Slashdot Mirror
University Reprimands Professor For Assigning Cheaper Textbook (slate.com)
schwit1 writes: California State University at Fullerton brought a grievance against associate professor Alain Bourget recently. It wasn't for poor results or questionable conduct — it happened because Bourget refused to assign a $180 textbook for his introductory linear algebra and differential equations course, instead using one that cost $75 and supplementing it with free online materials. "Bourget maintains that his choices are just as effective educationally and much less expensive, so he should have the right to use them. But the university says that it makes sense for courses that have multiple sections to all use the same textbooks. Both Bourget and the university say their positions are based on principles of academic freedom."
The Fullerton text in question is Differential Equations and Linear Algebra, published by Pearson with a suggested price of $196, but available at the Fullerton bookstore for $180 (used editions for much less). The authors are Stephen W. Goode and Scott A. Annin, the chair and vice chair, respectively, of the mathematics department at Fullerton.
Now it all makes sense.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
Whomever is above Dr. Bourget is clearly getting a kickback from the publisher and is mandating the same textbook to be used in order to boost profit.
I've worked at a bunch of different universities in California and making students use the same textbook across sections is definitely not standard behavior. If anything, departments don't want to have to do that work and encourage teachers to figure it out for themselves.
The university should be much more concerned about the financial motivations of those in administrative positions over Dr. Bourget.
It seems that some academics want to be more free than others.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
I was a professor at a major engineering school, and I got tired of the Institute forcing me to do everything in their prescribed bureaucratic way. Every decision was designed to line someone's pocket. Which textbooks to use, which equipment was required for labs, and even the labs were designed to use sole-source parts from particular vendors (Altera PLDs, for example).
There is no academic freedom in academia. None whatsoever. So, I quit. I started my own company and have never been happier.
Yeah sure, paper books priced extremely high make total sense in 2015. Tenure is definitely the issue hete.
So you'd rather that the students be forced to buy the more expensive book (which sends money into the pockets of his bosses) and that they be allowed to fire him for saving his students about $105 each, because preventing such actions would somehow make things less expensive for the students.
Nah.
Other courses probably use a DIFFERENT overpriced text book.
$180? Are they fucking insane? That's worse than pharmaceutical prices. At least cancer miracle drugs have the excuse that they have to go through expensive FDA trials and most of them don't make it on the market.
This is not a new subject. The treatment is probably not original. The "R&D cost" is probably no worse than a similar book that's not associated with college.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Any (former) student will tell you that you never buy the textbook until the prof tells you whether you need it or not. Heck, sometimes they'll even tell you that you can use an earlier revision which will be significantly cheaper.
My macro-econ book was paperback about 3/4" thick and cost $150. You could only sell it back for about $35 because the book itself was valued at $50 and the online code for the homework was $100. How about that for a 100-level course. At least linear algebra is like a 300-level course.
I believe that the GP misunderstood the summary's statement of "courses with multiple sections" to mean "multi-semester courses," which I do not believe is the case here -- certainly not for an introductory linear algebra course. Multiple sections means that there are multiple sessions of the exact same class going on at the same time.
As a former professor (in mathematics, even!), I would agree with the initial sentiment. The university should make sure that courses taught are consistent. This may even affect their accreditation. Who is this associate professor to break the uniformity of the students' education?
However, if you read the article, you'll see that the authors of the department-assigned text are the chair and vice-chair of the department. Which is largely unethical in my opinion. (But don't get me started on ethics and the textbook industry...)
What is going on is that the same class, say Math 101, is being taught by multiple different teachers, most likely at different times of the day/week. Typically they are designated Math 101a, Math 101b, Math 101c, etc. This lets people that want to take Math101 take it even if Physics 101 happens to be taught at the same time as Math101a - you just take Math 101b.
The OTHER teachers - teaching the exact same class Math 101a and Math 101b, tell students to buy the $185 textbook. But he teaches Math 101c and tells his students to buy the $75 book.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
that universities are at best, a money-hungry business, at worst, a cult designed to create a two-tier society where even the simplest jobs require a university degree.
During the early 1990's, math textbooks started requiring a graphing calculator. Not just any graphing calculator, but a specific model of the Texas Instruments graphing calculator. If you had a different model or brand, you were on your own as the instructors didn't have time to figure out the four or five other graphing calculators in the classroom. Math textbook and graphing calculator cost $200, which was twice the cost of going full time to the community college at the time.
I went from owning an HP calculator that did Reverse Polish Notation to several models of the TI graphing calculator. I still have them today. Never got around to owning an HP calculator that could take cartridges, say, Missile Command, to extend its functionality. That particular calculator cost $500 or so. More appropriate for the engineering crowd at the university.
Fortunately, I was very much old school towards learning mathematics. When I showed up for an exam without my graphing calculator, I was able to sketch the graph by hand. Other students who forgot their graphing calculator weren't so lucky, as they couldn't graph their way out of a paper bag. I've known several students who dropped out of school because they couldn't afford the latest and greatest calculator for the newest math textbook. The financial aid office came up with a program to help students with buying calculators.
Yes, that is a dilemma.
When I went to uni the first course in statistics required one book at around $200. However the profs had agreed to use the same book in the three follow-up statistics courses as well. So if you were going for a bachelor in statistics, you just bought that one book for all your statistics courses.
Similar story in physics, at least for the first two-three courses. The math courses were a bit more fractured for some reason, though in two of the courses the textbook was written by the prof and provided free as PDF. I got them printed and bound at the uni press for like $15 each.
However my book expenses was nothing compared to what they had to put up with in other areas, such as psychology or pedagogy. They had to buy $200 books just for a chapter or two.
The professor is teaching one section of a class where different sections are taught by different faculty. As all the students - regardless of which section they are enrolled in - are enrolled in the same course, they should all be studying the same material. While it is not impossible to ensure that this happens when different sections use different texts, it is a lot easier to ensure that this happens when everyone does use the same text.
