Last month, a rule-making committee failed to reach consensus on a U.S. Department of Education proposal that will bar colleges from automatically billing students for books and supplies. Now, institutions and curriculum developers nervously await the department’s decision on whether it will advance the proposed regulation.
And they have good reason to feel concerned. If enacted, this new federal rule would have an immediate, significant, negative and deleterious impact on students, including those at hundreds of community colleges across the U.S.
The department’s proposal targets “inclusive access” programs, which have helped colleges and universities better ensure that students have access to the high-quality course materials they need to succeed. The regulation would change the program’s opt-out clause to opt-in. This seemingly simple change will dramatically blunt inclusive access’s impact, reversing a decade’s worth of progress in driving down the costs of course materials and improving student outcomes.
Comparing the models
The traditional purchasing models most policymakers and regulators remember from their college years for purchasing course materials were built around this “opt-in” approach. It didn’t work then, and it doesn’t work now. Under this model, students are told which course materials are required for a given course, and then it’s up to them to find the materials on their own — and at a price they can afford.
It’s a process littered with frustrating hurdles, and it has led many students to view course materials as optional. Students on financial aid sometimes wait days, even weeks, for their financial aid to be disbursed so that they have the funds available to purchase required course materials. If the materials are sold out at the local bookstore or they cannot locate an affordable option online, students often wait until they are behind in the course before finding what they need or electing to purchase.
An alarming number of students choose to forgo purchasing the materials completely, even though these materials may be required as assigned readings or homework and completed as part of their overall grade. For courses using digital materials, the lack of immediate access while a student decides if or when to purchase means students do not have access to the resources needed to complete assignments.
This opt-in — or optional — approach leaves many students unable to fully engage with course content consistently throughout the semester, which impacts their ability to be successful in the course. Research shows that there is a significant relationship between textbook usage and a student’s course grades and GPA. Studies have found that delaying the acquisition of required materials, as too many students often do under traditional models, harms students’ chances of success.
Inclusive access, on the other hand, offers students “first-day, consistent access” to all course materials, delivered digitally and seamlessly through an institution’s learning management system (LMS). This greatly reduces the complexity and unnecessary burden of obtaining materials for students.
Research shows that the proliferation of inclusive access policies in recent years has also helped lead to a dramatic drop in the price of course materials. In the 2007 to 2008 academic year, students spent an average of $701 each year on course materials, according to the National Association of College Stores. By 2022, students were spending just $285.
The Open Books initiative
As the assistant vice chancellor for instructional innovation and support at San Jacinto College, a Hispanic-Serving Institution in the Greater Houston area, I have seen firsthand the challenges students encounter in obtaining course materials. If faced with the choice to pay for a month’s worth of groceries or a textbook, our students will more often than not choose the option that doesn’t leave them hungry.
San Jacinto College has been a pioneer in addressing these challenges through our Open Books initiative, which champions inclusive access as a solution to ensure student success. At San Jacinto, the success of our inclusive access program speaks for itself. Since 2019, we have seen an estimated $25 million in savings for our students through inclusive access. We work diligently to notify students of their options, and still our opt-out rate is only 2%. This demonstrates that students appreciate the easy access to affordable materials. I have heard countless stories of students who have struggled under traditional models but thrived under inclusive access.
Research shows that these kinds of programs bolster course completion rates and improve student learning for all students, regardless of their backgrounds.
I urge policymakers to recognize the importance of inclusive access in improving affordability and student success, especially at community colleges. Shifting to an “opt-in” model — as this new rule would necessitate all colleges to do — risks dismantling the structure and support students have come to rely on in accessing course materials. It would turn back the clock to when course materials were viewed as merely optional and not as the crucial learning tools they are today.
Inclusive access is not just about providing course materials; it’s about empowering students to succeed. Rolling back the innovations in instructional technology, course materials, and course design will negatively impact the very students that many of our elected representatives say they want to help. Policymakers must work to improve inclusive access in higher education — not weaken it or throw it away — so that institutions can ensure that all students have the resources they need to thrive.
