sigh*) Have you ever written a book? Dealt with a publisher? Would it undermine your prejudices too much to learn that the author's royalties often DECREASE with a second edition (it costs the publisher money to reset the type. You want to revise it, the cost comes out of your cut). This is especially true with small-run items like textbooks. =Ned Horvath=
hofbauer@csri.toronto.edu (John Hofbauer) (12/04/88)
> >I think the main reason the Nth edition is published is simply because >developments in the field concerned demand a new edition. As such, a >"really well-written text" might serve as a reference for years, but it >wouldn't be UP-TO-DATE...... I wish I could agree but all too often it is simply greed. For three years I taught a 'computer literacy' course at a local university. The text was COMPUTERS TODAY by Donald Sanders, a typically wretched book in this genre. (These are to computer science what introductory calculus texts are to mathemetics.) A third edition appeared two years after the second edition. I was amused and appalled to read a story in the business section of the local newspaper about how McGraw-Hill was shorting the interarrival time of editions because too many used copies were eroding their sales. The Sanders book was cited as the primary example. The difference between the two editions was marginal. A few chapters were moved around and a few cosmetic "improvements" were made. I have yet to find a decent 'computer literacy' book just as another poster bemoaned the non-existence of a calculus book that isn't just a catalogue of tricks.
hofbauer@csri.toronto.edu (John Hofbauer) (12/04/88)
>Yesterday I received a complimentary copy of a linear algebra book in the mail >(which I never asked for). ... >As I look at my shelves, I see about 5 books that I got this way, and I've >only been teaching 3 1/2 years! I know of someone who was on a commitee to >pick a calculus book and who received many, many free (unsolicited) copies of >calculus textbooks. While I like receiving free textbooks, I wonder if >this practice is a good idea. > Free books are one of the perks of teaching at the university level. Unfortunately you often don't want them. When I taught a section of a 10-section, 1200 student 'computer literacy' service course I was constantly visited by publisher sales reps who were trying to convince us to switch to their book. By the time I left I had a self full of useless (to me) books. I managed to trade some in for books I wanted. In one case I traded in three such books for two I wanted. The sales rep was happy because it made his quota look better (one fewer given away) and I was happy too. As for it being a good idea... well, it is their way of advertising. Without getting the book in your hands how will you discover their great book. :-) Undeniably it adds to the cost of books, so I try to give a useless book back whenever I can. I just wish publishers would take more care in not publishing yet another useless calculus book. But what do they know about mathematics or anything else; they are just publishers! It will be up to us to write those wonderful new books and get them in their hands.
matloff@bizet.Berkeley.EDU (Norman Matloff) (12/04/88)
In article <17553@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> matloff@iris.ucdavis.edu (Norm Matloff) writes: In response to a posting which mentioned some reasons why the high prices of textbooks might be justified, I had said: >Yes, these SOUND LIKE reasonable explanations for the high price of >textbooks. But oligopolistic market structure is a much better explanation. >The plain truth is that publishers "have students over a barrel" -- the >students MUST buy the books, and so the publishers can to a great extent >charge what they want. >Here is a little experiment you can do to see this: There are a great >many softcover books on "Unix for programmers" on the market. Most are >intended to be sold to nonstudents, but the one by Paul Wang is aimed >as a textbook for university courses. It is of very similar content to >other books, but is considerably more expensive (check this yourself). In case anyone is interested, I just checked a few. Wang's book was around $38, but most other books which were similar in content were around $25. Wang's book was intended for the textbook market, while the others were intended for the general market. It definitely does appear that publishers are conscious of the fact that students must buy the **assigned** text for the course, i.e. no alternate choices, and thus will to a great extent be willing to pay whatever the publisher wants, and that the publishers are taking advantage of this. Norm
johnm@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (John Murray) (12/04/88)
Just a couple of thoughts: * If publishers sent their promotion copies to campus libraries or bookstores, and then solicited support from the faculty at that location, wouldn't that provide them with greater exposure than dumping copies on the desks of individuals who don't even teach the topic? Anyone browsing through the "Review Texts" section could have the opportunity to provide them with input, including students. I wonder what proportion of a text's sales go to libraries rather than individual students (and profs not on the mailing list)? * As for rewarding the authors, many profs seem to write their texts "during working hours", so to speak. Taking a sabbatical to write a book appears to be more common for advanced topics rather than for introductory texts, which often evolve out of class handouts over several years. Thus, the author isn't really "dependent" on the income in the same sense that a professional writer is. It seems to me that the royalties are sometimes just a way for instructors to make a little extra money. What would the royalties on a typical, mediocre intro text be, anyway? $500? $5000?? $50000??? * The Wang Unix book was mentioned as an example of over-pricing. Presumably it was marketed in the usual textbook fashion. How often do profs prescribe texts they've received free, rather than going through the contents of their local bookstores? By not looking for good, cheap books on a subject (such as the myriad of Unix non-textbooks), they inadvertently contribute to this disgrace. * It gets worse when BOTH a textbook and a half-baked version of the prof's forthcoming work need to be bought by the student. Sometimes a non-textbook supplemented by good course notes would more than suffice. - John M. (My own opinions, etc.)
