Essay #1

E-Reader Textbooks:

“Cheaper textbooks” might end up costing students more

The Harvard University Library stands as the largest Academic library in the world. Boasting nearly 17 million traditional volumes and comprised of 70 subject focused libraries it easily denotes the extreme importance of books in higher education (Harvard University Library).  The Harvard University Library could be said to rest on the pinnacle of collegiate education. Even so, the majority of college students do not attend Harvard and despite the perceived prowess of a school’s library (or lack thereof), most students rely heavily on purchased textbooks throughout their education.  
Those who choose to purchase textbooks can end up spending vast amounts of money.  According to a study done by Northwestern Missouri State University the “typical college student spends up to $1,000 per year on textbooks” ( Rickman et al).  A student’s world is often filled with Ramen and Kraft Mac-n-Cheese and this goal of stretching pennies into dollars even causes some students to skip the textbook altogether (Kinzie).  Cutting back textbook expenses is desired by most, if not all students.  This is but one of many hopes the e-reader textbook promises to fulfill.  E-readers seem to offer a money saving and more convenient solution for college students everywhere.  However, this issue is one of considerable complexity.
The offers of money saved and less weight in the backpack look incredible while starring down at a shiny new touch screen Kindle.  But the differences between the written word and the word on the screen seem to dull the luster of the e-reader as an academic tool.  The transition to e-readers could be difficult and expensive, but that may be the least of the many bad side effect that e-readers have on students and educational systems.  The way the human brain reads is complex and could be hampered by the very convenience the e-reader advertises.  Studying skills of students could become poorer due to the distractions and multiplicities of e-reader.  Students may also find themselves paying more actual money for e-textbooks.  Whether or not a student pays more dollars for these e-books the costs will certainly be higher.  E-readers are now being considered an alternative to traditional textbooks on many college campuses (Foasberg).  Many factors prevent the widespread use of e-readers instead of text books from being a logical solution in the collegiate environment.  Furthermore, even if e-readers become the better solution, there is no need for colleges to introduce them to students.   
The e-reader offers numerous advantages to the standard book.  The e-readers most obvious perk is its size.  Instead of carrying 30 pound of books in a backpack, an e-reader can easily be slipped into a purse or pocket.  One can store hundreds of their favorite novels or textbooks in one little compact package.  E-readers allow one to easily shift between books, and explore subjects further a minute after the impulse to do so kicks in.  Many e-books are free and most e-books cost less than their printed counterparts.  William E DeLamater states in the article “How larger Font sizes impact reading and the implications for educational use of digital text readers”, that because font size can be made larger or smaller on an e-reader it can help those with poorer eyesight and those who are dyslexic.  However, this larger font size does not necessarily help reading comprehension (DeLamater).  Even though font size does not affect reading comprehension, other aspects of reading on an e-reader do.             
Maryanne Wolf, a cognitive neuroscientist, professor of child development and author of “Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain” said in a New York Times blog that “humans were never born to read”.  She goes on to state that the brain learns to “access and integrate with in 300 milliseconds a vast array of visual, semantic, sound and conceptual processes” this allows people to interpret and start to understand a word.  The majority of people are then able to “allocate an additional precious 100 to 200 milliseconds” to more abstract thoughts.  These more abstract thoughts are the “analysis” and interpretation that are “the apex of reading.” Wolf says that it is this more abstract second decoding that will be interrupted by reading on a screen.  She worries that “the young brain will never have time” to “learn to go deeper into the text.”  Wolf states that this is the result of all the very same distractions that make reading on an electronic device more convenient (Alan Liu et al).  
Wolf is not the only Neuroscientist to cite distraction as a chief concern when reading on e-readers. Sandra Aamodt, co author of “Welcome to Your Brain: Why You lose your Car Keys but Never Forget How to Drive and Other Puzzles of Everyday Life”,  states that it is the repeated “switching” between tasks that costs electronic readers the most. She mentions a study in which workers would switch tasks roughly “every three minutes” and it would take them an average of “over 23 minutes” to find their way back to the original task (Alan Liu et al).  David Gelernter, a professor of computer science at Yale University, adds that people switch projects approximately every ten and a half minutes (Alan Liu et al).  This short span of time is certainly not enough time to scan a book let alone read or study from one.  In fact, the study “A campus wide E-textbook Initiative” done at Northwest Missouri State University found that while the majority of students found no significant change in their study habits when using e-readers, most discovered they reduced the amount they read (Rickman et al).        
Aamodt points out another powerful advantage of paper texts. An e-reader does not allow one to flip “back and forth” though a text that requires this motion such as articles with endnotes or figures (Alan Liu et al).  A 2010 Seattle Times article, Amazon.com's Kindle fails first college test states that students do not read their textbooks in the same way they read other texts. The inability to flip through the pages on a e-reader vexed students. According to the article “80 per cent of MBA students at the University of Virginia” said they “would not recommend the Kindle DX” as a study aid (Martinez, 2010).  Anyone who has attempted to read something on an e-reader can see that it is difficult (and frustrating) to scan and review on an electronic device.
