The Biden administration wants to roll back an Obama-era policy that allowed a聽procurement model for digital textbooks and course materials to聽flourish 鈥 a聽move that has alarmed publishers and institutions, but one that student advocates say would give students more choices.
The Association of American Publishers (AAP) said nearly half of聽all degree-granting institutions have adopted a聽version of聽the known as inclusive or聽equitable access, in聽which students receive all required course materials 鈥 offered for sale at below-market rates through deals struck between institutions, publishers and campus bookstores 鈥 by聽the first day of聽class as聽part of their tuition and fees.
The Education Department proposes to take away colleges鈥 ability to automatically bill students for their books and supplies, with only a few exceptions. Instead, students would have to聽opt聽in.
Publishers said the move could deal a fatal blow to inclusive and equitable access systems. The change would make the models unworkable, they argued, because an opt-in approach could lead to fewer participants. For the programmes to work, they said, a large bulk of students have to participate; without that, students could see higher costs for course materials.
糖心Vlog
Kelly Denson, senior vice-president of education policy and programmes for the AAP, said changing the policy would have an 鈥渙utsized and very negative impact鈥 on college students.
鈥淚ronically, the Department of Education is doing this even as the Biden-Harris administration is on record for pushing for affordability and higher education, including through loan forgiveness,鈥 Ms Denson said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a little disconcerting to think that they would roll back the enormous progress made on course material affordability.鈥
糖心Vlog
Proponents say the policy change will give students back their autonomy, and they question claims that students are actually saving money.
鈥淚n the past, students had the option to purchase second-hand, rent or borrow certain materials from the library,鈥 Christina R. Hilburger, a librarian at SUNY at Fredonia, wrote in an email. 鈥淲ith inclusive access, these students may find themselves in a situation where they could ultimately be spending more on their course materials.鈥
The are opaque and primarily benefit publishers, said critics who believe that 鈥 publicly licensed materials available for free 鈥 are a more long-term sustainable solution to high textbook costs. For students in the access models, they said, it聽is聽not always clear how to opt out or feasible to do so, especially if their courses use software that is聽required for assignments and quizzes. In addition, students do聽not own the materials and typically lose access when the course ends 鈥 and the resources or textbooks they are paying for are not always used in their classes.
鈥淚f inclusive access is [the] great deal that many people claim it is, there鈥檚 no reason to believe that students won鈥檛 continue to do that voluntarily,鈥 said Nicole Allen, director of open education at the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition, or SPARC.
The proposed policy change, first outlined earlier this year, is part of regulatory proposals aimed at ensuring that students receive the financial aid they are entitled聽to. The plan is still in the early stages and subject to negotiation over the next two months, so it could change. Any regulatory change will not take effect until July 2025.
The Education Department did not respond to a request for more information about the proposed policy change.
鈥楴ot the way to go鈥
The federal government clarified in 2015 that colleges could lump the costs of books and supplies into tuition and fee charges, and established certain guardrails, such as that materials have to be offered at below competitive market rates. Although the Education Department initially wanted to prohibit the practice, agency officials were eventually persuaded that the programme would allow an institution to negotiate lower prices on materials for students.
Still, officials that even with the opt-out measure, 鈥渟tudents who would otherwise seek lower cost alternatives will settle, out of sheer convenience, for the price of books and supplies negotiated by the institution鈥. The department encouraged institutions to negotiate agreements that provided options for students.
糖心Vlog
Shahrooz Moosavizadeh, a mathematics professor at Norfolk State University and director of its equitable access programme, said the change allowed his institution to charge students a flat fee of $25 (拢19) per credit hour, which could add up to $375 for a typical 15-hour course load.
鈥淚t is imperative that our students have their course materials on the first day of classes,鈥 he said. 鈥淎n opt-out programme allows us to do that because the school can buy materials for an entire class at one time, and they don鈥檛 have to do millions of transactions.鈥
Professor Moosavizadeh said only five of the university鈥檚 more than 5,700 students opted out of the programme in the last academic year. 鈥淲e鈥檝e come a long way since the days of ridiculous textbook prices,鈥 he said, pointing to a single calculus textbook that used to cost $275. 鈥淭aking a step backward and going back to the old approach is not the way to go. My office is open to making it as transparent as possible.鈥
The National Association of College Stores said student spending on course materials from an average of $662 in 2012-13 to $285 in 2022-23. Some chalk up the lower costs to the growth in inclusive access; others say it聽has happened because instructors have shifted to digital resources, with or without the programmes, and to using more free materials.