I say the professor should have brought up his concerns with the text book earlier; although working in academia I suspect he may have himself been assigned to teach that section without enough time to do so.
In other words, there is blame to go around.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
....and in the comments section it mentions that the department started using this book in 1989, 15 years before the author became department chair.
Also, it mentions that the course-approved book rents for much less than the rebel-chosen book.
So obviously there's more to the story than the simple venal corruption that's implied.
- it seems a conflict of interest when a department is *requiring* the use of a book from which the department head(s) directly profit; then again, if my department is using book X, and we can "get" as a professor the author of said book, I'd do it for sure.
- it also seems pretty reasonable that a department would agree to teach from a consistent set of books, especially for lower-level courses, so as to provide a consistent contextual base for all students in later classes; do they do so in other departments?
I don't have any answers to resolve this, frankly.
-Styopa
The professor has a solid ethics case against the school fot a clear conflict of interest case. The reprimand could get the school in serious legal trouble.
The truth shall set you free!
At my college they used a new text book for algebra every year.
Why? I asked, it's the same math nothing has changed over that year.
You know why.
$
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Seriously - there's no current events that impact how we do linear algebra and diff equations, nor have the concepts changed in hundreds of years. So why the hell aren't we using public domain textbooks?! Well, we all know why, but how do we go about changing the money grab?
A professor assigning a textbook that he or she wrote happens fairly often as people tend to write texts for courses that they teach often, and tend to write texts when they are not happy with what options are already out there, and they generally think that they cover things in the best way possible, since they wrote it. Often a text evolves from course notes and is shopped around to various publishers, one of which is happy to accept it and polish it up and charge extortionate prices for it. If it gets adopted on its own merits at other institutions, great for the publisher and author.
But there is an obvious conflict of interest when a faculty member requires a text that he or she wrote for a course at the home institution, as the author/instructor gets some of the money (not much, though, even for a $180 text, I'm afraid.) At a normal university with standards and ethics, there generally is a mechanism for making textbook adoption decisions revenue-neutral for the instructor. I know of places where the part of the proceeds from the sale at the home institution of the author is sent directly from the publisher to something like the department colloquium fund, or sometimes if the publisher can't cope with the complexity, the author just donates the apportioned proceeds from sales at the home institution to a student support fund or tutoring lab or something like that.
Apparently, in this department, there is no such mechanism for the revenue (or the authors are not worried about the conflict of interest) and the authors apparently do get money from the text being required at their own institution. It is easy to see how another faculty member, now tenured, can feel that it is unfair for the text to be required, if the text isn't that great (most aren't) and if the money is going to his or her department members despite the fact that it is not the best value book. When the people profiting in question are part of the department administration (chair, assistant chair) that makes resistance more difficult, as department staff can retaliate in various obvious and subtle ways and there can be pressure to comply with unethical practices.
At a normal university, there would be conflict-of-interest policies that apply and would probably prevent a department from forming a policy to require a course purchase which benefits a faculty member financially. At Cal State Fullerton, either there aren't any strong policies, or they are being ignored, apparently. The instructor who is not following this unethical policy does have tenure (his wife is also tenured in the same department) so though he can't be readily dismissed or denied tenure, but still because the people who are financially impacted by this make decisions which can affect him and his wife, this is big headache.
There has been support from faculty in other departments which is a good sign but the fact that it got this far is one sign of an unhappy dysfunctional math department. There are hundreds of commodity linear algebra and differential equations textbooks out there, with lots of different approaches. Most of them are terrible, but there are enough good ones that this kerfluffle seems pretty ridiculous.
It's psychosomatic. You need a lobotomy. I'll get a saw.
While 75 dollars is a significant savings over 180, why stop there? I just did a search on "linear algebra" on Google Shopping, and I can see three books from Dover Publications in there, with a combined cost of $33.18. While I'm sure they're terrible at explaining linear algebra to someone who doesn't already know linear algebra, I'm equally sure that the 75 and 180 dollar versions are terrible as well. I'd rather have three concise terrible math books books plus 40-150 dollars than one really heavy terrible math book.
And the problem is? Students that can choose between the classes can now get to chose based on book price as well. He will have more students register for his calss than the others.
You do know that Teacher A and Teacher B who both teach the same Class A, will teach it differently, right????
Also, if this was a book that could be used multiple semesters, don't kid yourself - they always say that and then the next semester they magically have a new revision that you have to buy regardless (oh but you can trade in your current one and get half off the new revision!)
(But don't get me started on ethics and the textbook industry...)
There's ethic in the textbook industry?! Since when?!
"Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
Yes, remember, all the ills in the world can be traced back to not being able to fire someone for no reason at all...
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
"At least cancer miracle drugs have the excuse that they have to go through expensive FDA trials and most of them don't make it on the market."
Isn't $180 is kind of a low-ball bribe for the FDA to certify a 'miracle drug'?
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
Most of my EE books were in the $150+ range. And that was nearly 30 years ago. $170 for a 197 page E&M book. Yep, nearly a buck a page!
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
This really is plain insanity. The cost of a university education is well out of control, and textbooks aren't helping.
While I agree that having the same coursebook over a whole section (i.e. All Math 101 classes use the same book, which hopefully Math 201 also use..) I do believe that our educators should have a hand in which textbook is selected. Unless the group deciding what textbook is used, teach from said textbook, they need to take a backseat and listen to the people on the front lines. Cost is one valid factor when deciding what to choose. Education like this is as much a business as it is an academic exercise. When your consumers can't afford the product you sell, you have fewer consumers.
Awk! Pieces of eight. Pieces of eight. Pieces of seven... ERROR: General Protection Fault. [Paroty Error.]
Maybe if the education system here took their heads out of their asses, it would not matter which text book was used for a particular subject. As long as the student learns the base material on how to resolve the questions asked of them during their exams, the book should be irrelevant.
They are not supposed to be teaching kids how to parrot a book to pass a test.
