Inclusive access (IA) is a textbook-purchasing model in which students buy access codes. These access codes allow students to read a digital-only textbook for a set amount of time rather than purchase a permanent physical or digital (eBook) copy. IA is marketed as providing textbooks to students on the first day of class for a lower cost than non-IA textbooks; however, publishers artificially inflate non-IA textbook costs to make IA options more appealing. And, once students are on IA platforms, publishing companies mine students’ usage data. Data sharing of any type should abide by the principles of data sovereignty. That is, data sharing should be subject to the laws of the jurisdiction where the data is collected. Therefore, tribes should consider enacting data protection laws to protect their citizens, including the students who attend tribal colleges and universities (TCUs). Moreover, TCU instructors could take advantage of open education (OE) textbooks as an alternative to IA textbooks, as OE textbooks are free and do not collect student data.

HOW INCLUSIVE ACCESS CODES AND DIGITAL LICENSING WORK

When TCUs agree to an IA textbook model, students buy access codes that allow them to read a digital-only textbook for a set amount of time rather than purchase a permanent physical or eBook copy. This means that IA textbooks are digital book rentals, which are distinct from eBooks. While an eBook may seem to be the same as a hard copy, just in digital rather than physical form, this is not entirely true. How eBooks work depends on who is purchasing them.

Individuals or libraries can purchase eBooks. For individuals, eBooks are similar in cost to physical books, but they provide less access because an individual cannot use an eBook like they can a physical book. A physical book can be lent out, given away, or resold as a used copy, while an eBook generally cannot.

Technically, an eBook bought by an individual could be shared with others in their household. For example, a Kindle digital book could be shared with a family member who uses the same Kindle account, just like multiple members of a household could use the same Netflix account. But this type of sharing is limited. An instructor cannot buy a Kindle book and then share it with her entire class or pass on or sell it to a student when she is finished with it.

Licensing is more complicated for eBooks sold to libraries, whether public libraries, school libraries, or tribal libraries. A library eBook can be purchased as an individual title or as part of a package deal with an aggregate service, like the one EBSCO provides. Additionally, library eBooks cost more if librarians purchase the right to have more than one person read that title at a time. This concept is called seats, where each person occupies one seat. A book that can be read by one person at a time is a one-seat library eBook. If a faculty member wants an entire class to use an eBook, the librarian would need to purchase more seats. Because more seats cost more money, the total cost depends on how many students are enrolled in the course.

IA textbooks, on the other hand, provide students immediate access to the content through the college’s or university’s learning management system (LMS). Students do not need to compare format options, and librarians do not need to determine how an IA textbook is available and how many seats should be purchased. A student’s access to an IA textbook is removed at the end of the set period, an agreement that parallels the experience of physically renting a book. All of this is provided for a lower cost than a physical book or an eBook.

Publishers market IA by emphasizing that students will enjoy immediate access to course content at lower costs, although they emphasize the immediate access more than the lower costs. The publisher Cengage describes IA as “learning materials built into the cost of tuition with guaranteed day-one access” (Cengage, n.d.a). Macmillan calls it “a program that ensures that every student has access to their course materials through their LMS on the first day of class” (Macmillan Learning, n.d.). McGraw Hill describes IA as “innovative course material delivery models that help higher education institutions provide students with access to course materials on the first day of class at a discounted price” (McGraw Hill, n.d.). Pearson states that IA options “help students be prepared on the first day of class with Pearson courseware, available through Inclusive Access” (Pearson, n.d.). Both benefits are mentioned, but the publishers’ taglines emphasize access.

Publishers’ claims that IA allows students to immediately receive their course materials are correct. When digital books are preloaded into an LMS, students can access their books immediately. Without this, students may not come to class prepared. When students do not have their textbooks immediately, statistics show they are less likely to participate and more likely to earn lower grades and to drop out of both the course and higher education in general. With this in mind, it is understandable that publishers focus on how IA prevents this problem.

Still, the term “inclusive access” is a misnomer, because students are actually given less access to their textbooks under the IA publishing model. IA revokes the rights to content at the end of the contract. Contract lengths can vary, so students can choose if they want to buy a longer-term access plan. Most will choose the cheapest option that covers the time of their class. After all, students do not know what books they will need or want in the future. This creates a circumstance whereby if a student takes a class that uses the same textbook as their previous class, they will have to buy a new access code for the same content. Likewise, if a student wants to keep a textbook, they do not have that option under their access code. Although this may be seen as a lesser problem, as physical textbook rentals would have the same drawback, it is still an issue to consider.

