Chuck Crumly, Science Publisher at the University of California Press, continues with the second in a short series of posts about the future of specialized textbooks in the college curriculum.
One of the great strengths of science, as a way of understanding the world, is the connection between past research and future university-level teaching. Exciting scientific findings percolate into textbooks and, as a result, textbooks are constantly changing. Unfortunately, not all change is for the better. Sometimes by including new and amazing discoveries important parts of the foundation of the field are omitted. More often, however, everything is added and nothing is omitted yielding books that ruin the backpacks (not to mention backs) of the students using them. These mega-textbooks are also difficult to teach from because they suffer from a certain "kitchen sink." quality. It is not easy to avoid the peripheral and focus on the core of a textbook that seems to have grown as if on steroids.
As mentioned in my previous blog posting, this trend leaves the specialized courses behind because the growth in the number of pages in a text cannot be sustained by a smaller market. Thus, textbooks for traditionally small classes are disappearing from the marketplace. The solution to both of these phenomena involves establishing a better partnership between the author and the publisher. The underlying elements of this partnership need to be service to the student, some sacrifice, and sustainable financial plans for each textbook.
Let us imagine a publisher working with an author to create a specialized science textbook. These days the goal would have to include content that is in print and also in digital form. Students would be granted the option of obtaining content in either medium. Flexible downloading options would need to be available - from chapter by chapter pay per view to full-text downloads. Authors would need to agree to changes in the way that royalties are assessed and paid so that this flexibility could be implemented by the publisher. And, at least in the short term, authors might be asked to do more work with respect to manuscript preparation (e.g. obtaining digital permissions for all content) and accept less money because the publisher is spending more on digital experiments in content development. This would be the price authors pay to provide service to a smaller student audience.
The author-publisher partnership will not be one-sided. The publisher will need to experiment with fiscally unproven content delivery systems. And some will fail. Individual textbooks will become test subjects or guinea pigs. Because of this testing phase, individual textbooks are likely to cost more to produce and yield less in a return on the investment. And this would be the price that the publisher would have to pay.
Assuming that both author and publisher are willing to join in these sacrifices, what would the world of the textbook look like in ten, twenty or thirty years?
Stay tuned - next time is reserved for the crystal ball