The problem is that the text book and testing industry have such an incestuous relationship, and their collective hands are so far up the asses of those educational leadership, that it is too lucrative not to force students to buy expensive books that are useless after a single year. Hey, we changed 2 words in this math book which has 200 year old source material, lets make every student purchase a new book instead of used.
It's total bullshit, it is not like the text book industry is coming up with original content, rather they are just reusing what has been around for 1000's of years (depending on the subject of course).
I came, I conquered, I coredumped
Yeah, it seems insanely low. Given the monopoly power of the schools — they control, which books can be used — they could ask for your first-born child as well.
The Big Ed's shenanigans are far worse than those of the regularly-condemned Big Oil and Big Pharma, for example, and they are long overdue for some Congressional scrutiny.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
When I started college nearly all textbooks were created by the teachers giving the course, we had a college bookshop with hundreds upon hundreds of locally printed course material. Slowly they were transforming to books while I was there.
The material always became worse, no exceptions.
Create a "Credit Union" version of the University - open sourced books, leverage videos, implement real world methodologies into projects, and foster ethical and professional behavior across all disciplines. Drive to create a true non-profit organization centered on delivering actual education and value back to the middle class students who need that accredited degree to get their foot int he door professionally.
Our President and business leaders talks a good game about promoting STEM and education in this country, but won't do anything to overhaul the terrible system that is our college system. Make it affordable, practical, and worthwhile.
Of course, the same could be said about our health care system, too.
$180? Are they fucking insane? That's worse than pharmaceutical prices.
Student loans. Easy money. The student will pay whatever because the loan covers it and the student is incapable of thinking of how exponential interest will harm him in the long run. It's the same principle that drives the pharmaceutical industry. How do you think they get to a $65,000/dose cancer treatment? "Don't worry your insurance will cover it".
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
The reprimand could get the school in serious legal trouble.
Probably, but even if you have a legal case against your employer, bringing up a that case creates a relationship between you where they will look for the first opportunity to get rid of you, or make your life so miserable that you quit voluntarily.
You can only bring up a case like that if you intent to look for a job elsewhere anyway.
I am OK with DRM on Tailor Swift songs and proprietory word processors. But copyrighted mathematics? Seriously? Claiming exclusive right to facts and laws of nature?
I see many comments saying something along the lines of department chairs / professors "lining their pockets" by requiring books that they wrote.
While it very well may be an ego thing, it is definitely NOT a money thing. My wife has written many collegiate level textbooks and they are used at many different schools. She netted a whopping $600 in royalties for 2014. The authors are not getting rich on sales of textbooks. Their salaries dwarf what they earn for publications.
Next conspiracy theory ...
While I'd like to support the guy that's trying to save his students some money, his colleague & supporter Hassan is nuts, and making his position sound irrational: "If the university thinks you are good enough to teach the course, they should let you pick the materials," he said.
A world full of "We can do whatever the hell we want", is not a place I'd want to live. I would be furious if semesters 1, 2 & 3 of a course each required a DIFFERENT BOOK, instead of using the same one. Perhaps all three books having been written by each professor... Perhaps all three costing $180 a piece!
While the $75 book sounds like a better deal than the $180 book, it isn't so good for students that continue into the next course, under a different professor, and thus still need to buy that $180 book, in addition to that previous $75 down the drain.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Larson: $279
http://www.amazon.com/Elementa...
Poole: $274
http://www.amazon.com/Linear-A...
Williams: $206
http://www.amazon.com/Algebra-...
By contrast:
Strang: $66
(Intro to Linear Algebra, 4e, 2009)
http://www.amazon.com/Introduc...
But also:
Strang: $322
(Linear Algebra and its Applications, 4e, 2005)
http://www.amazon.com/Linear-A...
Of course what makes this racket even worse, there's been nothing new in the field of Linear Algebra for over 100 years. A textbook written in 1915 would be just as usable as one written today.
I better go back and study the differential equations before I loose my degree. The changes must be tremendous if new expensive books are necessary to teach the subject.
"How do you think they get to a $65,000/dose cancer treatment? "Don't worry your insurance will cover it"."
That's disingenuous. Are you sure that $65000/dose price doesn't include not only the cost of research/trials/fda approval of THIS particular drug but also the countless other drugs that didn't live up to expectations?
My mother-in-law takes a fairly new med for her leukemia -- it's about $10,000 for 14 days and has been very effective. That drug would have never made it to market if "big pharma" didn't expect to turn a profit (including cover OTHER research projects). This is *NOT* a bad thing. In about another decade or so the cost will dramatically come down.
I'm not saying that this is the BEST model for research. What I'm saying it is a good and effective model.
But undergraduate mathematics is essentailly set-in-stone. There isn't much new being added to undergrad math since all of the new stuff is a function of graduate work on the advancement of math. Stuff at this level isn't changing so the only changes to the textbooks that actually make sense are those that make learning the curriculum easier, but even that is subject to both interpretation and to the particular way that a given student learns. That's also why there's a teacher there, because otherwise subjects like mathematics at this level could be learned through self-study, and sometimes that human guidance helps clarify things when the book doesn't provide the answers in a way that students understand.
Macroeconomics, while partially math-based, is also a lot of the discussion of evolving schools of thought. It's not settled, and the to and fro of collective opinion on what functions best or what model represents reality best is always being debated, and crosses into politics at times, and new Economic theories that impact undergrad studies appear at least a little more often than new undergrad math concepts.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
Here in Canada, there is a law that limits loans based on the what percentage of my income the payments would end up being. I can't help but think a lot of this madness would end if the maximum student loan was based on what is affordable based on the expected income of someone graduating with the degree in question.
They had the assigned textbook, and a list of suggested textbooks. Either way, the instructor assigned their own problems, usually a mix from the instructor's manual and of their own creation. In the case of readings, they gave the topic and (in the case of the assigned textbook) section numbers for the current and prior editions. The student was by no means obligated to buy the assigned or recommended textbooks. They could use a book of their own choosing, online resources, or simply rely upon lectures.
