CourseSmart, which sells electronic versions of textbooks by major publishers, issued a statement this week defending its model, after a report by a student advocacy group said publishers were off track with their online offerings.
The report was released this week by the Student Public Interest Research Groups, a collection of independent statewide organizations representing college students. The report said that online textbooks generally cost about the same as printed ones, even though the CourseSmart Web site says that online textbooks save students up to 50 percent. In making the claim, the report’s authors figured that many students sell printed textbooks back to the bookstore after a semester, recouping some of the initial cost. Books bought through CourseSmart expire after a set number of days so that they cannot be resold.
But officials for CourseSmart say that even if the money students make from reselling print textbooks is taken into account, the company’s online textbooks are still significantly cheaper. Sean Devine, CEO of CourseSmart, said in an interview that a student could expect to save about $15 by buying an online version of a textbook that would have cost $100 in printed form, even if resale is considered. And Mr. Devine pointed out that many students do not resell their textbooks.
Mr. Devine also defended CourseSmart’s limitations on printing and on how long users can access a book. “That’s not an unusual restriction at all” for a publisher online, he said.
“We find that the students who purchase from us have a very, very high satisfaction rate,” he said, adding that tens of thousands of students have bought its books.
He said that online textbooks are still in an early phase of development, and that CourseSmart would likely evolve over time. “We think we have a fair product in the marketplace right now, and we’re getting student feedback about how we can make it better,” he said.—Jeffrey R. Young
2 Responses to CourseSmart Disputes Report on Digital Textbooks
Dr. Melissa Barlett - June 4, 2012 at 9:59 am
I teach in higher ed and my husband works at a Pearson VUE site, so we tend to have an interesting viewpoint on the whole thing. Of course, higher ed already does this with NCLEX and other standard tests. In this case, it relies on people taking and completing the course, which according to another article I read today, not a high number, and they will have to find a way to pay for these, because proctors cost money, I should know, it’s part of my household income. Until we have created a generation of people who are truly completely self-motivated, I think we’re still good on people feeling like paying for and coming to physical classes helps them more, although, we still need to up the ante on those classroom experiences if we are going to beat this long term.
professorh - June 7, 2012 at 10:28 am
Distance courses are very popular and can be great learning experiences if they are well designed with strong assessment features. Unfortunately, I’ve seen a lot of evidence of failure in distance courses because they are perceived as easier since they are not located in a classroom. I’m not sure why students think distance classes would be easier when the instructor is not at hand, but they often do.
However, I hope that if more groups want to offer opportunities in the teaching and learning community they recognize the importance of quality and accreditation. Partnering with companies with strong testing venues is helpful when it comes to ensuring the work of the registrants, but how helpful are these classes if there are no articulation agreements with other accredited institutions? I would argue for full disclosure to students – I know of students who started at a school lacking accreditation who tried to transfer to a college only to sadly learn that their courses would not be accepted and their aid was about used up. Students need to know what they are choosing and the long-term effects of their choices.