Academic Librarians Examination of University Students’ and Faculty’s Perceptions of Open Educational Resources

Student Perceptions of Textbook Cost on Academic Success

Overall, most students felt that their academic success was negatively impacted due to the high cost of textbooks. Roughly 65% of students, on average, indicated they did not purchase a textbook because of the cost. More than half of those students felt that foregoing the textbook negatively influenced their grade in the course, and approximately 37% had dropped a course because they were unable to afford the textbook. For students who continued in a course without the required textbook, 20% believed that not purchasing the text caused them to fail or withdraw from the course.

Similar results were found for students who delayed purchasing a textbook because of the cost. Across the ten institutions surveyed, 86.6% of students responded that they had to delay purchasing a textbook due to the cost. A majority (61%) of students who were unable to afford the textbook at the start of the term felt that the delay negatively influenced their final grade in the course.

According to some students, high textbook costs delayed them from achieving their academic goals. Of the students surveyed, 37% said they registered for fewer courses because they had already allocated so much of their funds towards expensive textbooks. Moreover, 33% of participants indicated that their decision to not register for specific classes was influenced by knowledge of the materials that would be required and the associated cost.

Table 1 provides an overview of the 2,574 student responses to the survey questions related to academic success. The percentages of the table regarding perceptions of academic success are based on total student participants, but it is important to note that the logic of the survey only sent students to some questions based on their response to previous questions regarding delay and forgoing purchasing textbooks based on cost.

We then analyzed differences between two-year and four-year institutions. Chi-square residual analyses indicated that students at two-year colleges were more likely to respond that not purchasing a textbook negatively influenced their final grade. Furthermore, they also were more likely to report that the cost of textbooks caused them to register for fewer courses. When asked if not purchasing a textbook has caused them to fail or withdraw late from a course, a higher proportion of students at two-year colleges answered yes. There were no other statistically significant differences between the two groups.

How Students Would Repurpose Saved Money

Students were asked the question: if you didn’t have to spend money on textbooks, how else would you use the funds? Because each response could receive multiple codes in our qualitative analysis, there were 2,832 codes generated from the 2,564 students who chose to respond to this question. Their responses are summarized in Table 3.

Food/Groceries. Students shared hardships they had encountered when budgeting for food throughout the semester. Students said they would use the money “to not be as hungry” or stated that they “would buy food,” which may “seem silly, but food is normally what [they] end up going without in order to make ends meet.” Some students attributed this lack of money for food to textbook costs. A student stated that they “remember living off $7 a week my freshman year even when [they] worked 15 hours a week. [The student] “literally didn’t eat because [their] textbooks were expensive.” Another student stated that they would “buy food, [because] last year [they] couldn’t afford both.” There were traditional and nontraditional students who shared these sentiments. Many students, both single and with families, were not always in a position to buy healthy food for themselves or sometimes buy food at all. These students identified that the reduction of textbook cost could alleviate some of this pressure.

Education. The second most prominent category towards which students would reallocate funds from textbook savings was education. Students stated that they would use the money directly towards other education costs. To students, this often meant paying their tuition or buying other educational materials required. Students expressed that finding the funds to pay for tuition can be burdensome, with comments like: “I would add the money to savings to pay tuition for next semester. Paying for school is the biggest stressor in my life.” There were other students though who stated they would pay for tutoring expenses or that they would be able to take more classes and graduate sooner.

Housing. Another expense that students would reallocate textbook costs towards was rent or housing. These students were not homeless; rather, they stated that they wished to improve their housing situation or live closer to campus so that they could spend more time studying rather than travelling.

Savings. Students expressed that savings could be extremely helpful for them as they prepare to encounter life events that may be financially burdensome. One student shared the comment: “I would put it right into savings. I get a Pell grant and a half tuition scholarship each semester, so if I can save 300–500 [dollars] on books then that helps my emergency fund.”

Transportation. Students also stated that they would use the funds for transportation, whether that meant paying for their car, their fuel, their auto insurance, or on campus parking fees. Students indicated that they do not always live close enough to campus to walk, and that they commute to get to their classes.