University is different from primary or secondary school. While students are expected to meet certain requirements for learning, learning is mostly the responsibility of the student.
While I can understand the argument that a common textbook makes it easier to teach the same material to multiple sections, it's not necessary if the teacher or professor covers all the necessary material.
While I was enrolled as an engineer, one math professor decided he didn't like the textbook being used to teach the course. It was wordy, confusing, and generally not well-written. So, he embarked to write his own book that would be much easier to utilize while teaching calculus courses. He wrote up all of his lecture notes in textbook-like form for easy compilation later, and passed them out to his students for free with each lecture. His notes were very easy to comprehend and matched up with his classes very well. Everyone enjoyed having him as a professor because he actually cared that his students understood the material better.
In his case, sure there was some future financial gain in it for him. (After he found a way to get everything published.) But, it was more about his ability to teach the students effectively. Other professors didn't care that he used his own teaching method or didn't use the standard textbook for his courses. And we all turned out just fine because he still taught all of the material, just in his own way.
BR I guess my point is this: let the teachers choose their own methods, as long as they teach the students the required material. Oftentimes, this can result in greater effectiveness, as it's more comfortable for the person doing the teaching. And that, in turn, usually translates into better learning of the material by the persons being taught. Don't just railroad everyone into doing the same thing. That's how we get all of this common core and standardized testing BS that doesn't really do anything for the teachers or the students.
Bite my shiny metal ass!
It's a common misconception that drugs are expensive because of R&D, but actually, the lion's share of Big Pharma's budget is spent on advertising.
http://www.randalolson.com/2015/03/01/design-critique-putting-big-pharma-spending-in-perspective/
http://www.fiercepharma.com/story/new-numbers-back-meme-pharma-does-spend-more-marketing-rd/2014-11-06
But don't get me started on ethics and the textbook industry...
Actually, since you are a former university(?) math professor; I'd love to get you started on ethics and the textbook industry, and hear your take on it.
I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
" Given the monopoly power of the schools...they could ask for your first-born child as well."
That's what tuition is for. Textbooks are just a side racket.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
If they are maths students, they should be capable of thinking of it.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Hallowe'en is tomorrow.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
You said nothing that counters what I said. Pushing new medications in to adoption isn't cheap. How is that not PART of getting meds to market? How useful would it be if a new med came out but wasn't really adopted?
The goal of "big pharma" is to make money. They do that by providing effective medications and push the line of new and greater quality treatments. If you remove their ability to make money you will remove them from making new and greater quality treatments. This isn't complicated and making money isn't 'evil' by nature.
$180? Are they fucking insane?
The people reprimanding him are the people who chose the $180 textbook, and they also happen to be the authors of that overpriced textbook.
So no, it definitely not that they're insane... Unethical, corrupt and greedy, but not insane.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
Maybe if the education system here took their heads out of their asses, it would not matter which text book was used for a particular subject.
It seems to matter very much to the people who chose the book for the course because they also literally wrote the book. So they probably think it's the best and they get a portion of every sale.
The problem is that the text book and testing industry have such an incestuous relationship
Quite incestuous indeed, since they wrote the book and then picked the book that they wrote.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
The Sharp had one thing none of the others (at that time -- early 80's) did. Playback.
You entered in up to 50 "button pushes" of whatever, and hit =. To check you entered it all, you hit PB (playback) and you could then scroll through every bit of it. It also had 6 memory locations you could draw from. The others in its price range had 2.
No other calculator came close (at that time), even at 3 times the money. [I guess they are up to 142 steps now.]
Fond, fond memories of that product. From sharp minds indeed. I didn't go out of my way to convince my felow 'geers about its virtues...
I come here for the love
Such a brazen conflict of interest should threaten accreditation and be much more significant problem than merely using a different textbook.
As a (former) student, I never had a college level math class that didn't require the text book. Even more notably, it almost always had to be the new one, because they rearrange and change the problems assigned as homework.
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
Student loans. Easy money. The student will pay whatever because the loan covers it and the student is incapable of thinking of how exponential interest will harm him in the long run.
This is why we don't teach critical thinking in public schools. Without critical thinking, we can suck them into college prices w/o thinking about the reward/return ratio.
Hah. If that were true then all mathematicians would be millionaires!
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Anyone want to wager when textbooks will hit $1,000?
If only 1 million people in the next 20 years worldwide need a single 14 day course, that's 10,000,000,000 to them.
They wouldn't have so much cost from failed attempts if they would actually give up on them when the early results are disappointing rather than trying to find a way to game the stats to show some tiny sliver of efficacy.
As a former university and tech school mathematics instructor, I'm happy to throw in my take on it.
Most textbooks are absolutely dull, and are full of extremely contrived examples designed to "show how useful the subject is". Many subjects are extremely useful, but perhaps to only certain fields, so it's sometimes difficult to explain the utility to a first undergraduate course in the subject. This makes many students bored because they're smart enough to realize they're essentially being lied to -- the examples are obviously contrived and lame. Furthermore, it pushes this idea that unless there's a "practical way to make money" on the subject, it's worthless, which is absolutely not true. We should encourage philosophical thought for its own sake, and recognize that such thought sometimes leads to great discoveries long term, even if we don't know how its useful right this minute.
So that being said, the textbook industry knows Education is a buzz word in politics. They know getting Good Jobs (TM) is another buzzword. So they rewrite the textbooks every year now. The actual content doesn't change (or at least not for the best; I think they often just remove content!), they just swap chapters around, and most importantly, tailor the contrived examples to the buzzword industry of the year. They can then go around convincing politicians, school districts, and universities that their books "prepare students to enter the workforce" and you absolutely need the latest edition or your students won't have the advantage others' do. It's kind of a bullying -- they make the professors feel bad, and if they manage to stand up, then they go to the school board or university administration to get their book in.