vkr@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu (Vidhyanath K. Rao) (12/04/88)
In article <17738@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> matloff@iris.ucdavis.edu (Norm Matloff) writes: >[...] It definitely does appear that publishers are conscious of the fact >that students must buy the **assigned** text for the course[...] Ultimately the blame must fall on the students (as somebody else pointed out). You see, in basic courses, I would rather ask the students to buy a problem book, and may be one (or more :-) books out of a short list. Unfortunaltey, students feel uncomfortable about this. In fact, a biologist collegue of mine was bemoaning the fact that students wnat to know which pages of the text were going to covered on a given day, rather than knowing the name of the topic alone. I often feel the same way. In fact, when I lecture, I give only the name of the topic. But student think that that is too little. If that the way they feel, they deserve to be gouged. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nath vkr@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu
gsh7w@astsun1.acc.virginia.edu (Greg Hennessy) (12/05/88)
Vidhyanath K. Rao writes: >Ultimately the blame must fall on the students (as somebody else pointed >out). WHAT!!! You want to blame ME for the price of text books!?!?! Yet another case of blaming the victim! Get real! -Greg Hennessy, University of Virginia USPS Mail: Astronomy Department, Charlottesville, VA 22903-2475 USA Internet: gsh7w@virginia.edu UUCP: ...!uunet!virginia!gsh7w
night@pawl1.pawl.rpi.edu (Trip Martin) (12/05/88)
In article <1124@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu> vkr@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu (Vidhyanath K. Rao) writes: >In article <17738@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> matloff@iris.ucdavis.edu (Norm Matloff) > writes: >>[...] It definitely does appear that publishers are conscious of the fact >>that students must buy the **assigned** text for the course[...] > >Ultimately the blame must fall on the students (as somebody else pointed >out). You see, in basic courses, I would rather ask the students to buy a >problem book, and may be one (or more :-) books out of a short list. > >Unfortunaltey, students feel uncomfortable about this. In fact, a biologist >collegue of mine was bemoaning the fact that students wnat to know which >pages of the text were going to covered on a given day, rather than knowing >the name of the topic alone. I often feel the same way. In fact, when I >lecture, I give only the name of the topic. But student think that that is >too little. If that the way they feel, they deserve to be gouged. Being a student who's had to deal with buying textbooks for the past 3.5 years, I feel this is unfair. I've taken a number of courses (including one currently) where problems were assigned out of the required text, and these problems had to be handed in for a grade. Thus, we must buy that particular textbook so we can get the problems, or have to rely on getting the problems from other students (this is a REAL pain -- I've tried it). There are other factors which conspire against students being able to simply shop around for the best book. For one, the college bookstore usually stocks only the required or recommended books for each course (This might not be a problem for a large university, but is certainly is for RPI and many other schools). Second, how does a student decide which text is the best one to use? After all, the student doesn't already know the material to be covered, and thus is certainly not in a good position to judge the quality of each text (Granted, there are some things which a student can look out for to get an idea, but that often isn't enough). Third, suppose a student gets a text and it turns out the text doesn't cover all the material (Possibly a couple of minor topics not mentioned in the syllabus)? I certainly wouldn't mind being given a list of books to choose from, instead of having a single required text. Having students track down good textbooks on their own is different story. And I resent being blamed for not taking the time and effort to track down such texts. I think that that time and effort would be better spent on other things (like classes). -- Trip Martin night@pawl.rpi.edu night@paraguay.acm.rpi.edu
cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) (12/05/88)