HOW TEXTBOOK COSTS ARE INFLATED

While IA textbooks are less expensive than commercially published textbooks in other forms, this benefit is deceptive. Textbooks do not need to cost as much as they do. The $3.18 billion textbook industry is controlled by just four publishers: Cengage, McGraw Hill, Pearson, and Wiley. These publishers manage more than 80% of the market, dictating the costs students must pay. Accordingly, the cost of textbooks has risen 1,041% between 1977 and 2015. In just 10 years, between 2006 and 2016, textbook costs rose 88%. Textbook costs peaked in 2020 but remain high, and costs rose 7.2% between 2020 and 2023 (Del Valle, 2021; Hanson, 2024).

Colleges and universities can negotiate discounts, but these discounts are percentages of inflated prices. Suppose a college negotiates for its students’ textbooks to be offered at 20% off the list price through an IA model rather than $20 off. This choice makes the discount relative to the cost of the book. Textbook companies’ goal is for institutions, and their students, to perceive these percentages as advantageous; after all, a higher original price results in a higher discount. Yet the higher original prices are pre-set to make the percentage look more like a good deal. Think of how retailers artificially mark up their costs before Black Friday so that a sale looks better than it actually is. The same concept applies here.

Additionally, publishers price their textbooks to encourage users to select IA options. Cengage sells its Precalculus (11th edition) textbook, written by Ron Larson, through inclusive access for $56.99 for six months or $78.49 for 12 months. Renting the digital textbook from the publisher for six months is $75.00, nearly the same as the IA 12-month rental. Buying it in hardback? $312.95. Through this pricing structure, Cengage pushes students away from owning physical books, for doing so costs an extra $237.95. Digital books, either rented directly from the publisher or provided through the publisher under the auspices of an IA agreement, do not come with an ownership option, so students who are not willing to pay the higher cost will rent no matter what. When the student goes to evaluate digital options, they’ll find that the IA option is positioned to be a better deal; after all, it costs only $3.49 more for a whole year of access, or they could opt for the cheapest option for six months of access (Cengage, n.d.b).

To make matters worse, the practice of automatic billing obscures these costs from students. Refer again to Cengage, which promoted its materials as “built into the cost of tuition.” This is automatic billing. While automatic billing is purported to make life easier for students, allowing them to skip reviewing an extra line item, it obscures true costs, which can prevent students from making their own decisions. Under other textbook models, students may choose not to take classes that have high textbook costs, source textbooks from an alternative retailer, participate in a buy-back program at their bookstore, or decide to take the class without buying the textbook. When IA costs are included within tuition fees, the options around textbook purchasing disappear.

WHY DATA AS A PRODUCT IS A PROBLEM

The final and most important problem posed by IA textbooks is how these books collect student data. Usage data is recorded when students use their textbooks, similar to how data is recorded when we browse the internet, scroll through shows on Netflix, or read a book on Kindle. Usage data indicates when students start reading, where they stop, how fast they read, what content holds their attention—and what does not. These actions are events logged for learning behavior analysis. Depending on an individual’s preference for privacy, this may seem rather innocuous. After all, it is not so dissimilar as the use of algorithms to promote products based on our browsing history, provide more shows like the one we already binged, or highlight what passage other readers also found moving. What we see on the consumer end is an improved user experience.

But these benefits are not a gift to the consumer. Improved user experience may make a product or service technically better in the short term, but in the long term, it allows the company to make more money. The discount publishers offer to students who use IA textbooks is not charity; it is a way to ensure that the company collects data it would otherwise miss if that student used a physical textbook or other alternative.

The term for using data to create more revenue is called data as a product (DaaP) and it is a common concept across many business sectors, not just publishing. Most of us are unaware that we are providing DaaP as we interact with commercial entities because enforcement of data sovereignty in the United States is weak.

Data governance defines who can make decisions about what data can be collected, using which methods, and under what circumstances. It also specifies how that data can be used, stored, and protected. Data sovereignty asserts that data governance must follow the laws of the country or jurisdiction within which data is collected.

Data sovereignty protections can be strong when they lean toward greater privacy protections or weak if they permit less transparency or fewer regulations. Consider that the European Union requires websites that place cookies on a viewer’s computer to notify visitors. Visitors to that website can then opt in or out of that data collection. The U.S. does not have such protections. A decade ago, the Harvard Business Review (HBR) noted that “though some companies are open about their data collection practices, most prefer to keep consumers in the dark,” and recommended that companies be more transparent about their policies to earn trust and ongoing access to consumer information (Morey, 2015). Some U.S. companies have followed this recommendation by informing consumers that their data is being collected and letting them opt out. Still, most companies have not, since technically the federal government has not created a law.

There have been efforts in the U.S. to strengthen data protections. In the absence of national-level action, 15 states protected their citizens’ privacy through local laws and seven more have narrowed what type of data can be collected. Federal policy was sought when the American Data Privacy and Protection Act (ADPPA) was proposed in 2022. ADPPA was approved by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on July 20, 2022, but it died on January 3, 2023, because legislators could neither resolve how the state and federal level laws would co-exist, nor agree on how challenges could be brought. Generally, Democrats wanted to allow private litigation whereas Republicans wanted to deny it (ADPPA, n.d.; Alder, 2024). The American Privacy Rights Act of 2024 was proposed as an alternative to ADPPA and was introduced to the House Energy and Commerce Committee on June 25, 2024. As of the time of writing, a ruling has yet to be reached (Alder, 2024; U.S. Congress, 2024).