To convince people of the book, they spam free copies of the book to everyone. They hand out swag at conferences, reminding them of how awesome they are for publishing. They get name recognition.
Professors then start to feel bad that maybe my students are not receiving the same advantage as everyone else, let me use what they all use. Going through graduate school, I had my share of completely awful textbooks for courses. Couldn't learn a damn thing from them. We asked the professor about it (several different ones for different classes) and the response was almost always "this is the standard textbook nationwide on this topic".
Having a standard breeds mediocrity in some sense. To me, University is meant to open your mind to new ideas. I think they should be a little different between semesters and professors. Shake it up. Cover a few new topics, especially if the students seem interested. Throw out a few topics because maybe there's little interest. Why not tailor it to what the students want, rather than university and accreditation boards? I know, losing accreditation would be bad, but that's exactly my point -- the system has damaged what it means to have a university education. You just go through an assembly line, rather than being encouraged to explore your interested. Classes like linear algebra are amazingly useful, but (1) not every applied field in the world needs it, so I can see some instances where you don't want to cover all the nuances; (2) linear algebra is a very large subject and so even if a student should learn it, the question becomes: what part of linear algebra? What should be the focus of the class? We need professors willing to change it up based on student needs and interests. We're teaching kids how to learn, not rote memory -- if we do a good job, then even if we don't cover everything, students will know how to find and learn what they need in the future!
Finally, many textbooks themselves were not written because of someone's passion to educate, but rather to fulfill a bullet point for a PhD or tenure. Check the introduction/forward of any textbook; most of them will say "This grew out of work I did for my PhD....". It is almost verbatim someone's PhD thesis, but somehow undergraduates are expected to follow a PhD thesis on a subject (remembe
I'm a current one. I enjoy bullshitting with our textbook reps, because I enjoy bullshitting, and they keep thinking that entertaining me is going to positively influence our textbook purchasing. What really happened at the last committee meeting was " It is immoral and unacceptable to discriminate against minority students through textbook pricing. I will not support the new edition until there are adequate copies available on the used textbook market.." Throwing the discrimination card worked beautifully.
I remember one course in computer science (architecture) where the textbook was written by the lecturer (a academic no-one), it was considerably more expensive than the standard textbooks, it didn't cover as much or in as much detail than the standard and it was "required" as it contained assignments that would not be provided in any other form. Bullshit.
It worked out in the end though the university at first didn't see the problem: the use of that book was actually not decided by the lecturer but by the university. The reason was that it followed the lectures better than any other book - not that strange...
The result was that one was recommended to use the book but it wasn't required. Why didn't they do that from the beginning? The course itself was good as was the lecturer but that left quite some badwill...
Prices go up, not down. I've been taking pills for 20 years and I have NEVER seen the price go down. What I've seen happen is that I've been switched to new (and more expensive) patent-protected medications when the patents on old medications are about to expire. But at $1500 a month I am not paying less for my pills.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Yes and the argument of those poor pharma companies to anyone who tries to stick their legislative oar in is "oh but it's the only way we can make profits". Because Bayer doesn't make any money at all on Aspirin.../sarcasm
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Also likely can't fail any one as well as that hurts the schools income.
My mother-in-law takes a fairly new med for her leukemia -- it's about $10,000 for 14 days and has been very effective. That drug would have never made it to market if "big pharma" didn't expect to turn a profit (including cover OTHER research projects).
$5000 of that cost goes to marketing and sales commissions. R&D spending is generally 10-20% sales spending examples I mean, R&D is expensive. Those costs are definitely big numbers; it's just that they're small in comparison to other parts of pharmaceutical spending.
Every course I took, as an Electrical Engineer, had books in the college library for use as reference. I stopped buying textbooks after my first year of school. Nearly ever math book had the chapters rearranged but 90% of the examples and problems were the same if you went to the appropriate chapter. Where they were different it was never hard to get the correct questions from fellow students.
Or just split the cost of books with others in your section and make "study groups".
"Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
There's ethic in the textbook industry?!
Yup, there's exactly one ethic: No using children under the age of 5 as a source of paper.
However, if you read the article, you'll see that the authors of the department-assigned text are the chair and vice-chair of the department. Which is largely unethical in my opinion. (But don't get me started on ethics and the textbook industry...)
Having the textbook authors mandate purchase of their book is blatantly unethical. So, the authors attempted to shield their lack of ethics by recusing themselves from the textbook selection process. However, the members of the selection committee are still fully cognizant that they are deciding whether to take money away from their bosses. So, despite the recusal, the situation is still unethical, just in a more hidden way.
This situation has parallels to the issue of sexual consent between superiors and subordinates. Due to the ability of the superiors to retaliate, subordinates are assumed to lack the ability to freely give consent in any situation. Such is the case with the textbook committee. Because there is no way to remove the threat of retaliation, they are effectively unable to freely voice their opinions.
I had elementary electronics classes where the instructors would use old Navy books because they were cheaper. They worked fine.
Here's what one former university professor had to say about his experience with the textbook industry.
The man from the book depository was there, and he said, "Excuse me; I can explain that. I didn't send it to you because that book hadn't been completed yet. There's a rule that you have to have every entry in by a certain time, and the publisher was a few days late with it. So it was sent to us with just the covers, and it's blank in between. The company sent a note excusing themselves and hoping they could have their set of three books considered, even though the third one would be late."
It turned out that the blank book had a rating by some of the other members! They couldn't believe it was blank, because [the book] had a rating. In fact, the rating for the missing book was a little bit higher than for the two others. The fact that there was nothing in the book had nothing to do with the rating.
Imagine the wasted money, time, and human effort that could be saved from not rewriting the same books every few years. Imagine all the good that could be achieved not just in California, or the US, but the entire world, if textbooks where open source. The only losers would be the textbook publishers and those receiving their kickbacks.