In article <1124@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu>, vkr@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu (Vidhyanath K. Rao) writes: > In article <17738@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> matloff@iris.ucdavis.edu (Norm Matloff) > writes: > >[...] It definitely does appear that publishers are conscious of the fact > >that students must buy the **assigned** text for the course[...] > > Ultimately the blame must fall on the students (as somebody else pointed > out). You see, in basic courses, I would rather ask the students to buy a > problem book, and may be one (or more :-) books out of a short list. > > Unfortunaltey, students feel uncomfortable about this. In fact, a biologist > collegue of mine was bemoaning the fact that students wnat to know which > pages of the text were going to covered on a given day, rather than knowing > the name of the topic alone. I often feel the same way. In fact, when I > lecture, I give only the name of the topic. But student think that that is > too little. If that the way they feel, they deserve to be gouged. > I will not even give out in advance what topic I will cover on a given day. This is even the case in multi-section course in which the other sections are doing this. I do not necessarily follow the same order as the other sections. But the students want to know what will be covered on a given day, and what will be on the examinations. Our examinations should have at least half the questions things which can be done by someone who understands the concepts but not the manipulations, and cannot be done by someone who has merely memorized the various types of manipulations. I suggest that the liberal use of crib sheets be allowed in mathematics examinations. A formula can always be looked up in the real world; a definition can be looked up; a theorem can be looked up; the understanding of what these mean cannot be looked up. Students want to be told how. This must be resisted; the must understand why. Setting up problems is the important thing, except for theoreticians. The student from outside, and most of our teaching is to such, does not have to know how to solve a well-formulated problem, but how to formulate the problem so that an "expert" can solve it, if the solution procedure is known. If there is not a good book in a given area, it will take at least two man- years and multiple authorship of the entire book to produce a reasonable book for a one-semester course. And the students will hate it, and few faculty will be willing to make the effort to teach the concepts. It is much easier to teach plugging into formulas, it is much easier to grade, and the students like it much better. One can even use multiple choice tests, so it is not necessary to take the effort to grade! So why are the students so ignorant? -- Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907 Phone: (317)494-6054 hrubin@l.cc.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet, UUCP)
coughlij@clutx.clarkson.edu ( Jason Coughlin,221 Rey,84176,) (12/06/88)
>From: vkr@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu (Vidhyanath K. Rao) >Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.physics,comp.edu >Subject: Re: How to beat the high cost of text books! > >Ultimately the blame must fall on the students (as somebody else pointed >out). You see, in basic courses, I would rather ask the students to buy a >problem book, and may be one (or more :-) books out of a short list. > >Unfortunaltey, students feel uncomfortable about this. In fact, a biologist >collegue of mine was bemoaning the fact that students wnat to know which >pages of the text were going to covered on a given day, rather than knowing >the name of the topic alone. I often feel the same way. In fact, when I >lecture, I give only the name of the topic. But student think that that is >too little. If that the way they feel, they deserve to be gouged. I think this is really malicious and unfair! Please tell me exactly what problem you're solving by raising the cost of books!! I'll tell you what problem you aren't solving! You aren't solving the problem of motivating students to READ the textbooks and UNDERSTAND the textbooks. And, your incurring the problem of obtaining the textbooks. I'm ahead of my schedule. I'm only a sophomore and I have Tanenbaum's OS book and "The Dragon Book" on my bookshelf which I intend to read well in advance of my OS and Compilers course. Want to know how much I paid for those two books? I paid $100 for 2 books. NOT PRETTY! At this price, I can understand why a lot of students wouldn't be willing to buy them!! >From: cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) >Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.physics,comp.edu > >I will not even give out in advance what topic I will cover on a given day. >This is even the case in multi-section course in which the other sections are >doing this. I do not necessarily follow the same order as the other sections. And what problem fits this solution? I'm thankful my professors give me an itinerary for the entire semester. I read the material before the lecture, go to the lecture, and well-la, I've been exposed to the material twice. By looking at the material ahead of time, I get a perspective on the concept so that I can ask questions about the application. Don't tell me that you understood physics