Student Loans/Work. Many students stated that they would use the money to either pay off existing loans or use the money to avoid taking additional loans and paying the interest associated with those loans. Although textbooks may seem like a less significant portion of the cost of higher education, some students stated that they would not need to take out any loans if they did not have to pay for textbooks. A student shared that they “just simply wouldn’t be in debt right now” if they did not have to pay for textbooks. Another student commented that they “would be able to take out smaller loans for school but right now [their] textbooks take up the majority of [their] money.” Students who mentioned using the money towards their student loans commented on the significance of these funds towards the alleviation of their surmounting debts.

There was a smaller group of students who said they would use the money saved towards their education in an indirect way. Forty-eight students stated that if they would need to work less hours to remain financially stable. A student posited: “I wouldn’t have to work as many hours, and I could use that time to get ahead in my schoolwork instead of always struggling to stay caught up.”

Recreation. Respondents stated that they would use funds saved from textbook costs for recreation. Although lower in response than some other categories, there were 204 students who would reallocate these funds for recreation. These students felt that recreation may round out their college experience. In a response to this question, a student remarked on textbook savings: “It would also allow me to participate in more extracurricular activities that require money. Such involvement would enrich my academic experience.” Some students also noted that they would only use the money for recreation after they had met their basic needs.

Family Obligations. Many students responded that they would use the funds for familial obligations. One hundred and twenty-seven responses related to this category, and although this reflects 5% of the responses, comments regarding these obligations reflect a vulnerable population. One respondent stated: “I am a single mother raising two teenagers who need things like food and clothing, shoes and fees for school, sports and hobbies. I would spend that money on my children, they often go without because I am a full-time student and I work 2 part-time jobs.” Several responses reflected the same sentiment. Other general living expenses included clothing and medical expenses.

Other. There were a number of lesser mentioned categories towards which students expressed they would reallocate their funds. These were expenses and responses such as investments, alleviating college costs on their parents, and charitable donations/service.

Students’ Feelings About Textbook Costs

The last question of the student survey invited participants to share any final thoughts they had regarding textbook costs. The responses to these questions were coded into four categories: positive, meaning that something complimentary was said (e.g., “Textbook costs, in my opinion, are worth it”); neutral, in which nothing good nor bad was stated about textbook costs (e.g., “I don’t feel that they are unreasonable”); negative, statements that showed a dislike for textbook costs (e.g., “Many professors like to use the most recent edition of a textbook despite little being changed and this is more expensive for students in the long run, which is unfair for poor students”); and extremely negative. Comments coded as extremely negative contained a sense that students were being exploited (e.g., “The school bookstore extorts students into paying outrageously high prices by creating ISBN packages ‘unique’ to the school that we are required to purchase through the school even though the same books can be found individually online for a fraction of the cost”). Table 4 provides an overview of how the 1,733 responses from students who responded to the final survey question were coded.

There were no differences in responses between two-year and four-year schools. More than one-quarter of all comments were vociferously opposed to high textbook costs. One issue that was brought up multiple times was access codes. For example, one student wrote,

“[Access codes] are a scam and, even worse, they are a scam that students cannot avoid. Every required online lab/homework/study software provided by the major publishers (Pearson, Cengage, etc.) has been nothing but a financial hindrance on my education. These software are never intuitive, and they are never useful. More importantly, they are never worth their $50–300 price tags. They exist as a play on market competition and the used book market. What easier target than students who have a GPA and an education dependent on the course materials required by a professor?”

Multiple comments expressed similar student outrage at not being able to access used books because of access codes.

Faculty Member Textbook Selection

There was an approximately equal number of participants from each faculty rank: adjunct faculty (24.1%), assistant professor (24.9%), associate professor (26.2%), and full professor (24.8%). We found that a significantly higher proportion of adjunct faculty required students to purchase a textbook or other commercially published resource in their classes. In addition to requiring commercial texts, adjunct faculty were less likely to personally select the required material and relied more heavily on department mandated texts for both lower- and upper-division courses. This means adjunct faculty required their students to purchase texts that they were not selecting but might have been required by the department. There were no differences between two-year and four-year colleges in how faculty members selected/required textbooks.

