A Report on the Feasibility of Textbook Rental - IBHE

Detailed AAP Response to Illinois Draft <strong>Report</strong> on TextbooksEXECUTIVE SUMMARY• The focus of textbook legislation has been on lowering student spending on textbooks, notcurtailing the “rising cost” of textbooks, as stated in paragraph one. Any reference to “costs” or“prices” could be problematic because they could be construed as an attempt to regulate prices ormandate publishing business practices and would be unconstitutional and violations of the FirstAmendment to the Constitution and the U.S. Commerce Clause. See Appendix A – Weil,Gotshal, Manges letter.• In paragraph one, line two of the Summary the sentence reads “remedies to the financial burdencollege students face.” According to studies, 50 percent or more of students are unconcernedabout the price of textbooks. For balance, you might want to change the sentence to read “somecollege students.”Findings• Bullet 1, page 5 – The Government Accountability Office report is cited incorrectly. The costinformation is based on figures from 1987 to 2004, not 2005. Additionally, the Consumer PriceIndex (CPI) used by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) includes any book designatedas a required text, which could include many novels, technical books, professional journals, etc.that are not sold or distributed by individual publishers of postsecondary textbooks. AAPobjected to the CPI figure that, by its own disclaimer in the GAO report, before 2001, did notaccurately reflect the increasing penetration of lower-cost alternatives that are replacingunabridged, hardcover texts. Consequently, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data exaggeratestextbook price increases over the course of the reporting period. On page 32 of the report, GAOalso acknowledges "textbooks are increasingly wrapped in packages along with additionalmaterials, making it difficult to collect all of the qualitative characteristics of the textbooks. As aresult, it is difficult for BLS to obtain the information necessary for quality adjustment, and othertimes the price recorded as the textbook price may also include ancillary materials."A paper entitled “Faculty Selection and Use of Publisher-Provided Textbooks and SupplementaryMaterials in the United States” released only last week also addresses the weaknesses in the CPI’spricing model (see page 12).(www.immagic.com/eLibrary/ARCHIVES/GENERAL/IMM/I061215F.pdf)• The numbers on spending by Illinois students appear to be far higher than those cited for studentsin other states. Is there a reason for this difference in spending? The report could also providecontext by explaining these costs as a percentage of total educational costs, including tuition andfees, room and board, and transportation costs. Textbook costs for two-year and four-yearstudents average between six and seven percent of annual educational costs, according to theCollege Board’s Trends in College Pricing, 2006.• Bullet 4, page 6 --o Bundling – A textbook packaged with supplemental learning materials will, as one wouldexpect, generally cost more than a standalone textbook just as a car or computer withadded features will cost more than those without extra features. The benefit of thepackage is that, collectively, the materials cost less that when sold separately. Publisherscan and do sell supplemental materials separately. This practice of separate sales doesnot, as some suggest, reduce students’ spending if they purchase all of the materialsadopted for their class by their instructor.o Publication of new editions – Although there is a great debate over the issuance of neweditions, recent research by Nebraska Book Company, one of the country’s largest used-72-