One simply cannot turn the pages as the same speed on an e-reader as they can in a book.  It is also impossible to leap from one paragraph to another with the same level ease because one has to scroll in order to move across the page on an e-reader. Once one finds an important note to remember, one can write in the margins of a book or highlight imperative text.  This is not a possibility in an e-reader.  Even if this was possible, one would not be able to scan with easy for these highlighted portions and side notation.  Scrolling, pressing a button (or tapping on the screen) and waiting the extra second (or nanosecond) for a page to load would be the cumbersome replacement to the quick and ingenious scanning capabilities of the brain— book combination.
Even all these flaws might be overlooked if an e-reader could save students money, but saving money with an e-reader is not a guaranty.  It is not hard to find students sharing textbooks in college and e-readers put a hamper on this cordiality.  If a student is wants to lend his/her chemistry book to a friend and it is uploaded on an e-reader, he/she also has to part with all the other books on the e-reader as well as the chemistry book.  The same problem would interfere with a group of students joint purchasing a textbook.  The study at Northwestern Missouri State University claimed that e-textbooks would save students a great amount of money.  However, all the data on traditional textbook prices in the study showed textbooks at the cost they would be if purchased new.  
Presuming that all (or even most) students buy new textbooks is not a wise assumption.  With websites such as Amazon and many stores selling used textbooks at heavily discounted prices it is not safe to assume students will pay full price.  The survey also neglects to mention that many students sell back their textbooks at the end of a semester or quarter.  If a new textbook costs a student $150 and they sell it back for $75, the student only actually lost $75 to use the textbook.  Similarly, if a student buys a used textbook for $45 and then sells said textbook back for $45, the student has not lost any money.  If a student is savvy, they could even make a slight profit.
To understand whether or not e-readers should be adopted by college students, it is important to understand the current use of e-readers.  A Pew Internet and American Life survey states that as of May of 2011, 12 percent of Americans own e-book readers.  This means the number of people owning e-readers has doubled since Pew’s 2010 survey showing a 6 percent ownership rate (Purcell).  This could be due in part to the lower cost of e-readers.  Amazon’s Founder and CEO, Jeff Bezos stated in a press release that when the company lowered the price of their Kindle “from $259 to $189”, the Kindle device sales “tripled” (Amazon).  As of October 2011, the Kindle ranges in price from $79 for the most basic version to $199 for the new Kindle Fire (Kindle Store).  The dramatic reduction in the price of e-readers could have easily led to this increase in sales.
The Pew Internet study also shows that “Hispanic adults, adults younger than age 65, college graduates and those living in households with incomes of at least $75,000” have a larger likelihood of owning an e-reader (Purcell).  College students remain missing from this collection of probable e-book readers.  This could be due to the expense of e-readers.  It could also be because students lack the leisurely reading time to read fiction and read largely non-fiction text.  A survey entitled Consumer Attitudes toward E-Book Reading, conducted in 2009 and 2010, found that “75 percent” of e-books purchased are fiction and textbooks make up only a dreary “11 percent of e-book purchases” (Meyer).  If one typically reads textbooks and views e-readers as a medium for fiction one would be less likely to purchase an e-reader.   
However, purchaser of an e-reader and the user of an e-reader are not necessarily the same. According to the Consumer Attitudes toward E-Book Reading study almost “half of all e-readers are acquired as a gift” (Meyer).  Who owns an e-reader largely depends on who everyone thinks would want an e-reader.  When giving gifts to a college student, socks and peanut butter come to mind, not e-readers.  On the other hand, giving an e-reader to a mother, fond of hiding romance novels in her nightstand is an ingenious idea.  
Understanding that students do not currently own or utilize e-readers on a massive scale is imperative when debating the introduction of e-readers by colleges as the primary textbook reading device.  To grasp this importance we simply need to look at economic law. Rational assumption theory tells us that “people do not intentionally make decisions that would leave them worse off” (Miller).  Students are people and therefore no different.  More students would own more e-readers and e-textbooks if they truly saved them time, energy and money.  The fact that students do not purchase or own a vast amount of e-readers and e-textbooks demonstrates the products ineffectiveness for use as textbooks.
There is no need to introduce e-readers into the college classes as a learning tool.  If they are effective, Adam Smith’s famed “invisible hand” of economics will place e-readers in the fists of knowledge hungry college students everywhere.  If in the future e-readers become a more effective medium with which to read textbooks, students will make the transition on their own.  No one needed to encourage students toward switching to laptop computers from desktop computers.  The collective student population made this transition because individual students saw that portability was a precious and desirable feature and laptops could offer it.  It is also not necessary for colleges to provide e-readers at a cheaper cost to students by subsidizing them.  If students become the market for e-readers then the price will find its new equilibrium naturally.  Anyone who understands even the most basic economic principles can tell you that supply and demand will handle price far better than someone tinkering around, even if that person has the best intentions.   
The reason college students use textbooks is to advance their education.  If students cannot absorb, contextualize and wrestle with an idea as they read than they will not be able to understand or learn.  If one cannot learn from a textbook then there is no reason for the textbook.  Following economic theory, students will make the switch to e-readers if they become effective.  This also proves that e-readers are not an effective learning tool for college students, because if they were, students would have already made the switch to e-readers.  E-readers are amazingly useful devises, but they do not function well as a textbook.  If colleges try to encourage the e-reader as a textbook equivalent, more problems will be created than solved.  If at some point this switch is made, it should happen naturally.  This change should be driven by the student’s demand not college politics.      