and calculus the first time you were exposed to it in a classroom because I don't buy it (Pun intended!) >But the students want to know what will be covered on a given day, and what >will be on the examinations. Our examinations should have at least half the >questions things which can be done by someone who understands the concepts >but not the manipulations, and cannot be done by someone who has merely >memorized the various types of manipulations. I suggest that the liberal >use of crib sheets be allowed in mathematics examinations. A formula can >always be looked up in the real world; a definition can be looked up; a >theorem can be looked up; the understanding of what these mean cannot be >looked up. Now THIS is a solution! And I agree entirely!! In fact, so does my comp sci professor. All examinations are open notes and open book. Any data structure, any formula, any algorithm already written can be looked up. However, his problems are new faces on old people. One must find the solution not just the forumla. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jason Coughlin, jk0@clutx.clarkson.edu, or jk0@clutx, or coughlij@clutx.clarkson.edu, or coughlij@clutx
cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) (12/06/88)
In article <1809@sun.soe.clarkson.edu>, coughlij@clutx.clarkson.edu ( Jason Coughlin,221 Rey,84176,) writes: > >From: cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) > >Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.physics,comp.edu > >I will not even give out in advance what topic I will cover on a given day. > >This is even the case in multi-section course in which the other sections are > >doing this. I do not necessarily follow the same order as the other sections. > > And what problem fits this solution? I'm thankful my professors give > me an itinerary for the entire semester. I read the material before the > lecture, go to the lecture, and well-la, I've been exposed to the material > twice. By looking at the material ahead of time, I get a perspective on the > concept so that I can ask questions about the application. Don't tell me that > you understood physics and calculus the first time you were exposed to it in > a classroom because I don't buy it (Pun intended!) For one thing, it is not necessary to follow the order of the material in the textbook. I may want to use some of the material in chapter 6 before some of the material in chapter 2. Or I may feel that a digression, explaining some of the concepts in more detail, is justified. Also, there are parts of the book which are irrelevant and are being omitted. But the worst situations, which I attempt to warn the students about well in advance, are those where the book is just plain misleading. Books in mathematics and statistics are particularly bad in presenting algorithms or special cases in such a way as to make the concepts very difficult to understand later. The student who believes that integral is antiderivative must disabuse himself of this in order to understand the 4500+ year old notion. Computing the amount of a bill is a much better example. A concept may involve the use of formulas, but it is not the manipulative procedure. I expect the student to read the book in advance of class, and most of them do not. But in most courses, the warnings about the misleading nature of the book are necessary. I also do not read the textbook in class. I expect the students to read the relevant parts, and they do not like this. Also, do not tell me to write a book. I know what is involved in writing a textbook, but few of the textbook authors seem to do anything but copy bad books. > >But the students want to know what will be covered on a given day, and what > >will be on the examinations. Our examinations should have at least half the > >questions things which can be done by someone who understands the concepts > >but not the manipulations, and cannot be done by someone who has merely > >memorized the various types of manipulations. I suggest that the liberal > >use of crib sheets be allowed in mathematics examinations. A formula can > >always be looked up in the real world; a definition can be looked up; a > >theorem can be looked up; the understanding of what these mean cannot be > >looked up. > > Now THIS is a solution! And I agree entirely!! In fact, so does > my comp sci professor. All examinations are open notes and open book. Any > data structure, any formula, any algorithm already written can be looked up. > However, his problems are new faces on old people. One must find the solution > not just the forumla. I can assure you that this is not appreciated by students in service courses in mathematics and statistics. The students are accustomed to having only the regurgitation of memorized formulas, and routine manipulation. The only reason that I do not customarily allow open book, and limit the amount of notes, is that otherwise students unaccustomed to this approach will spend all the time looking things up. -- Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907 Phone: (317)494-6054 hrubin@l.cc.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet, UUCP)
