The Good, the Difficult, and the Dubious: the Present and Future of Library Textbook Affordability Initiatives

By Stephanie Warden (Associate Director/Information Literacy Librarian, Jim Dan Hill Library, University of Wisconsin – Superior) <swarden1@uwsuper.edu> and Jennifer E. M. Cotton (University of Maryland, College Park Libraries) <jecotton@umd.edu> https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1018-431X and Theresa Carlson (Northern Arizona University, Cline Library) <Theresa.Carlson@nau.edu> and Brittany Blanchard (Northern Arizona University, Cline Library) <Brittany.Blanchard@nau.edu>

Textbook affordability has emerged as a significant concern for students pursuing higher education. The soaring costs of textbooks and course materials have become a significant barrier, limiting students’ access to essential resources. As a result, institutions and libraries have been exploring strategies to alleviate this financial burden, ensuring that students have equitable access to the educational materials they need. Approaches taken by libraries are varied but include providing access to textbooks through mechanisms like Course Reserves, facilitating lower cost alternatives through course packets and supporting the creation, adoption and curation of Open Educational Resources. In this issue, we explain our individual libraries’ approaches to textbook affordability and the impact these approaches have had. Our separate tactics have been shaped by our institutional context and resources. Before we discuss our individual approaches, we want to take a moment to address some of the current challenges to textbook affordability initiatives on a broader scale.

One trend that hampers the ability of libraries to aid students in textbook affordability is what are generally referred to as “inclusive access” programs. Inclusive access, also known as automatic billing, is widely touted as a panacea for affordability problems. Courses that are enrolled in an inclusive access program have all of the course materials available to students through the learning management system (LMS) at the beginning of the semester, with the costs of the materials added to the student’s tuition charges, rather than requiring separate purchase. The advantages touted by advocates of these programs include all of the students having access to the materials from the beginning of class, easier purchasing, and increased market share, which allows publishers to lower prices.1

However, inclusive access also presents several causes for concern to those interested in textbook affordability. For one thing, adding the textbook costs to tuition and fees does simplify the process, but it also makes it easier for students to overlook those costs, thereby adding to their overall student debt without necessarily realizing it. In our experience, inclusive access programs can also disincentivize instructors to investigate low-cost options like open educational resources (OERs), particularly in models where the costs of all required materials are averaged together across courses. These programs can also lead to disciplines with less expensive course materials (e.g., humanities) subsidizing the costs for more expensive disciplines (e.g., STEM areas).

The electronic nature of inclusive access materials can also present issues. Electronic texts that require internet access may present problems for students who don’t have a reliable internet connection, which can be an issue especially for students from marginalized and/or rural communities, thereby further widening the digital divide. The electronic access included in inclusive access materials is also temporary, meaning that students who wish to use the same text for a future class or for their own further reference may be unable to do so. Inclusive access programs can also allow for the invisible collection of user data,2 depending on the contract between the materials broker and the school.

Another significant cause for concern is students’ ability to opt out of these programs. While inclusive access programs do theoretically offer the option for students to opt out (and thereby not be charged for the course materials), the process for doing so may present several hurdles. Not only can the process for opting out be multi-step, difficult to find, and/or subject to short or unspecified deadlines, but the inclusive access materials may include ancillary materials such as assignments and assessments, meaning that students effectively have no way to pass the class if they do manage to complete the opt out process. In theory, students have the ability to opt out of the program, but in practice, doing so may effectively be opting out of the chance to succeed in the class.3

In the case of “inclusive access,” libraries may be unable to purchase copies of the required texts. Students are also locked out of other cost-savings measures, such as sharing a textbook, trading used books, or buying a copy used or from a different source. In theory, this option costs the students less than the “traditional” publishing model, but since all of the prices are controlled directly by the publishers, their incentives for keeping those costs low are dubious. Indeed, these programs often make it difficult to measure cost savings in the absence of a one-toone comparison of what the prices of materials would be if the program were not available. In addition, since this contravenes the spirit of the Higher Education Opportunities Act of 20084 (and in cases where the book information and price of the text are not available from the course catalog, appears to violate the letter of the law as well), institutions that are considering adopting inclusive access programs would do well to consider all of the possible ramifications of doing so.

