The sand is really starting to shift under the traditional textbook providers as the open course content movement shows signs of, well, movement. Already this year there are two events that point to shifts in how instructors and students can shortcut the complex ecosystem of textbooks as we know it today. First, Flat World Knowledge — a provider of open access course materials — launched earlier this year. Second, new legislation has been proposed in the U.S. Congress to mandate that some agencies use their funding to produce open access course materials.
Flat World Knowledge Launches
Flat World Knowledge launched earlier this year, and it brings an entrepreneurial feel to the staid subject of textbooks. Billed as “the world’s first publisher of open-source college textbooks,” their website has a scrappy, web2.0 start-up feel to it. It should probably come as no surprise, then, that they are a web2.0 start-up — they recently received $8 million in venture capital funding. To faculty and staff in higher education, Flat World Knowledge describes themselves this way:
We preserve the best of the old – textbooks by leading experts.
Then we flip it on its head.
Our books cost $0 online. We provide paperbacks, audio books, and self-print versions for under $30. Our books are open for you to edit for your class. Our new editions are on your terms. We publish them – you decide if and when to use them.
They offer free versions of their textbooks online then charge for various derivatives and additions. Instructors can modify the textbook — rearranging chapters, add or delete chunks of text, and (coming soon according to the site) be able to add materials based on a database of what is available at Flat World Knowledge. (One has to register on the site to do this, but you can watch a video tutorial to get an idea about how it works.) Students get flexibility, too; one scenario from their website is:
Kayo doesn’t read books online. She orders the black and white softcover for about $29 bucks. It shows up in a few days. Too bland for her friend Sam – he orders the color edition for $59. Not Sharon. She commutes everyday, so nothing but the audio book on her iPod will do. Then there’s Chaz. He’s indecisive. He decides, well, not to decide. He’ll order the self-print .pdf chapters when he needs them for $1.99 per chapter. Cool. And don’t forget Tessa. She never has enough time. She’ll cut to the chase with our mp3 study guides, mobile flash cards, and online practice quizzes with feedback. That’s convenient. That’s choices. That’s Flat World Knowledge.
Right now their catalog is focused heavily on business topics, but they are looking to expand beyond it. (Into sociology, geographic information systems, and genetics according to their latest newsletter.) Here are the course materials available now and what they have in the pipeline.
| Title | Author(s) | Pub Date | Relevant Course(s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exploring Business | Collins, Karen | Feb-09 | Introduction to Business |
| Fundamentals of Income Tax Theory and Practice | Kiefer, Dieter | Mar-09 | Federal Taxation; Federal and State Taxation |
| Introduction to Economic Analysis | McAfee, R. Preston; Lewis, Tracy R. | Mar-09 | Intermediate Microeconomics, Managerial Economics |
| Organizational Behavior | Bauer, Talya; Erdogan, Berrin | Mar-09 | Organizational Behavior |
| Principles of Management | Carpenter, Mason; Bauer, Talya; Erdogan, Berrin | Mar-09 | Principles of Management |
| Launch! Advertising and Promotion in Real Time | Solomon, Michael; Duke Cornell, Lisa; Nizan, Amit | Mar-09 | Advertising and Promotion |
| Principles of Macroeconomics | Rittenberg, Libby; Tregarthen, Timothy | Apr-09 | Principles of Macroeconomics |
| Money and Banking | Wright, Robert E.; Quadrini, Vincenzo | Apr-09 | Financial Markets and Institutions, Money and Banking |
| Principles of Microeconomics | Rittenberg, Libby; Tregarthen, Timothy | Apr-09 | Principles of Microeconomics |
| Risk Management for Enterprises and Individuals | Baranoff, Etti; Brockett, Patrick Lee; Kahane, Yehuda | Apr-09 | Insurance, Risk Management |
| Atlas Black: Managing to Succeed | Short, Jeremy; Bauer, Talya; Ketchen, Dave; Simon, Len | Apr-09 | Organizational Behavior, Principles of Management |
| Principles of Economics | Rittenberg, Libby; Tregarthen, Ti | May-09 | Principles of Economics |
| Financial Accounting | Hoyle, Joe Ben; Skender, C. J. | Oct-09 | Financial Accounting |
| Basics of Oral Business Communication | McLean, Scott | Oct-09 | Oral Business Communication |
| Basics of Written Business Communication | McLean, Scott | Oct-09 | Written Business Communication |
| Information Systems: A Manager’s Guide to Harnessing Technology | Gallaugher, John | Oct-09 | Management Information Systems |
| Principles of Marketing | Tanner, Jeff; Raymond, Mary Anne; Schuster, Camille | Oct-09 | Principles of Marketing |
| Creative Destruction: The Economics of E-Commerce and the Internet | Koch, James | Feb-10 | Electronic Commerce |
| Personal Finance | Siegel, Rachel | Feb-10 | Personal Finance |
| Project Management in a Virtual World | Darnall, Russell; Preston, John M. | Feb-10 | Project Management |
| Sustainability, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship | Larson, Andrea | Feb-10 | Entrepreneurship, Sustainability |
| Franchising: A Graphic Novel | Combs, Jim; Ketchen, Dave; Short, Jeremy; Simon, Len | May-10 | Franchising, Small Business Mgmt |
H.R. 1464 — The LOW COST Act
The title of this bill is cleverly named — the Learning Opportunities With Creation of Open Source Textbooks (LOW COST) Act. Let’s set aside my twitching in response to this use of phrase “open source” in this context — the correct form of “open” is probably “open access” — but that would ruin the acronym. (I had the same reaction to how the Flat World Knowledge folks used this phrase, too, so I should probably get over it.) The bill would mandate federal agencies that spend more than $10 million on science education to spend 2% of their budget on the development of related, college-level educational resources.
