A recent EdSurge post attempts to explain resistance to digital textbooks and lists four “issues”. As the author of a digital textbook, I feel the need to respond.
1. Digital textbooks do not offer lifetime access. – First, this is not true unless the digital content is leased in some way (BTW – most college book stores and textbook companies now lease/rent textbooks). Second, if you purchase digital content it is yours. With companies such as Amazon, you can actually redownload your purchases making the purchase more practically accessible than the book yet may have stored in a box ten years and three moves ago. Finally, very few students ever return to most of the textbooks they purchase. They sell them back.
2. It is more difficult to learn from a digital textbook. I would suggest that this depends on how the student uses it. I agree with the author that reading from a smartphone is not easy. It can be done, but this would seem a matter of convenience or cost savings. Digital textbooks are easily highlighted and annotated and more can be done with these interactions than with the markup applied to paper textbook. Depending on the source, mobility and access are also often better with digital content. The content typically can be loaded to more than one device and thus is more accessible than the book you left in your dorm room or school locker.
3. Digital textbooks may be expensive because they cannot be sold back. Note first of all that this contradicts the first concern raised by the author. Also, as I mention above, digital content can often be leased or rented just as is the case with traditional books.
4. Digital content is useless without Internet access. Technically this is true. I assume the meaning is without any access ever. However, once loaded to a device (or several devices – this can be important) continued Internet access is not necessary. Access can be argued several ways. As I suggest in response to concern #3, it is very possible to argue that digital content is actually more accessible.
Criticism of these criticisms is far too easy. Such concerns are more a matter of lack of information and experience than reality.