To the Editor:
The problem of textbook prices is a long standing one on university campuses, and the possible solutions are more complicated than a bookstore setting a deadline and then blaming faculty for not following it. Publishers’ incentives for large-scale adoptions, the frequent re-issuing of “new” editions (with few changes from previous editions) and the cycle of course offerings at a particular university are all factors to consider. The used book market at Fairfield is small, as departments rarely, if ever, mandate that all faculty teaching a particular course use the same texts. (Such decisions are common at larger universities employing graduate student teaching assistants.) Also, because the student population is small and tracked (most students, in other words, graduate in 4 years), few courses are taught in both fall and spring semester. EN 11, for example, is offered in the fall but almost never in the spring. A faculty member’s failure, then, to turn in book orders for EN 12 on time would be unlikely to affect buyback of EN 11 books. Those books won’t be bought back because those courses are not going to be taught again the next semester. Upper-division courses are taught even less frequently and have even fewer students. So, again, buyback opportunities are going to be limited. I applaud the FUSA Senate for responding to students’ concerns, but I would urge Senate members to seek more creative solutions. Consider, as you would with any research project, what information you need to collect and why you are collecting it. Rather than ferreting out delinquent faculty members (and I am no doubt one of them), work with the bookstore and the Registrar’s office to determine which courses seem likely to yield timely buybacks. Approach those department chairs to facilitate targeted deadlines for those specific courses. Then you might actually see some results and save yourselves and your constituents some money.
Sincerely, Beth Boquet Professor of English Director, The Writing Center
Leave a Reply