jjc@cisunx.UUCP (Jeffrey James Bryan Carpenter) (12/07/88)
In article <1049@l.cc.purdue.edu> cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes: >memorized the various types of manipulations. I suggest that the liberal >use of crib sheets be allowed in mathematics examinations. A formula can >always be looked up in the real world; a definition can be looked up; a >theorem can be looked up; the understanding of what these mean cannot be I fully agree with this. I could never understand why there was so much emphasis on memorizing formulas when it is the concepts and ways of applying the formulas that counts. You can give everyone the formulas, but if the students don't know what to do with them, then the formulas are not much help. My bigget problem in math classes was trying to remember all the formulas. -- Jeffrey J. B. Carpenter, University of Pittsburgh, Computer Center USMAIL: 600 Epsilon Drive, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15238 jjc@cisunx.UUCP | AT&T 1 412 624 6424 | JJC@PITTVMS.BITNET JJC@VMS.CIS.PITTSBURGH.EDU
reggie@pdn.UUCP (George W. Leach) (12/08/88)
In article <14193@cisunx.UUCP> jjc@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu (Jeffrey James Bryan Carpenter) writes: >In article <1049@l.cc.purdue.edu> cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes: >>memorized the various types of manipulations. I suggest that the liberal >>use of crib sheets be allowed in mathematics examinations. A formula can >>always be looked up in the real world; a definition can be looked up; a >>theorem can be looked up; the understanding of what these mean cannot be > >I fully agree with this. I could never understand why there was so >much emphasis on memorizing formulas when it is the concepts and ways >of applying the formulas that counts. This was standard practice in the Calculus courses I took. In fact, the crib sheet was a preprinted, on both sides, card that could be purchased from the bookstore! In fact, in many ways I would have preferred NOT to have open book tests because they were HARDER. Of course, you learned quite a bit more about REAL problem solving that way. -- George W. Leach Paradyne Corporation ..!uunet!pdn!reggie Mail stop LG-129 Phone: (813) 530-2376 P.O. Box 2826 Largo, FL USA 34649-2826
lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster) (12/08/88)
In article <580@oravax.UUCP> fred@oravax.odyssey.UUCP (Charles Mills) writes: >as the [Cheap, Free] Textbook Foundation An excellent idea. Naturally, the first thing it will require is a champion with network access and a willingness to devote some disk space to the job. -- Hugh LaMaster, m/s 233-9, UUCP ames!lamaster NASA Ames Research Center ARPA lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov Moffett Field, CA 94035 Phone: (415)694-6117
lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster) (12/08/88)
In article <8812040311.AA17256@king.csri.toronto.edu> hofbauer@csri.toronto.edu (John Hofbauer) writes: >the non-existence of a calculus book that isn't just a catalogue of >tricks. Try looking at Spivak's book. Of course, many people won't like it, because it takes too long to get to the "tricks". -- Hugh LaMaster, m/s 233-9, UUCP ames!lamaster NASA Ames Research Center ARPA lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov Moffett Field, CA 94035 Phone: (415)694-6117
goodloe@xenon.UUCP (Tony Goodloe) (12/08/88)
In article <14193@cisunx.UUCP>, jjc@cisunx.UUCP (Jeffrey James Bryan Carpenter) writes: > In article <1049@l.cc.purdue.edu> cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes: > >memorized the various types of manipulations. I suggest that the liberal > >use of crib sheets be allowed in mathematics examinations. A formula can > >always be looked up in the real world; a definition can be looked up; a > >theorem can be looked up; the understanding of what these mean cannot be > > I fully agree with this. I could never understand why there was so > much emphasis on memorizing formulas when it is the concepts and ways > of applying the formulas that counts. It is much easier for the prof to make and grade a test that is "plug-n-chug" rather than thought-provoking. Also, some profs end up teaching a class that they really don't understand. We had a professor, sort of a utility professor, that taught digital design, emag, electronics, and communications, and couldn't answer a question about any of it ... unless he had HIS cheat sheet in front of him. If you knew the formulas, you could get a 100%. Teachers like that really piss me off. They are just wasting my time and money. > Jeffrey J. B. Carpenter, University of Pittsburgh, Computer Center Tony Goodloe, Intergraph Corp.
