danajohnhill.org

I have been receiving praise a lot lately for the work I do, and it’s a nice feeling.  Since the beginning of summer I have programmed all the classical music we play at the station, which amounts to six hours each day.  That is a time consuming task, but one I take pride in, which makes the compliments that much more rewarding.

Last Saturday, for example, my Pre-Opera Program garnered several calls during the show, and when I came in on Tuesday I had even more messages from people who had tuned in and enjoyed what they heard.  Today I played the Concerto Symphonique No. 4, Op. 102 by Henry Charles Litolff - an obscure work, but one which is ideally suited to the style of my show.  In no time I was answering phone calls from excited listeners, and returning messages from other listeners brought in to me by the secretary.  I also got kudos for playing a Grand Trio for Two Flutes and Piano, Op. 119 by Friedrich Kuhlau on a Naxos disc, and from other selections played yesterday, namely 18 Divertiment Notturni, Op. 86 by Mauro Giuliani, which isn’t necessarily a piece that I’d listen to in my free time–it’s for flute and guitar–but one which I figured others would like.  Mission accomplished.

In an August 12th op-ed for the New York Times entitled “Course Requirement: Extortion”, University of Texas professor Michael Granof offers his analysis of the high price of college textbooks, and makes recommendations on how those prices may be lowered.

He points out that college texts generally cost over $100, while other hardcover books retail between $20 to $30. He goes on to say that a committee appointed by congress to assess the problem and make suggestions to ameliorate it have instead “proposed a remedy that would only worsen the problem”. That proposed remedy is a strengthened used textbook market. Professor Granof believes that it is used textbooks themselves that are driving up prices.

“[P]ublishers have the chance to sell a book to only one of the multiple students who eventually use it. Hence, publishers must cover their costs and make their profit in the first semester their books are sold — before used copies swamp the market. That’s why the prices are so high.”

I disagree with that statement. I think college textbook prices are high because publishers have a captive market. Lists of best-selling fiction are not made up of books readers are forced to buy. No professors are mandating you read the latest crime novel or self-help tome. The concept of supply and demand has been modified so that the publishers create both the supply and the demand, through lucrative contracts with colleges and universities.

Professor Granof supports a system wherein texts would be treated more like computer software, i.e., as “intellectual property” that can be licensed for use by students who can, if desired, pay extra for a physical book. The colleges themselves would pay a fee to the publishers per student enrolled, thus, “the publisher would have a stream of revenue for as long as the text was in use”. This is simply unethical, in my opinion. First, its overriding motive seems to be to ensure profit for corporations. Second, it contractually binds students and teachers more than the already flawed system. For instance, I have on several occasions in the last year or so, made a conscious decision to not buy assigned textbooks on the grounds that they cost too much.  A system like the one Granof proposes would only raise the price per credit hour for students to cover the cost of textbook contracts, and deprive students of the right to not support a system of extortion.

Finally, Professor Granof asserts that “[c]ampus bookstores buy back not only the books that will be used at their university the next semester but also those that will not”.  I understand that Granof is also the chairman of the University of Texas bookstore, but what he is describing does not coincide with my experience.  I have a stack of textbooks here that my campus bookstore would not touch, or, if they would deign to buy them back, they make an insultingly low offer.

I feel that Michael Granof’s proposals are not an improvement on the current system that might best be described as anti-student.  My recommendation would be continued and increased trade in used textbooks.  When institutions–in league with publishers–assign the latest edition of a book without any legitimate additions or improvements, and the change is made solely to increase revenue for the publisher, students ought not buy the new edition.  I have seen first hand how the content of texts change little from edition to edition.  I think that colleges–especially professors–should be more practical when choosing course materials.  I understand that many scientific fields demand up-to-date information, and those corresponding books will be modified appropriately.  But nothing much has changed in the fields of ethics or music or history and so on.  Instructors should use their best judgment when selecting which text to assign.  If a non-textbook will do, why not assign it?  Especially in undergraduate courses where the instruction is so general to begin with.  Finally, when students are finished with a text, if they choose not to keep it, they should sell it on eBay or Amazon.  They will get more money for it than they would at a campus bookstore, and they can prevent that store from turning around and making a profit off of students’ losses, as they sell it at a considerable markup over what they paid.

I am about to practice what I preach; today I am listing three textbooks for sale on Amazon.