It's really interesting. I work at a small independent (family-owned) academic publishing house, and we actually have a textbook with an author at Cal State Fullerton. That author foregoes royalties on any sales to Cal State Fullerton. I had thought that was a school policy (this kind of policy is pretty common--and becoming more so--actually), but I guess not.
$180 seems like a crapload for a math textbook that probably doesn't change much between editions. Our most expensive book is a real monster at something like 1800 pages, and comes in around $140. Having said that, I can absolutely understand the desire to have all students in different sections use the same book.
Maybe the authors should volunteer to give up royalties (or donate to a charity, etc) for sales to their own school as a good faith gesture?
Any (former) student will tell you that you never buy the textbook until the prof tells you whether you need it or not. Heck, sometimes they'll even tell you that you can use an earlier revision which will be significantly cheaper.
Yep that's it. It only bit me once in my entire degree where a textbook was optional and then 2 weeks before finals we were told the exam is open book but we could only bring the approved textbook in. There was a sudden rush on the library, and the bookstores and then the maybe 20 copies of it available were all gone. Thank good I knew someone who did the course who still had the textbook.
Do you mean 5 years as in 365*5? Do you mean under 5 as in had 5 birthdays? What about those born on Feb 29th? Can we begin to use them for paper when they're 5 or when they're 20?
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
And the problem is? Students that can choose between the classes can now get to chose based on book price as well.
The problem is when student's can't chose between the classes and then when it comes to sitting the Exam for Maths101 they were all taught in different ways using different content. Was my teacher awesome? How do I know?
I promise you, if they invent a drug that cures cancer, they don't need to advertise that shit.
Even on a lesser scale, important drugs don't need advertising. Advertising is for shit drugs that are desperate for a market and customers. It's just a way to milk us.
You seem to be under some illusions about the working conditions of University professors. Most of your professors are adjuncts, working part time for less than minimum wage.
You're upset because your professor didn't contact you way before the first class to tell you what the expectations were? Guess what? The University probably hadn't even gotten around to hiring her yet. And even if they had, they reserved the right to say "just kidding" and cancel it at the last minute.
You want someone to blame for the poor quality of your education? It's not your professors. It's the "dooshbags" they are working for.
I am sorry to hear that you are out an extra $50 for the cost of a new textbook. Your professor, who makes about $20,000 a year by working at three different schools with no benefits, no job security and no support from their employer, knows what that feels like.
http://news.slashdot.org/story...
My local university has one that is completely free and has the source code available upon request. I'm trying to 'rewrite' it in an iPython notebook similar to the AeroPy.
I haven't lectured in two years. I've of course been teaching, but have stopped using the method known as "the lecture"—delivering a set amount of material (aka, "covering") from the front of the classroom to a group of mostly quiet, note-taking students. Like greater profs before me, I am a converted lecturer.1
It was Spring 2012 when I went full-steam ahead with the flipped classroom idea for my Computational Fluid Dynamics course. I've written before about how this came about, but the impetus resulted from already having done the lecture capture, live, in a previous version of the CFD course. I uploaded the videos from that live lecture capture to YouTube (after minor editing and cutting into segments) where, since then, they have collected nearly 220,000 public views (checked 20 April'14). My challenge that semester was coming up with class activities—but that should be the topic of another post.
- AeroPy.
If they are a maths student, it means they want to learn math, not that they already know it. That's like insisting that a first year med student know that they can't mix Panexa with Tetra-meth phlogiston without a repressor protein to block the operating cells.
Here an Associate Professor has tenure. If you are tenure track you are hired as an Assistant Professor, and become an Associate when you are granted tenure. So it means you've been around for some time and passed your big milestone. Becoming a full professor does not happen for a long time after that, generally at least 10 years, sometimes longer. As a practical matter departments usually only have so many lines for full professors.
So an associate isn't some junior level position or anything. It means a tenured professor with their own research lab, at least where I work.
Not according to one of the math professors commenting in TFA:
The professor is teaching one section of a class where different sections are taught by different faculty. As all the students - regardless of which section they are enrolled in - are enrolled in the same course, they should all be studying the same material. While it is not impossible to ensure that this happens when different sections use different texts, it is a lot easier to ensure that this happens when everyone does use the same text.
Yes, what if matrix multiplication is done differently in one book as opposed to the next..
It's linear algebra. Set a syllabus for what needs to be covered, yes, with a little room for teacher-specific enrichment, but requiring the same unethically chosen textbook for everyone is absurd. Linear algebra doesn't change based on what textbook you read it from. The *only* advantage is students have more people to talk with about the problem set if they're all assigned the same book.
Why would you need a $180 book to teach linear algebra? Matrix multiplication is easy. And if you have a state university system the size of California's, you can hire a great educator to write a textbook for less than, say, the 1.8M per year it would cost 10K students going through linear algebra a year to buy them.
So what you're saying is that the mathematics in the $75 book is different from the math in the $185 textbook, and that students must use the exact same book or else they won't learn the same material as the other sections?
So long as a professor is teaching to the course syllabus he should be free to use whatever training materials he feels is best for his students.
If they failed the course the first time around or didn't make a high enough grade to satisfy a prerequisite for a later class in the series, then they make take the same class a second time. If the previous lecturer isn't teaching the class in the current term, the student would have a different one, who may be using a different book.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
I'm a professor in the business school at a large public university and several of our department's faculty have written well-received text books (i.e., popular outside of our university). For the class I teach there are actually three different faculty members with three different text books (three different publishers too), including our department chair. We have no pressure to choose one text book over another (in fact one faculty uses a book different from the one written by this faculty's spouse). Our Dean has enforced a long standing policy that all royalties for faculty-authored text books sold on our campus go to a student scholarship fund so our faculty cannot benefit from sales at our university. If it is a good book the sales outside of the university should be enough. I use one of our faculty's text books in my class and I inform my students of this policy the first day of class. The students know that I chose this text book because I feel that it is the best for our class, and not that my buddy down the hall will financially benefit. This should be a standard model outside of our department and university but I really have not heard of this happening elsewhere.