johnm@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (John Murray) (12/08/88)
How about this scheme: The publisher has the source of the book available on-line. The bookstore/ university/professor/library/student orders the book by electronic mail, charging it to their account number/tuition bill/credit card or whatever. The publisher sends out the textfile and it is printed/reproduced locally, or alternately simply used online. (I'm not going to discuss the problems of copy protection, etc. We know all about them from software experience.) The advantage is that the source can be revised each year, so that people always have to get the latest version. It seems like the system would work best if most or all the texts for a given subject were distributed in this manner. (New topics with relatively few general texts, such as nanotechnology or cognitive engineering, seem to be potential candidates for such a system.) Thus, if you intended to be involved with the subject, it would be assumed that you were registered with the system (much as you would with Compuserve or Lexis). The authors also benefit, by doing their submissions and reviewing on-line too. It may be that the publisher would prefer to deal directly at the bookstore level (or perhaps professor/department level), rather than the general public. So why hasn't some enterprising publisher established a system along these lines? Many are into software distribution and on-line services in a big way in any case, and the text of many books is in machine form somewhere already. Someday, professors might tell sales reps they won't recommend a text unless it's available on-line. On the other hand, people weren't banging on the doors of banks and lotteries for on-line access, but it happened anyway. Recently, there was some discussion about the "value of information" here. It comes to mind that the "value" in legal text systems (like Lexis) is not in the contents; court decisions and the ramblings of judges are in the public domain. However, the publishers make their profits out of their copyrights on the indexes and tables of contents. Given the opinion of some posters, who feel that students should be encouraged to learn more than just how to apply a memorized formula, we might think how traditional textbooks might be transformed into a realistic "knowledge base", perhaps using some form of local hypertext system. Any opinions? - John M. (My own opinions, etc.)
sbelcas@hvrunix.UUCP (Sarah Belcastro) (12/08/88)
Yeah, i hardly see how you can blame the student. Some teachers use the texts extensively and others not at all; how was i to know that my Analysis prof. would never use the text and that my Algebra prof. would assign us to read sections not covered in class? We don't have _any_alternatives in our book- store that i've seen. I suppose i could get on a train and go to U Penn if i wanted a copy of Herstein really badly, but it would be a real pain. And that assumes that i know what other book i want. i think i am babbling. --sarah marie belcastro. Bitnet: s_belcastro@hvrford
sbelcas@hvrunix.UUCP (Sarah Belcastro) (12/08/88)
In article <1809@sun.soe.clarkson.edu>, coughlij@clutx.clarkson.edu ( Jason Coughlin,221 Rey,84176,) writes: > >From: vkr@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu (Vidhyanath K. Rao) > >Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.physics,comp.edu > >Subject: Re: How to beat the high cost of text books! B > >always be looked up in the real world; a definition can be looked up; a > >theorem can be looked up; the understanding of what these mean cannot be > >looked up. > > Now THIS is a solution! And I agree entirely!! In fact, so does > my comp sci professor. All examinations are open notes and open book. Any > data structure, any formula, any algorithm already written can be looked up. > However, his problems are new faces on old people. One must find the solution > not just the forumla. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Jason Coughlin, i prefer the type of tests that my profs tend to give: open-book, untimed. just no collaboration. These allow students to schedule them when they need to and learn new concepts on the tests themselves, or to take as much time for a proof as they need. Of course, i suppose this only works if you have an honor code like we do. --sarah marie belcastro Bitnet: (PLEASE!!!) s_belcastro@hvrford
hofbauer@csri.toronto.edu (John Hofbauer) (12/08/88)
>>the non-existence of a calculus book that isn't just a catalogue of >>tricks. > >Try looking at Spivak's book. Of course, many people won't like it, >because it takes too long to get to the "tricks". > I'm aware of Spivak. I should have been more precise and specified calculus book for a service course that isn't a catalogue of tricks.
gae@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu (Gerald Edgar) (12/08/88)
One of the national copying chains has a program called "Publication on Demand" (or something like that). They recruit authors to publish with them. They keep one copy at their store, and then when a purchaser wants to buy it, they copy it for him. -- Gerald A. Edgar TS1871@OHSTVMA.bitnet Department of Mathematics gae@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu The Ohio State University gae@osupyr.UUCP Columbus, OH 43210 70715,1324 CompuServe
rjfrey@kepler1.UUCP (Robert J Frey) (12/08/88)
In article <19290@ames.arc.nasa.gov> lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov.UUCP (Hugh LaMaster) writes: >In article <8812040311.AA17256@king.csri.toronto.edu> hofbauer@csri.toronto.edu (John Hofbauer) writes: >>a calculus book that isn't just a catalogue of tricks...? > >Try looking at Spivak's book. Of course, many people won't like it, >because it takes too long to get to the "tricks". > I second this recommendation; Spivak's _Calculus_ is one the best books in the field. His _Calculus on Manifolds_ is another superb text if you're interested in multi-variate methods. ============================================================================== |Dr. Robert J. Frey | {acsm, sbcs, polyof}!kepler1!rjfrey | |Kepler Financial Management, Ltd.|------------------------------------------| |100 North Country Rd., Bldg. B | The views expressed are wholly my own and| |Setauket, NY 11766 | and do not reflect those of the Indepen- | |(516) 689-6300 x.16 | dent Republic of Latvia. | ==============================================================================
pjh@mccc.UUCP (Pete Holsberg) (12/09/88)
In article <3466@emory.uucp> vicki@emory.uucp (Vicki Powers) writes:
=This got me thinking -
=is this habit of sending textbooks to academics contributing to the high cost?