But even as the cost of course materials has fallen, the bill is still too high for some students, said Julia Seaman, research director for Bay View Analytics, a research firm that surveys students and faculty about educational resources and other topics.
糖心Vlog
She found in a recent survey of Pennsylvania students that the average cost of course materials was $90 per course 鈥 $360 for four classes. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 down from over $120 [per course] a few years ago, pre-pandemic, but that鈥檚 still a lot of money to ask an 18-year-old to pay up front for their courses,鈥 she said.
Michael Moore, a researcher at the University of New Hampshire and a consultant focused on course materials, says the proposed policy change would undo 鈥渢he positive work that鈥檚 been done in the last decade to help drive down the cost of course materials and increased access to course materials for students鈥. His research has found that students who participate in inclusive access do better in classes than those who do聽not.
He said that if the Education Department decides to require greater transparency and a clearer opt-out process, it would be an 鈥渆xcellent compromise鈥.
More convenience or more choices?
Like the industry experts, students also disagree about whether the access models are the best option for them.
Madison Lewis, a sophomore at Iowa State University, prefers the convenience of the inclusive access model. She鈥檚 a student ambassador for McGraw-Hill, a leading higher education textbook publisher, which means that she offers feedback on materials and shares information about the company鈥檚 resources with peers.
鈥淚 don鈥檛 have to worry about finding textbooks,鈥 said Lewis, who is majoring in communication studies. 鈥淚聽love being able to access everything that I聽need online and at my fingertips.鈥
This semester, she paid about $35 through her university鈥檚 inclusive access plan, which covered the materials for two classes. She also spent $87 on a textbook. Not all of her classes use or require textbooks. On average, she鈥檚 paid about $100 to $200 per semester for inclusive access, which Iowa State calls immediate access.
鈥淚f immediate access went away, I聽would definitely experience an increase in stress,鈥 she said. 鈥淭he beginning of every semester for college students is extremely stressful. Having to find all the required course materials online or go to a bookstore 鈥 it would be incredibly stressful and incredibly difficult.鈥
She pointed to an experience this year when she had to find a required psychology textbook, of which the campus bookstore had only 10聽copies.
鈥淪o in a course of 80 psychology students, only having 10聽copies of a textbook, it鈥檚 a nightmare,鈥 she said. 鈥淵ou are going to be fighting to the death for your textbook. I聽couldn鈥檛 imagine having to worry about that for every class.鈥 (The psychology class reverted to immediate access, and she was able to access the textbook online.)
Graceanne Hoback, a junior at Florida State University and leader of a campus textbook affordability campaign, is frustrated with her campus鈥 inclusive access system. In her first semester, she was charged $160 for two books required for a general education class. But those books were barely used, she said.
Ms Hoback is president of the Public Interest Research Group at Florida State, a chapter of a national organisation that works with students to tackle issues important to them, and she runs the Open Textbook Alliance, which aims to make course materials more accessible and affordable. As聽part of her work, Ms聽Hoback heard from students who did聽not know how to opt聽out 鈥 or did聽not realise that they could. Some said they have paid $500 in one semester for course materials through inclusive access.
鈥淣one of these costs are communicated up front,鈥 she said, adding that some of the course bundles include access codes for course software that is required for class assignments and quizzes or tests. 鈥淥pt-out is only feasible in courses where it鈥檚 only the textbook that you are getting.鈥
Ms Hoback said an opt-in model would be 鈥渓ess of a threat to students鈥 autonomy,鈥 although she would rather see additional measures to protect students and lower the cost of course materials.
鈥淯ltimately, we鈥檙e adults,鈥 she said. 鈥淚f a student chooses to spend $160 on their basic needs to sustain themselves through weeks of school rather than buying a course textbook and would take the hit of a B鈭 or a聽C, then I聽believe that that鈥檚 their choice in being an adult at a university. If the course textbook is that significant in a student succeeding in class, that should still be their choice.鈥
糖心Vlog
This is an edited version of a story that first appeared on .
Register to continue
Why register?
- Registration is free and only takes a moment
- Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
- Sign up for our newsletter
Subscribe
Or subscribe for unlimited access to:
- Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
- Digital editions
- Digital access to 罢贬贰鈥檚 university and college rankings analysis
Already registered or a current subscriber?








