Wow... Has it really been 15 months since I last posted to this blog? So much for my intentions for School Library Learning 2.0... just fell by the wayside as other priorities took over (namely the confusion and scrambling after being unceremoniously exiled from La Jolla High School, where I'd been Teacher Librarian for 15 years, when my principal eliminated the position, then reassigned as sole library staff at two elementary schools 30 miles away from home). I still hope to get back on the horse and complete SLL 2.0, but it probably won't be until summer vacation starts this July. (My schools are year-'round and not over until 7/21 and then, unless I can retire--which remains to be seen--I'll either be "lucky" enough to land an assignment as TL split between two different secondary schools or wind up assigned to teaching English to five classes of likely 40+ students, back where I started my career 31 years ago.) I write this just in case some lonely soul out there with nothing more interesting to read stumbles across this blog, reads it, and wonders at the gap. But I digress (and, yes, whine a little)...
Recently a Library Tech. at a San Diego Unified (SDUSD) middle school posted a query to the SDUSD library staff listserv. She said she's been asked (essentially) why we're not using digital instead of bound-paper textbooks? Wouldn't that be cheaper and save trees? Her actual words:
____________________________
"What is the cost comparison from actually doing Textbooks on line compared to actually having Textbooks on hand since you would think that it would be better financially since if we were to go paperless that we would be saving paper and trees?
"Why would Textbook on line be more expensive?? Does this make any sense and does anyone have an answer for me or do I need to call each publisher and ask why?? Or is there a site I can go to for the answer. I need concrete evidence."
_________________________
Although I certainly don't have all the hard numbers she's looking for, I did have some ideas about some of the factors affecting districtwide adoption of etextbooks, including the issue of providing students with "dedicated ebook reading devices (ERDs)" vs. the newly-available and relatively inexpensive "netbooks". After writing my reply, I thought I'd post some of it here, too, in case it may inform other discussions in other places. I also have a thought about what the impact might be on school libraries if/when a district such as San Diego Unified--which relies on school library staff to process and circulate to students and teachers all textbooks and related teacher materials--converts wholesale from "dead-tree" to digital textbooks and provides netbooks to all students to assure universal access; for this see my P.S. at the end. Here's what I wrote:
_____________________________
I'm not sure what you mean by "textbooks on line." Do you mean providing etextbooks--purchasing digital copies students read at a computer--as opposed to "dead-tree edition" (bound paper) copies? And by online, do you mean the computer has to have a live Internet connection to view the book, or do you mean the digital copy can be downloaded to the computer, then subsequently viewed even when an Internet connection is not available? The two scenarios are actually quite different and it matters which of them one is considering. The download scenario is preferable from a district standpoint: as long as the student has Internet access at school and can download his/her textbooks there, then the district doesn't have to assure (provide) Internet access at home to comply with Williams. However, when download is possible publishers tend to get nervous about piracy, although recent technology advances have made this somewhat less of a concern.
Then there's the issue of assuring each student has ready, individual access to a computer (or other mobile ebook reading/viewing device, "ERD" for short) both at home and at school (รก la Williams). That's one of the biggest hurdles in switching to digital vs. paper textbooks: providing every student with an ERD (except perhaps those willing to sign a waiver saying they already own one). Amazon's Kindle (now Kindle2) has my vote as the best mobile ERD right now, but it's $360 and is not a computer, nor does it support color (a deal-killer for etextbooks in my opinion). Now that "netbooks" (ultracompact laptop computers) are available for about that price--with a color screen and about 5-1/2 hrs. battery life--we're fast approaching the point where "1-to-1 computing" (lending each student a mobile computer) begins to seem feasable, and the educational bang for your buck is hugely higher than just providing him/her with an ERD. In September 2005 (after initial textbook checkout and the dust had settled), I did a rough-and-dirty estimate of how much it cost to provide the average La Jolla High student with a set of just the basic textbooks for each of his/her courses per year (not including the 10-20 supplementary texts required for English: $318 (no doubt more now).*
One thing to keep in mind is that even in digital format textbooks will never be free. One person in the book publishing business I spoke to (not a sales rep.) told me about 85% of the cost of producing a textbook is not the paper, printing, binding, shipping, etc. but the cost of "intellectual property" (money paid to authors and other copyright holders) and layout/design, editorial, and other "brain work" required to assemble and format it all. Those costs aren't going to disappear. Don't assume that we can just stop buying physical textbooks and use the savings to buy each student an ERD or netbook; we will still have to pay for each copy of the e- versions of the textbooks... possibly 85% of what we're paying now (though in time that cost should go down--possibly a lot).
Of course, the publishers have a ton invested in the current paper-based system and have considerable vested interest in things staying the way they are now. They make quite a healthy profit under the status quo and probably aren't keen on investing in new IT infrastructure--especially in this economy--to gear up for all-digital distribution... even if all of a district's students have wireless-connected ERDs or computers. I think that's one of the reasons the textbook publishers are only offering digital versions if the district pays for the dead tree editions. When the (print edition) cash cow keeps on providing the cash, it's relatively cheap to also copy the book onto a CD you paste into the back of the physical textbook, and since you're not going to have potentially tens (hundreds?) of thousands of students simultaneously accessing the text online, it's also not very expensive to also (or instead) throw it up on a relatively low-bandwidth Web server.
--Steve
*For each of 20 students--5 randomly selected from each of the four grade levels--I totaled the cost of all textbooks out to him/her then divided by the number to books out. Then I averaged the totals for each grade level, then averaged those averages. By-grade-level breakdowns were:
9th... $284
10th... $359
11th... $320
12th... $308
P.S. If/when the district does convert from physical to digital textbooks, that hugely reduces the critical importance of classified library staff at the secondary level. Once the ERDs or netbooks are checked out to the students (conceivably not through the library), students download their textbooks themselves. If they have netbooks (as opposed to ERDs), they don't need to use the computers in the library any more. Since--for better or for worse--research is largely performed online now instead of using library books, the library's main functions now become 1) source of library books for pleasure reading (some sites have more students than others using it for this), and 2) convenient supervised student lounge for the few students not assigned a class that period or on extended medical P.E. excuses. It's also a convenient venue for adult meetings (staff, PTA, etc.), student testing, etc., but other adults can always open it up and will be present for those activities. Food for thought, eh?
____________________________
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)