Yes and no. A few years ago, many oublishers not only stopped sending
unsolicited texts, they stopped sending solicited ones as well!
However, they quickly realized that they were stopping their best advertising.
If you can't use the book, you might either pass it along to a colleague
who could use it, donate it to your library, or return it to the publisher.
Pete
--
Pete Holsberg UUCP: {...!rutgers!}princeton!mccc!pjh
Mercer College CompuServe: 70240,334
1200 Old Trenton Road GEnie: PJHOLSBERG
Trenton, NJ 08690 Voice: 1-609-586-4800gae@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu (Gerald Edgar) (12/09/88)
In article <483@mccc.UUCP> pjh@mccc.UUCP (Pete Holsberg) writes: >If you can't use the book, you might either pass it along to a colleague >who could use it, donate it to your library, or return it to the publisher. There are characters who come around to my office frequently (and I mean frequently: sometimes more than one a day) who want to BUY these sample textbooks from me. What is the ethics of that? -- Gerald A. Edgar TS1871@OHSTVMA.bitnet Department of Mathematics gae@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu The Ohio State University gae@osupyr.UUCP Columbus, OH 43210 70715,1324 CompuServe
gmat@wuibc.UUCP (Gregory Martin Amaya Tormo) (12/10/88)
>For one thing, it is not necessary to follow the order of the material in the >textbook. I may want to use some of the material in chapter 6 before some of >the material in chapter 2. Or I may feel that a digression, explaining some >of the concepts in more detail, is justified. So why can you not tell the students this? Assuming you have planned your path around the textbook in advance, and are not making it up as you go along, a simple syllibus would tell students what to read in advance, or even just announce it a few weeks in advance. Your students will be with you as you talk, and will probably get more out of it, than if they are hearing it for the first time. >Also, there are parts of the book which are irrelevant and are being omitted. >But the worst situations, which I attempt to warn the students about well in >advance, are those where the book is just plain misleading. Books in >mathematics and statistics are particularly bad in presenting algorithms or >special cases in such a way as to make the concepts very difficult to >understand later. The student who believes that integral is antiderivative >must disabuse himself of this in order to understand the 4500+ year old >notion. Computing the amount of a bill is a much better example. A concept >may involve the use of formulas, but it is not the manipulative procedure. >I expect the student to read the book in advance of class, and most of them >do not. But in most courses, the warnings about the misleading nature of the >book are necessary. So make them. If the book is too loaded with them, why use it? >I also do not read the textbook in class. I expect the students to read the >relevant parts, and they do not like this. Also, do not tell me to write a >book. I know what is involved in writing a textbook, but few of the textbook >authors seem to do anything but copy bad books. I do not like a prof who teaches right out of the book. If you take the time to make your own teaching notes, you are doing the student the service of presenting the material in a way YOU understand it. However, I do expect my profs to follow what is in the book within reason. Nothing is more confusing when I read one explanation for something in the text, and then have the prof say something completely different. You are imparting a lot of information in a very short time, and clarity is very important to ensure all students have a chance to learn. remember, college is not survival of the fittest. Each student pays tuition to learn, not to be weeded out from those to who the subject comes naturally. > The students are accustomed to having only the >regurgitation of memorized formulas, and routine manipulation. > This is so stereotypical it makes me sick. Thats right. All students are the same, in college only for the grade and the GPA that will get him a good job so he can make more than the prof. It sounds to me like no one has any respect for the students! Let me give you some textbook examples. A CE law and society class and we were told to buy a 1000+ page book of law cases. We went though less than 200 pages and the prof ended up DISAGREEING with the decisions made by the respective supreme courts in many of the cases. I paid $49.95 for that book; that comes out to $.25 per page used. In a "devices" class, we had a book on developing