The U's Board of Trustees passed a policy change in May to the Code of Faculty Rights and Responsibilities concerning faculty members' receipt of royalties on self-written textbooks assigned to their students.
The amended code requires faculty to assign or recommend course materials without the prospect of financial gain. If self-written materials generate any royalties, faculty must pay an equal sum to either the U or any tax-exempt organization within six months after the course, or a discount can be offered on the sale of the book.
The Academic Policy Advisory Committee reviewed other universities' policies on this issue and recommended the U change its policy.
According to Susan Olson, associate vice president of faculty for Academic Affairs, the committee based its recommendations on a 2005 study conducted by Rutgers University Senate Committee concerning the possible conflict of interest in the assignment of self-written textbooks.
The Rutgers University study consisted of 18 universities and colleges. There were 4,276 accredited institutions in the United States during the 2005-2006 academic year, the National Center for Education Statistics reported. The U's newly amended code was based on the opinion of .4 percent of the total number of universities and colleges in operation at that time.
The study showed 12 of the 18 institutions' policies allowed faculty members an option to retain royalties if their material was approved and all other criteria were met. The other six institutions required royalties to be donated to the institution, department or other charitable organization. After reviewing other university's methods, the U modeled its policy after the minority.
Shawn Miller, a biology teacher, understands the Board of Trustees' quick response as an effort to eliminate any appearance of unethical practice, but he believes that in the board members' haste they made a blanket statement that any self-written material required for faculty's classes is unethical.
"That is not true," Miller said. "Not all materials are created equally."
Over the last two years, Miller has developed a software program, Real Anatomy, where biology students can view a real 3-D cadaver that can be rotated 360 degrees and can, beginning with the skin, dissect through 40 layers of anatomy.
"The project required programmers, photography, people to work on the text and Photoshop to make the images crisp, and when that software sells, I will make $1.50," Miller said.
The Rutgers University study acknowledged that there was nothing "inherently wrong" with faculty using their own textbooks, and at roughly 6 percent, author royalties were not likely to generate more than $275 per course.
The dilemma stems from faculty members who might photocopy their PowerPoint presentations, which might or might not contain their own artwork and efforts, bind them and then sell them directly to their students as required material for their classes.
However, there is no appearance of wrongdoing with faculty authors receiving royalties from their students on nationally recognized textbooks found in the Library of Congress that have an ISBN number and are professionally published and sold to bookstores in colleges and universities nationwide.
"These materials are not slapped together, but are painstakingly custom created on the faculty's own time and with the thought process aimed toward the pedagogy of the course material," Miller said.
"The Board wants to encourage faculty to publish and write textbooks, but we want to avoid the potential perception that faculty members might be assigning (their) own textbook to their class because it benefited them financially," said Randy Dryer, a member of the U's Board of Trustees.
Although that might be true, there are other options that would better encourage faculty to publish textbooks while still being fair to students and faculty. A policy that requires permission for faculty to recommend self-written material to their students would eliminate the posers and force faculty members to prove their material is worthy of instructing the class. This would guarantee that students are purchasing the best instruction material for their classes whether they are written by faculty or not. If approved, faculty should then be able to retain the minute royalties of their hard-earned efforts.
What we received instead was a policy that eliminated concerns over the appearance of unethical practices by faculty without the U having the hassle of monitoring and approving faculty recommended course materials. This might be easier for the U, but it isn't fair to faculty or even students.
Either way, students should not be forced to pay the price of royalties if faculty members don't get to keep them. Offering to pay the royalties to the U or another tax-exempt organization does not benefit students, and it still requires us to pay the royalty fee regardless of who receives the money.
letters@chronicle.utah.edu
Be the first to comment on this article!