Let me guess: Mankiw?
At least it's a good textbook. I didn't sell mine back, and not just because old editions are completely worthless.
An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
You made an unjustified leap. Advertising that keeps going must be working and getting more people to buy the drugs. That I can agree on. The idea that more people buying a drug will lead to lower prices for each person is the leap that I can't agree with. It may lead to lower prices for the drug or if the company is selling more doses per month they may decide to keep the price the same and just pocket the money.
Just a little off topic but very interesting from the link you cited. Just to show that certain idea could become obsolete when time goes by. :)
I'll give you an example: They would talk about different bases of numbers -- five, six, and so on -- to show the possibilities. That would be interesting for a kid who could understand base ten -- something to entertain his mind. But what they turned it into, in these books, was that every child had to learn another base! And then the usual horror would come: "Translate these numbers, which are written in base seven, to base five." Translating from one base to another is an utterly useless thing. If you can do it, maybe it's entertaining; if you can't do it, forget it. There's no point to it.
As you know, we would need to understand the covert base number concept nowadays in order to understand computer architecture better (especially with fraction approximation). In 1999, it might not be that important yet.
It was a long time ago in a university far far away, but for all the 'hard' courses, I brought myself several textbooks for each course. Reading the subject from multiple viewpoints and multiple ways of explaining was effective at getting the ideas in my head. Of course if the textbooks were the price they are in the US today, I don't think I'd be able to afford that approach. I still have a pile of math and DSP books in front of me from that time. Lecturer quality varies, but you still have to learn the stuff.
To the linear algebra problem in TFS, I highly recommend the MIT Open Courseware Linear Algebra lectures by Gilbert Strang. He's a good teacher.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
> At least linear algebra is like a 300-level course.
Why? When I was at school, the basics of linear algebra (matrices, eschelon forms, gaussian elimination, A=LU, etc, but not the higher dimensional stuff) was taught on and off from around age 13. You were supposed to know it when you got to college. I remember not being presented with Eigen-whatsits until college.
It might be a 300 course in the US today, but it doesn't have to be. It's not that complex, just a bit conceptually different to what kids get from algebra.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
However, if you read the article, you'll see that the authors of the department-assigned text are the chair and vice-chair of the department. Which is largely unethical in my opinion. (But don't get me started on ethics and the textbook industry...)
Isn't that how all textbook decisions are made? I remember our awful CompSci books were written by the department chairs. I won't have cared that much had we not concluded the department head was senile.
So its like taking a test were you automatically get some points just for signing your name then lose points if you answer wrong.
I'll preface this by saying that I was not tenured faculty. But I was adjunct faculty with a thriving career outside of the university and seven years as a part-time faculty member.
This happened to me at local State U (I'm in a flyover state) and ended my years as a professor. I was a top-rated instructor in the department by both student evaluations and faculty observations, advising graduate students, experienced, and had been there a long time teaching courses that I developed and that were well-received.
New leadership came in at the divisional level, and I was called in to a meeting with my chair one day. I was told I could no longer do what I had been doing for at least half a decade: assigning a textbook that was several editions old (there were no substantive changes in the newer editions, just replaced photos) and instructing students on the syllabus to pick the books up for literally pennies on Amazon.com, Alibris, eBay, or other online venues.
Instead, I had to assign the latest issue of the textbook and do it only through the university bookstore, at a cost of >$150.00 in one class, >$200.00 in another (compared to an average of $4.00 plus shipping most semesters for the online used versions). I had it listed as my first assignment on each syllabus—buy a used textbook online and submit proof of purchase (to be sure the students actually did get ahold of the textbooks).
I refused. I said I would provide both options—I'd order the textbook through the university bookstore and provide that as an option to students that preferred to buy new, through the bookstore, but would also allow both current and old editions to be used in my classes for students that wanted to rely on used books. I was threatened again. New only, bookstore only.
I refused. I was fired.
That semester (in 2014) was the last time I set foot on a college campus as a professor, after nearly a decade in the classroom every semester. Again, I wasn't tenured—but it left a significant hole in curriculum and advising. They were more interested in ensuring that students contributed to revenue and partnerships through bookstore purchases than they were in actually enabling students to learn in a cost-effective way.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
The institutions themselves are benefitting in revenue terms through bookstore sales, which also benefit publishers significantly in a kind of win-win.
I made a post about my years as a professor below and about being fired for allowing students to work from used textbooks.
What I didn't post below was that in the early '00s, before I was a professor, I worked in a well-known academic publisher of textbooks and journals in the Los Angeles area. I was over a department / topic area and one of the things that we did to stay ahead of revenue neutrality in our publications was ensure that they were "updated" every year. In many cases, preparation for the new "edition" entailed hiring two independent contractors: one freelance photo editor to replace all the images, and another freelance academic (often at a total cost of $1k-$2k tops) to re-do the exercises, tweak a few chapter titles, and perhaps reorder some chapters.
This was a strategy to enable "stale" books (read: books with large presences in used channels) to be revenue positive again (new edition = now more books in used channels, meaning a rash of new sales for 2-4 semesters). The initial investment in the text had in many cases happened years ago; subsequent annual investments were often in the low four figures or even less.
Of course, this high-margin model also enabled us to do deals with universities and their bookstores. Because of the low overhead for many refreshed titles, we could offer favorable terms to them for their revenue generation, often demanding minimum buys or various kinds of exclusivity in exchange for better revenue terms.
It's a kind of wealth transfer from the taxpayers (as student loans), through students, into the pockets of publishers and institutional administrations.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
While big pharma does some research, most of the research is government funded. They just get to claim exclusive use of it.
OTOH, I believe the DO pay for the large scale human testing that goes on pre-approval. (And where they hide the results of any failed tests.)
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
If you had gone far enough you would have gotten the real linear algebra course. It usually comes with or after DiffEq.
