Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They said that this book was required. We could not find the number anywhere else.
When you received an empty 3 ring binder, did you compare that to what you thought you were buying? Was it by chance included along with a loose-leaf version of an actual textbook?
Now, I know textbooks come in all ranges of price but what gives? If I have a scholarship that pays for the course but not for the textbooks then it isn't really paying for the course is it?
It's like buying a car but you have to pay for all the fluids after you sign the lease.
Is there a way to get around this? Would it have to be on a semester basis or by what your major is? I realize people change majors but perhaps classes should be priced different.
...I know my arguments are pretty weak but is it just too complicated to incorporate textbooks into matriculation?
Where do you draw the line? Should the tuition also include the cost of transportation to get to class? Should it include the brunch you eat before class so you can pay full attention?
When you received an empty 3 ring binder, did you compare that to what you thought you were buying? Was it by chance included along with a loose-leaf version of an actual textbook?
No loose leaf, that is what I thought it would be. I was not the only one.
Written and published by the university. And only available through their bookstore, no other sources.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trusso11783
Because then the professors couldn’t rip you off by making you purchase their required textbooks that they wrote.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaxPhd
And required university published books are pretty rare.
University-published, I tend to agree; faculty-written, not as much i.e. it’s fairly common. That said, you undervalue the significance, while overestimating the profit, relative to such.
There is a distinction between recommended vs. required (reading), although it’s all relative to the individual’s benefit; (it’s assumed) the student is capable of determining such for themselves i.e. graduate students shouldn’t need to be spoon-fed. However, not only are you overestimating the profit relative to such (while minimalizing the student’s responsibility/benefit), you’re also assuming books are never discounted/sold used or that other recommended (or even required) material i.e. scholarly articles, academic journals and so on aren’t available elsewhere (often for free).
Its all a scam! Many professors have deals with certain publishers and therefore use the same book every other year. To prove my point, take accounting for example the principles of accounting (and most math classes) do not change so why does the book? Check out a textbook in economics from 1998 and compare it to one today what is the difference?
Colleges do not control the price of textbooks- publishers do. Professors don't make personal money off textbooks unless they wrote it themselves.
Don't think textbooks are required at most universities.
Whether mostly digital or not, there are required/recommended ‘textbooks’/reading material (and associated fees separate from tuition).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