SEC. 3. OPEN SOURCE MATERIAL REQUIREMENT FOR FEDERAL AGENCIES.
- In General- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the head of each agency that expends more than $10,000,000 in a fiscal year on scientific education and outreach shall use at least 2 percent of such funds for the collaboration on the development and implementation of open source materials as an educational outreach effort in accordance with subsection (b).
- Requirements- The head of each agency described in subsection (a) shall, under the joint guidance of the Director of the National Science Foundation and the Secretary of Energy, collaborate with the heads of any of the agencies described in such subsection or any federally supported laboratory or university-based research program to develop, implement, and establish procedures for checking the veracity, accuracy, and educational effectiveness of open source materials that–
- contain, at minimum, a comprehensive set of textbooks or other educational materials covering topics in college-level physics, chemistry, or math;
- are posted on the Federal Open Source Material Website;
- are updated prior to each academic year with the latest research and information on the topics covered in the textbooks or other educational materials available on the Federal Open Source Material Website; and
- are free of copyright violations.
The bill is sponsored by Representative Bill Foster of Illinois, and it is currently in the House committees on Education and Labor as well as Science and Technology. There are no co-sponsors to the bill, which I don’t think is a good sign, so I’m not expecting it to go far. Still, the sentiment is nice, so it is one to watch.
I’ve also heard through the grapevine that there is a bill being worked up to be proposed in the U.S. Senate that would set aside money for the development of open access course materials. So, at the very least, the notion of open access course materials seems to be catching on from top-down funders.





3 Comments
Hi there. I know that you are enthusiastic about Flat World Knowledge’s stated goals, but have you actually read what they’ve placed on offer? The books are in several cases well-known ‘road kill’–i.e., they failed spectacularly as traditional textbooks, and the rights to them then reverted to their authors. Reading into a few of these, it’s pretty clear what they share in common, and why they failed the first time around: they exhibit an utter lack of serious editorial attention.
Sure, Flat World’s concept is compelling. And the web site is ’scrappy’ and intriguing (right down to the Woody-Allen-esque voiceover). But do the books live up to the expectations set up by the marketing and the message? Not by a long shot.
I know that you are enamored of Flat World Knowledge’s message and marketing, but have you actually read any of the books on offer? A few of them are well-known ‘road-kill’: i.e., they died an ignominious death in the traditional textbook market, and then the rights to them reverted to the author. Others are new books by people whom one would be hard-pressed to identify as “leading experts”, no matter how loosely one defines that phrase. Whether road-kill or new, however, all of them exhibit a pronounced lack of editorial care and guidance. Just check out the first chapter of McAfee’s INTRODUCTION TO ECONOMIC ANALYSIS, if you want to see what I mean. Although I’m admittedly biased on this point, it seems to me that the intellectual labor known colloquially as ‘editing’ is a lot more important than those beating the ‘open access’ drum seem to acknowledge; in fact, it’s arguable that the quality of a textbook’s editing is the primary reason for that book’s success or failure. No amount of collaboration or customization can untangle the mess that a poorly written, badly edited textbook leaves in its wake. But at least their site is cool–right down to the Woody-Allen-esque voiceover.
Unfortunately, gotta agree with Peter. Their Intro to Business book by Karen Collins is a retread of a failed book from Prentice Hall. I think there are at least a couple others on their list like that as well. Wouldn’t call her a “leading expert” in the field of business either. If you actually take the time to read some of the stuff they’re offering (I have), its not very impressive, which is too bad. They have a good PR firm, give them that. However, for all their purported talk about the importance of quality, I think they are counting on the hype about their format and lower pricing trumping quality issues. I also think their site goes overboard with trying to convince people how “cool” they are.. pretty nauseating after awhile. Will be interesting to see how successful they really are, and whether they can actually make enough serious money with their business model to sustain it
Post a Comment