You Need a Strategy
The question for many academic librarians is “How can I get a textbook revolution started at my institution?” It helps to have a strategy. Here's how most of us emerge as advocates for OER on our campuses. A typical starting point is hearing about OER from a speaker at a conference or learning from a colleague at another library. It may be an article that builds excitement about the possibilities. That can lead to the development of a local resource guide about OER. Then we attend a professional development program to further enhance our knowledge of OER. Eventually we take the message out to faculty to identify our idea champions. With support it may lead to an organized project to help or incentivize faculty to adopt OER. While there's no exact count, since 2010 when there were two or three organized alternate textbook projects, in 2016 there are at least a dozen initiatives assisting faculty to adopt OER. While that's good progress, the academic library community could be achieving greater progress if there was an effective institutional strategy to follow that would lead to better results in less time.Five Institutional Strategies
Based on my own experience and others that have launched successful programs for their campuses, here are five specific strategies academic librarians can use to launch an OER program for textbook affordability at their institution:What About Reserves?
Did you notice that buying textbooks and making them accessible through the library's reserve operation is not part of the institutional strategy? That's by design. Acquiring textbooks to put on reserve is a costly and unsustainable strategy that benefits only a limited number of students, while supporting the currently broken model of commercial textbook publishing and depleting the library materials budget of much needed resources. You will no doubt hear that textbook-on-reserve programs always gratify students, so academic librarians are attracted to them as easy wins. Even if the students ask for it, which they invariably will because they want to avoid paying for textbooks, just say no and explain to students that there are better ways to achieve institutional textbook affordability. Then do something about it.Getting Started
Taking the first steps on a new initiative is never easy. This is especially true for textbook affordability because it impacts many different constituencies on campus and requires faculty to agree to a change that can be time consuming—and time is one resource faculty rarely have in excess. But it can be easier when there’s an institutional strategy in place that brings together a coalition of partners, including faculty, to achieve specific outcomes. My university has taken years to establish a textbook affordability task force. It brings to the table all the right parties to identify and put into place a strategy for moving forward. I am optimistic it will greatly advance textbook affordability at our institution. Make that a linchpin of your institutional strategy and the other pieces will fall into place. You now have five ways to get started.This article is a bit misleading, with the information that IMLS will be "eliminated." The order actually states that non-statutory components and functions of this and other agencies shall be eliminated.
Please think about the harm that this will do to our very important libraries and all the people it helps. It's not just book lending but so much more.
So what does that mean? I am not disagreeing with you, but what does it mean for the 'non-statutory components and functions" to be eliminated?
"First Last" It is not misleading, it quotes the actual wording: "the Executive Order calls for the “non-statutory components and functions” of the affected agencies to “be eliminated to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law.”"
Very informative. Thank you. I do agree that it is a bit misleading. Though some factual details of the order are laid out, the first sentence of the article itself implies IMLS is being cut in its entirety.
Thank you so much for writing this. IMLS is a treasure. I think one of your stats got a little garbled in translation. You said "used by more than 1.2 billion people each year." and the ALA's statement says "more than 1.2 billion in-person patron visits every year" which I think means some of those are one patron visiting multiple times. As popular as libraries are in the US, and they are VERY popular, I don't think they attract 3x the population of the country. Thanks again.
We are currently offering this content for free. Sign up now to activate your personal profile, where you can save articles for future viewing