Nevertheless, TCUs that are chartered by sovereign tribal nations have the ability to inform and protect their students in observance of their own data sovereignty. Federal data protections may not be robust, but that does not mean that tribal nations’ protections must be similarly limited. Tribes could pass their own data protection laws that would safeguard their citizens as well as students attending their TCUs. Then textbook publishers who wanted TCU students to use their products would have to obey these regulations.

DEFINING OPEN EDUCATION

For tribal nations wanting to enforce their data sovereignty, an alternative to IA textbooks exists: open education (OE). OE textbooks do not collect student data. Open education is a global movement that began in the late 1990s to promote student success by utilizing non-commercial digital learning resources. OE resources (OER) are now made and used at all levels of education from early childhood through higher education. OER includes a variety of pedagogical materials, from syllabi to assignments, exams, and even textbooks.

Figure 1: How open educational resources are made and used

OE textbooks are written by university or college instructors who are paid to do this work through course releases and/or through internal or external grants. OE textbooks may be written by one person or a team. Some are peer-reviewed. OE textbooks are licensed through Creative Commons rather than copyright. Creative Commons allows creators to share their material freely without relinquishing their authorship (Creative Commons, n.d.). Once the OE textbook is licensed, it can be placed on a platform such as Pressbooks and linked to an OE library, like the Open Textbook Library. Instructors at other institutions can then discover the new textbook and use it in their class either as is or modify it to suit their needs (see Figure 1).

However, not all OE textbooks make it into an OE library, and several OE libraries exist. At this time, there is no single place to search for OE content, which increases the difficulty of discovering appropriate material. For this reason, many colleges and universities have full-time staff positions dedicated to OE.

OE positions are usually filled by librarians or those with teaching and learning backgrounds. These OE staff dedicate their time to discovering content for instructors so that instructors can focus on reviewing the quality of the material, integrating it into their courses, and amending it as needed. OE staff also teach instructors about OE, disburse funds to instructors willing to adopt or create OE materials, mobilize students to advocate for affordability measures on campus, and keep up with trends in the field by participating in OE organizations.

OE organizations now promote the concept globally. The major OE organizations in the U.S. are Driving OER Sustainability for Student Success, Open Education Global, Open Education Network, and the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC). Internationally, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) participates in creating and promoting OER, as do Africa, through OER Africa, and the European Union, through Open Education Europa.

OPEN EDUCATION AS A COMMERCIAL ALTERNATIVE

OE textbooks offer most of the same advantages as IA textbooks, which has led publishers and bookstores to take unethical actions to try to recapture their market.

Table 1: Comparing features on textbook format options

OE textbooks are digital and immediately available on the first day of class, just like IA textbooks. OE textbooks can be integrated into an LMS, although this integration is not automatic. With OE, an instructor has to go into their LMS and add links to the OE textbook, whereas with an IA textbook, the publisher works with the institution to integrate the books within the course, thus lessening the load on the instructor. OE textbooks are free. And, unlike IA textbooks, students can download them for offline access, and students can print OE textbooks if they prefer to work with a physical book. Faculty can also tweak the textbook to reflect their pedagogical preferences by adding, removing, or altering content. This feature may be especially useful for TCU faculty required to incorporate Native cultural content into their courses (see Table 1).

Cengage sells OpenStax textbooks, which are free, by marketing their WebAssign system as a complement to the book. The WebAssign system is an online learning platform that integrates the OpenStax textbook into the institution’s LMS and provides pre-built and auto-graded exams. This added value allows Cengage to market originally free content, like the OpenStax calculus textbook, for $42.95 to $63.79 for six-month student access (Cengage, 2015). Note that the benefit goes to the instructor, who does not have to create exams or grade them, while the student pays the cost.

Textbooks could be kept free for students if faculty created their own ancillaries. If instructors want help creating exams or other materials from OE textbooks and their TCU does not have a curriculum designer on staff to help, they could turn to artificial intelligence (AI). Point an AI like ChatGPT at a specific chapter of an OE textbook, ask it to come up with the types of content required to review that material, wait for its response, and then edit the output as needed. Instructors would still need to grade, but this allows creation of the ancillary with less effort.

Despite the fact that these are free resources, some bookstores try to sell OE textbooks. Watch out for this practice, which has been documented by multiple universities that employ Barnes and Noble’s platform, including at TCUs that use Barnes and Noble. Remember, students should never pay for an OE textbook.

