[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

[ithiliana]

+100000000000000000000000000000000000000

That really pisses me off.

And I hope the internet cracks the code asap.

[angrymermaids]

Fuck. That. Shit.

I say that from the perspective of an undergrad whose soul bleeds a little bit more every time I have to purchase a $100+ textbook. I hope this guy steps on one Lego brick for every dollar this "earns" him.

[branchandroot]

OH MY GOD, AS IF TEXTBOOK COSTS WEREN'T INSANE ENOUGH ALREADY.

*breathing hard*

And what kind of idiot thinks that textbook piracy is enough of a problem to merit this attention in the first place, or that buying a used book should somehow be treated like piracy? Argh!

[hl]

I can help being relieved that this required the professors to go along with it if they want it to even start working; I don't think any professors here would adopt the method. ('piracy' is almost institutionalised -- and with reason, there's little chance most people could take the classes if they were paying full prize on textbooks.)

[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.

[dhobikikutti]

Oh my god how stupid can they get. :(

[somariel]

This is a ridiculous idea.

ETA: I sent the article to my dad and he said that it would be really interesting to see what reactions this guy has gotten from his fellow professors.

[tigerlily]

I hate that this exists, and that he works at my university. Talk about a lack of ethics and empathy for people.