The one you took was memorize and regurgitate, like pre-calculus statistics. Worth taking I suppose, but you just memorize formulas you don't understand.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
The basic research is generally government-funded, and typically winds up easily available to anyone interested. This may be an observation that a certain compound does certain useful things in mice, although it kills them fairly fast. A pharmaceutical company then picks up the research, and tries to make a practical drug out of it that works on humans without having side effects that are too bad. This involves lots of highly expensive tests, and may include either fiddling with the chemistry or finding out it just isn't going to work.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Understanding how matrices represent systems of linear equations is pretty darned useful to have internalized early on. I wouldn't call it regurgitation and memorization.
I took the full meal deal after I left college, since it crops up in my work all the time.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
When I took Linear Algebra the prof (also the undergraduate chair in addition) had written the textbook. The commercial version, which could be bought on amazon and which other schools used, cost around the same as the one the article mentions. For any classes *at* my school the school had a special version printed and bound especially for them. The printing and binding wasn't the greatest quality and it only included the material used in the specific curriculum of the school, but it was $25 at the university book store. I've always thought that was really cool and I always respected the prof for that.
"goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
However my book expenses was nothing compared to what they had to put up with in other areas, such as psychology or pedagogy. They had to buy $200 books just for a chapter or two.
That's what university libraries are for...go fair-use and photocopiers!
"I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
And the problem is? Students that can choose between the classes can now get to chose based on book price as well.
The problem is when student's can't chose between the classes and then when it comes to sitting the Exam for Maths101 they were all taught in different ways using different content. Was my teacher awesome? How do I know?
And the folks who took the course the year before or the year later will also have different experiences. So what?
Usually in places where Maths101a is taught by a different instructor than Maths101b, the evaluations are done independantly by each instructor, with nothing more in common between then then the courses taught in different years. To expect the identical experience when taking courses taught by different instructors is probably unwise.
If you can afford bus fare going to college, why can't you pay a measly $50-$70 for an important book? I agree that $180 is ridiculously high unless it's a niche/in-demand subject like law or marketing. You freeloaders are far worse than the greedy $200 textbook writers/publishers.
And the folks who took the course the year before or the year later will also have different experiences. So what?
The folks from the year before and after (or even on different semesters) are not graded against these people in a bell configuration. We went through exactly such a case when I was at university. If the general subject was taught in a way that the exam didn't fit in with the course materials the marks were corrected afterwards (bell curved). However in one subject we failed an assignment (thankfully not a final exam) we all thought we did pretty well in. The university's open marks policy allowed us to contact every failing student and lo-and-behold we all had the same tutor who royally fucked us by teaching us a format that didn't apply in the assignment. Not only did we fail but due to bell curving we pushed up sub-par students in the other class who actually did deserve to fail.
We eventually took it to the tribunal and they removed that assignment from the final grading for the course and also put a supervisor in the classes to check the tutor was teaching the right content for the final exam.
Don't underestimate how you can get screwed by something outside of your control. You shouldn't ever need to care what last year's guys did (except if you have lazy course coordinators in which case it sometimes pays off to get a copy of last year's exam off someone), but you need to take an active interest in ensuring you're getting the same education as other people doing the subject. If I'm going to fail I want it to be due to lack of effort on my part, not due to an unlucky choice of lecture constrained by my timetable.
Oh and of course this is not 100% within your control due to different quality of teaching, but you don't want to get screwed from the ground up by being taught from a fundamentally different material than everyone else to begin with.
Speaking as a former student: what's a textbook? Ok, I exaggerate slightly for effect: one of the many lecture courses that I took in my degree was taught from a textbook, although in that case it was written by the lecturer and she handed out photocopies of the relevant chapters. All of the other courses were taught from the lecturer's own notes. The idea that lecture courses should be taught from a textbook is part of a specific university culture, not a universally accepted notion.
Oh and of course this is not 100% within your control due to different quality of teaching, but you don't want to get screwed from the ground up by being taught from a fundamentally different material than everyone else to begin with.
That does sound like a challenge.
Of course the whole idea that grades should have any importance beyond helping the instructor and sudent gain insight into progress and how to futher their learning is an issue so fundamentally mixed up within our educational systems that it twists the way we look at almost every aspect of those systems. The proper idea of "we should/should not do such-and-such because it will help/hinder students' learning" is so easly morphed into "we should/should not do such-and-such because it will help/hinder students' grades", further driving the idea that the grading is the important outcome.
But I digress....
I taught pure and applied Calc and Diff Equations at a smaller university. We were 3 profs for the same subject. My students did not have rich benefactors; some were bright students from other countries. Groups of 4 foreign students rented an apartment, to share the costs. These students were appreciative of my not obliging them to buy the official book. In fact, they shared the one book, and worked together (synergism). It was one of the few years in the history of the university that a math class had every student passing with a good understanding of the two subjects. And, I am willing to bet that after the course, each of my students from that class could teach the two subjects to others. At the end of the year I left that city to return to my home town to get married. I called it the year of three successes.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
"Our Dean has enforced a long standing policy that all royalties for faculty-authored text books sold on our campus go to a student scholarship fund so our faculty cannot benefit from sales at our university."
I've seen similar rules at various universities.
The local captive bookshop and/or publishers ALWAYS ensure that the academics in question get a kickback.
There is an obvious conflict of internet that needs to be addressed when the chair and vice chair of the department wrote the required book. The math department there votes on what book to use so that they can standardize what the students are getting, BUT there's no mention of chair and vice chair not voting on it. If even if they didn't vote, it doesn't resolve the conflict of interest completely since they're the chair and vice chair of the department and therefore you can't prove that the others didn't vote in favor of it to be in favor of them.
Don't be silly. Words like "Conflict of interest", "Fraud", "Kickbacks" and "Unbecoming behavior" only apply to "Those evil business people", not to University Administrators! 8-}
They probably have done this for so long that they don't even know it is wrong, anymore...