assembly programs for 68000 computers. The prof mentioned the book once: "This is the text for the course." He then proceeded to teach the course from his HEAD (no notes), and never referenced the book once. I stopped trying to read the text, because it had nothing to do with what the prof whas teaching. That one cost $30. On the flip side, I had two courses this semester without textbooks. In one, I could not find any continuity in the weekly projects. There was no sylibus, or anything - only the prof's lectures. In the second course, we were bombarded with xerox copies, some that were of poor quality and unreadable. It is hard to organize your approach to a course as a student this way when everything is so disjointed. The problem on the surface is the high cost of texts, but the real problem is how they are used. In closing, I just spoke to a friend who paid $70 for a text. However, he said it was worth every penny for the help it gave him, and for how the prof integrated it into the course. We are not professional students. Profs have a responsibility to teach the material in a way that all students can learn, not just those who learn the best. David Deitch, Computer Connection dwd0238%wucec3@wucec3.wustl.edu Fido 1:100/22 ( Please mail to me, do not reply )
shankar@src.honeywell.COM (Son of Knuth) (12/10/88)
In article <130@xenon.UUCP> goodloe@xenon.UUCP (Tony Goodloe) writes: >In article <14193@cisunx.UUCP>, jjc@cisunx.UUCP (Jeffrey James Bryan Carpenter) writes: >> I fully agree with this. I could never understand why there was so >> much emphasis on memorizing formulas when it is the concepts and ways >> of applying the formulas that counts. > >It is much easier for the prof to make and grade a test that is "plug-n-chug" >rather than thought-provoking. Also, some profs end up teaching a class >that they really don't understand. We had a professor, sort of a utility >professor, that taught digital design, emag, electronics, and >communications, and couldn't answer a question about any of it ... >unless he had HIS cheat sheet in front of him. If you knew the >formulas, you could get a 100%. Teachers like that really piss me off. It's also because most students don't like tests that make you think. As an undergraduate the teachers who had the most thought provoking tests were the ones criticized the most by students for giving tests "unrelated to the class material". Profs who made you regurgitate homework problems, except with different numbers (this was in EE) were well liked, especially if they had nice curves (no, not the kind of curves you're thinking about :-)) too. Yes, this relates to the earlier discussion about students wanting to be spoonfed in buying textbooks, even though I disagree with the idea of not having a required textbook.
nevin1@ihlpb.ATT.COM (Liber) (12/15/88)
In article <130@xenon.UUCP> goodloe@xenon.UUCP (Tony Goodloe) writes: >It is much easier for the prof to make and grade a test that is "plug-n-chug" >rather than thought-provoking. Heck, some profs don't even bother to change the test from year to year (or between Tuesday's test and Wednesday's test; and yes, they were all thrown together in the same curve). >We had a professor, sort of a utility >professor, that taught digital design, emag, electronics, and >communications, and couldn't answer a question about any of it ... >unless he had HIS cheat sheet in front of him. Unfortunately, I've had too many teachers like this. During the closed-book final, if you looked at the prof, you could see him copying the answers straight out of the book to the answer key. That really showed the class how unimportant it was to know the material after the final. On a related note: when we studied for the AP (Advanced Placement) Biology test in high school, we used a great book called "The Biology Problem Solver". The night before the test, we went over all the multiple choice questions in it, as well as some of the essay questions (the "Problem Solver" series are books which have around 1000 problems with detailed solutions; I very strongly recommend looking at these books). The next day on the AP test, one of the multiple choice questions was copied verbatim out of the multiple choice section in the Problem Solver. All the essay questions on the AP tests were the same as four or five of the Problem Solver essay questions put together. >If you knew the formulas, you could get a 100%. Teachers like that >really piss me off. They are just wasting my time and money. If only there was a money-back guarantee. -- NEVIN ":-)" LIBER AT&T Bell Laboratories nevin1@ihlpb.ATT.COM (312) 979-4751