Faculty Willingness to Use OER

Approximately 90% of participants indicated that they would be willing to use suitable OER for their courses. Additionally, almost half of those who participated in the survey expressed a desire for help finding open textbooks in their subject area. This latter finding was particularly notable, given that survey respondents gave up their anonymity by submitting their email address to allow an academic librarian to contact them and aid them in finding OER. There were no differences between two-year and four-year institutions in terms of faculty members’ willingness to use and desire to receive help finding open textbooks.

Faculty Perceived Cost of Textbooks and Willingness to Use OER

We then analyzed if there was any correlation between faculty members’ awareness of textbook costs and their willingness to use OER in their course. As shown in Table 5, less than half (43.3%) of faculty members knew the list price of the text they required (faculty who failed to respond to this question were counted as not knowing the cost). However, there was no significant difference between faculty who knew the price of the textbooks they require and those who did not in terms of their willingness to use OER.

Faculty Reasons for Willingness to Use OER

When faculty members responded that they would be willing to use an open textbook if a suitable alternative could be identified, they were invited to explain why they might be willing to do so. The prominent codes that emerged from the 1,052 faculty member responses were: cost savings, adaptability/pedagogical advantages, benefits of a digital format for student use, and general willingness to experiment. Table 6 shows the distribution of codes between these various categories.

Cost savings. The overwhelming number of responses (73.6% of total responses) stated that their primary motivation for adopting an open textbook, if there was a suitable alternative, was cost savings for students. For example, a faculty member at a two-year institution stated a motivation for lower textbook costs “because I service some of the poorest students in the state.” The sentiment was shared by the majority of respondents who were interested in the financial well-being of their students and who stated that if a suitable alternative was available at low or little cost, that they would certainly consider adopting it.

Pedagogical benefits and customization. The ability to modify, adapt, and use portions of the text that would support learning, as well as combine textbooks was an incentive for adoption for 170 faculty members (16.2% of total). A faculty member noted regarding open textbooks that they “facilitate a certain flexibility to faculty. [They] allow faculty to move away from the one size fit all model.” Faculty respondents noted that this could improve their teaching, could improve the specificity and variety of content their students are reading, and do so in a way that integrates well with their personally created content for the class.

Easy access for students and faculty. Although not all students and faculty have a preference for digital textbooks, there was mention of the portability and convenience that accompanies digital textbook use. Faculty noted that students are often already comfortable with these formats. This can ensure that texts are brought back and forth to class and home, can be annotated online, are searchable, and can be used effectively by students. Although the digital format may not have been the primary motivator, there was a collective acknowledgment that current students are familiar enough with online materials to use a digital text effectively.

Up-to-date materials. Thirty-nine faculty members (3.7%) noted that the likelihood of these texts being up-to-date is higher than that of the traditional publisher because edits can easily be made online and users do not have to wait through a multi-year publication process. One faculty member noted specifically that this has been their experience with open textbooks, and that they have in some instances themselves been able to ensure it is up-to-date. Textbooks being current was especially important for faculty members who teach students new technologies.

Faculty Reasons for Not Using OER

Based on their responses to previous questions, only a small portion of faculty were asked why they would not be willing to use an open textbook. In total, 111 faculty respondents chose to answer the question why would you not be willing to use an open textbook? Their responses generated 115 codes that are summarized in Table 7.

The largest response category indicated that faculty members preferred that students use a hardcopy of the text (perhaps not knowing that OER can be in hard copy). Other popular reasons for not being willing to adopt a textbook were suspicion of the quality of a free resource and reliance upon supplemental resources provided by the traditional publisher. A respondent noted that the faculty makes “heavy use of automatic grading technology, and “unless that is available, [they are] not interested in any other textbook.” Other responses included that the time to adopt would be too cumbersome, they are not comfortable with the idea of academic work being available for free online, and that they are comfortable with the resources they are currently using.

For the question of why or why not faculty would be willing to adopt OER, there were no statistically significant differences between the responses of those at two-year and four-year institutions.