Works Cited

Alan Liu et al. “Does the Brain like E-Books?” New York Times. 29 May, 2010. Web. 3 Oct, 2011.
Amazon.com. Kindle Store. Web. 3 Oct, 2011.
Amazon.com. “Kindle Device Unit Sales Accelerate Each Month in Second Quarter; New $189 Price Results in Tipping Point for Growth”. Business Wire. NASDAQ: AMZN. 19 July, 2010. Web. 20 Sept. 2011
DeLamater, William E. “How larger font size impacts reading and the implications for educational use of digital text readers.” Ereadia. 29Apr, 2010. Web. 20 Sept 2011.  
Foasberg, Nancy M. "Adoption of E-Book Readers among College Students: A Survey." Information Technology & Libraries 30.3 (2011): 108-128. Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts. EBSCO. Web. 20 Sept. 2011.
Harvard University Library. “About the Harvard Library.” Web. 20 Sept. 2011.
Kinzie, Susan. “Swelling Textbook Costs Have College Students Saying ‘Pass’.” Washington Post. 23 Jan, 2006. Web. 21 Sept. 2011.
Martinez, Amy. “Amazon.com's Kindle fails first college test.” Business/ Technology. The Seattle Times. 25 May, 2010.  Web. 20 Sept. 2011.
Miller, Roger LeRoy. Economics Today. 16th ed. Pearson. 2012.
Meyer, Kat. “#FollowReader: Consumer Attitudes Toward
E-Book Reading,” blog posting, O’Reilly Radar.  Aug. 4, 2010. Web. 21 Sep. 2011.  
Purcell, Kristen. “E-reader ownership doubles in six months.” Pew Internet. 27 June. 2011. Web. 21 Sept. 2011
Rickman, Jon T. et al. “A Campus-Wide E-Textbook Initiative,” Educause Quarterly 32, no 2. 2009. Web. 21 Sept, 2011.