COURSE MARKING AS AN AFFORDABILITY BEST PRACTICE

Many U.S. colleges and universities employ course marking to promote transparency around course costs to students. Course marking is when a symbol is used to indicate a feature of a course.

The OE movement has standard ways to mark courses to indicate their affordability. Courses that have no associated costs are marked with the acronym ZTC, or zero textbook cost. Program pathways where none of the courses have textbook costs could be labeled Z degrees. LTC, or low textbook cost, marks courses that have associated costs below a certain threshold set by the institution, such as less than $50.

TCUs already teach many courses that are ZTC and LTC. In a fall 2024 study of TCU course offerings and adoptions, 89 courses were ZTC and 748 were LTC, with the LTC threshold set at $50 or less. It is likely that many more classes are ZTC and LTC than this study noted, as 11 of 36 TCUs studied did not provide course adoption data. Furthermore, when course adoptions are provided, OE textbooks are often not listed, because bookstores do not have to manage OE inventory (AIHEC, 2024).

If TCUs adopted course marking, they would help students understand which classes suited their budget, highlight their own commitment to affordability, and engage in an emerging best practice in higher education. Course marking can be practiced independently from OE textbook adoption; it is useful no matter what textbooks are selected.

***

Tribal councils should consider enacting data privacy regulations on behalf of their citizens and the students attending their TCUs. Without these laws in place, tribal citizens will have their data collected by companies in a variety of sectors, not just academic publishing. While many continue to hope that the U.S. government will work toward creating national policy, tribes are sovereign and can act independently.

Furthermore, TCUs should reject automatic billing and avoid IA textbooks and programs whenever possible. OE textbooks provide a good alternative to IA textbooks. TCUs should also consider marking qualifying courses as either ZTC or LTC to enhance students’ ability to see their proposed course costs. TCUs that want to learn more about course marking can consult Marking Open and Affordable Courses: Best Practices and Case Studies, an OE guide on the topic.

If your TCU or tribal council would like additional information on the various topics covered in this article, please contact the Open Education Project at the American Indian Higher Education Consortium (https://www.aihec.org/initiatives/open-education/).

Amy Hildreth Chen, PhD, is the Open Education Project director at the American Indian Higher Education Consortium.

REFERENCES

Alder, S. (2024, April 8). New Federal Data Privacy and Protection Legislation Introduced. The HIPAA Journal. Retrieved from https://www.hipaajournal. com /federal-data-privacy-legislation-2024/

American Data Privacy and Protection Act (ADPPA). (n.d.). Consumer Privacy Act. Retrieved from https://www.consumerprivacyact.com/american-data-privacy- and-protection-act-adppa/

American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC). (2024, October). Data Set for Book Adoptions at TCUs, Fall 2024. Retrieved from https://www.aihec.org/initiatives/open-education/

Cengage. (n.d.a). Inclusive Access with Cengage. Retrieved from https://www.cengage.com/instructors/inclusive-access/

Cengage. (n.d.b). OpenStax Precalculus. Retrieved from https://faculty. cengage.com/works/9798214035734

Cengage. (2015). WebAssign Instant Access for Strang/Herman’s OpenStax Calculus, Single-Term (1st ed.). Retrieved from https://www.cengage.com/c/ webassign-instant-access-for-strang-herman-s-openstax-calculus-singleterm- 1e-strang-herman/9781337777391/

Creative Commons. (n.d.). What We Do. Retrieved from https://creative commons.org/about/

Del Valle, G. (2019, March 6). The High Cost of College Textbooks, Explained. Vox. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/3/6/18252322/ college-textbooks-cost-expensive-pearson-cengage-mcgraw-hill

Hanson, M. (2024, October). Average Cost of College Textbooks. Education Data Initiative. Retrieved from https://educationdata.org/average-cost-ofcollege- Textbooks

Macmillan Learning. (n.d.). Macmillan Learning Inclusive Access. Retrieved from https://www.macmillanlearning.com/college/us/solutions/inclusive -access

McGraw Hill. (n.d.). Myth vs. Fact. Retrieved from https://www.mheducation.com/highered/inclusive-access.html?cid=ppc|HE|A_O|Google| McGraw_Hill_Inclusive_Access_2024&gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjwm7q -BhDRARIsACD6-fVGffrOmE3mtVQHnMK1NXLKD-gzBVj7Hs- _Uw16S6iXbDOhqqSRSSkaAo8SEALw_wcB

Morey, T. (2015, May). Customer Data: Designing for Transparency and Trust. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2015/05/customerdata- designing-for-transparency-and-trust

Pearson. (n.d.). Inclusive Access. Retrieved from https://www.pearson.com/en-us/higher-education/products-services/inclusive-access.html

U.S. Congress. (2024). H.R.8818 – American Privacy Rights Act of 2024, 118th Congress (2023–2024). Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/8818/text