The issues with digital access textbooks are not limited exclusively to inclusive access content. Materials published under a traditional model and made available for purchase by users or libraries also present a set of unique problems. These come mainly in the form of digital rights management (DRM) restrictions. These programs typically are justified as the way, maybe even the only way, to protect intellectual property rights once an electronic material is made available for purchase. Indeed, common restrictions coming from this software prohibit copying, downloading, converting, retaining, printing, and restriction on uses across devices among others.5 While this presents obvious barriers for research, it also creates a slew of unintended consequences surrounding accessibility6 and privacy.

Finally, we would be remiss not to mention the significant investment of personnel that textbook affordability initiatives demand. The successful implementation of these programs, in our experience, demands a considerable investment of time, financial resources, and unwavering commitment. Ideally, libraries would benefit from having a dedicated professional whose primary responsibility is to focus on affordability initiatives. However, convincing administrative bodies to create specialist positions in OER or textbook affordability can be challenging, often resulting in temporary or grant-funded contracts.

Furthermore, the funding landscape for these positions is often precarious. In instances where a dedicated position is funded, there might not be additional financial support allocated specifically for the initiatives themselves. Additionally, these specialists may find themselves diverted to other responsibilities as library priorities evolve. The lack of a standardized framework for the duties of an OER librarian further complicates matters. A position description analysis of 33 OER job postings reveals a diversity of roles within the OER landscape. Some positions primarily focus on outreach and increasing awareness of OER, while others are centered around developing, sustaining, and evaluating publishing programs. Furthermore, certain roles remain undefined, encompassing a broad range of general library duties alongside responsibilities related to OER initiatives. 7 This variability in roles adds an extra layer of complexity to the development and sustainability of OER initiatives within academic libraries.

While challenges and threats to affordability initiatives exist and can be difficult to overcome, libraries continue to evolve their approaches and adapt. Access to textbooks is a crucial part of the learning experience and their usage by students should not be dictated by a lack of funding. By implementing various strategies towards textbook affordability, libraries strive to create a more inclusive educational environment where all students have access to the materials necessary for their academic success. The articles included in this issue of Against the Grain describe approaches taken at three different university libraries, with varying sizes and finances, to assist students with textbook affordability.

Endnotes

1. McKenzie, Lindsay. “‘Inclusive Access’ Takes Off” Inside Higher Ed , November 06, 2017. https://www. insidehighered.com/news/2017/11/07/inclusive-accesstakes-model-college-textbook-sales

2. InclusiveAccess.org. “Inclusive Access – Deal or Data Mine?” InclusiveAccess.org, July 18, 2023. https://www. inclusiveaccess.org/facts/deal-or-data-mine

3. Cuillier, Cheryl. “Chapter 16 – Inclusive Access: Who, What, When, Where, How, and Why?” in The Evolution of Affordable Content Efforts in the Higher Education Environment: Programs, Case Studies, and Examples edited by Kristi Jensen and Shane Nackerud, ch. 16. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Libraries, 2018. https://doi. org/10.24926/86666.0101

4. Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration. “Public Law 110 - 315Higher Education Opportunity Act.” Government. U.S. Government Printing Office, August 13, 2008. https:// www.govinfo.gov/app/details/PLAW-110publ315

5. Roncevic, Mirela. “Digital Rights Management.” American Libraries 51, no. 3/4 (2020): 47–47.

6. Devi, Rekha, and Shailendra Kumar. 2023. “Digital Right Management and Accessibility of Libraries Electronic Resources for Blind and Visually Impaired Users: A Review.” DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology 43 (3): 193–201. doi:10.14429/ djlit.43.03.18544

7. Larson, A. (2020). Open Education Librarianship: A Position Description Analysis of the Newly Emerging Role in Academic Libraries. International Journal of Open Educational Resources, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.18278/ ijoer.3.1.4