[research] Ever wonder what bad scholarship is really like? This is it

[unjapanologist]

There's a lot of different ways in which you can screw up as an academic, from doing sloppy research full of methodological flaws and bad analysis (maybe so you can quickly monetize it as a popular book), to deliberately plagiarizing and denying other researchers credit for their work in an academic economy where people's reputations and jobs depend on being credited.

However, those are really just procedural issues in the end. There's also scholarship that is bad because it goes completely against the very purpose of scholarship, which is to advance knowledge for the good of the public that pays your salary. (In my book.)

From a bunch of people on Twitter, meet Joseph Henry Vogel, a professor of economics at the University of Puerto Rico-Rio Piedras who has patented a method to stop students from sharing textbooks with each other so that the publishing industry can get more money out of them.

The idea is simple. As part of a course, students will have to participate in a web-based discussion board, an activity which counts towards their final grade. To gain access to the board students need a special code, which they get by buying the associated textbook.

Students who don’t pay can’t participate in the course and therefore get a lower grade.

The system ensures that students can’t follow courses with pirated textbooks, as tens of thousands are doing today. Lending books from a library or friend, or buying books from older students, isn’t allowed either. At least, not when the copyright holders don’t get their share.

Vogel’s idea leaves the option open for students to use second-hand textbooks, but they still have to buy an access code at a reduced price. This means publishers can charge multiple times for a book that was sold only once.

Needless to say, publishers are excited about gaining more control in the classroom.

This is bad, bad way for an academic at a public university to spend the tax money that allows him to do his research. Joseph Henry Vogel's invention is bad not because the research behind it was flawed*, or because Joseph Henry Vogel is a bad person in some way. It's bad because it tries to solve an issue in a way that not only does not contribute to the good of the public (propping up anti-student legacy publishing models is not a contribution), but actively works against the public and is proud of that. As TorrentFreak notes, there's nothing admirable about a solution to "piracy" that prevents university students from sharing knowledge, and students without deep pockets from helping each other learn.

ETA: The patent itself is interesting reading too. It's especially creative in the way it distributes blame for the high prices of text books (piraaates) and the way it considers remuneration for the "inventor".


*Although this invention is fatally flawed. If the students don't crack that code themselves, somebody on the internet will help them out. I have no idea why any publisher might think this code will be uncrackable, unlike every other code in the whole of history. This invention will result in very little extra income for anyone, but a lot of useless enforcement costs.

Comments

[kimboo_york]

Pretty much a big "ditto" to your comments and those of everyone else here, with a side note that the professors I know and work with (at a public US university) would absolutely not want to participate; they are constantly trying to circumvent the need for students to buy textbooks these days, most of them scanning relevant chapters/readings and posting them as PDF files. I'm almost shocked when I do have to buy a textbook for a class. Most of them hate the text book industry, having paid in to it in their own student days, and also because simply textbooks are generally at least a year or two out of date.

Also, yeah, come ON: that code would be cracked w/in days of being implemented. Honestly I'm not sure how much this is going to be popular with textbook companies either because of the extra work they would have to do on the backend to comply.

Dismal idea.

[unjapanologist]

*nod* The only way I can see this being implemented is if they somehow manage to strong-arm professors into it, but unless they pull off something incredibly weird on an institutional level... The benefits for institutions/professors just aren't there at the moment, as far as I can tell, and the system in and of itself provides nothing new compared to other educational offerings. Online discussion boards? Had that since the dawn of time.

[kimboo_york]

Online discussion boards? Had that since the dawn of time.

LOL I suppose that is true but you make me feel pretty damn old. :D

[unjapanologist]

*cough* It's a figure of speech, obviously.