In my time at the University, various classes have required me to pay outrageous amounts of money for textbooks with no guarantee that they would be used. In a majority of these classes, these textbooks were from third parties not associated with the University or its staff. I believe this is useful to students, as it offers a different outlook from the viewpoint of the teacher, who, given the opportunity, would leave out information in these books had they assigned their own books. While I am not excluding the possibility that their own book might be beneficial to the student’s learning, I believe that their own material should be used as a supplement to the third-party source.

As F. Scott Fitzgerald said, “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.” By using the teacher’s findings as a supplement, you receive a more well-rounded education, as you tend to eliminate some biases that you would be completely exposed to had it not been for the third-party textbook. By eliminating as much bias as possible, the student can balance the two opposed ideas (as Fitzgerald talks about) without a predetermined stance based on their lack of knowledge on one side of the argument. 

This is crucial, as bias is one of the greatest threats to the free flow of ideas. It leads to closed-mindedness as well as divisiveness. However, this can also lead to scholarly debate, with the result being a better understanding of the subject.

The second question we should ask is if we, as students, should be forced to use unfinished textbooks as part of our multi-thousand-dollar education. Not only that, but should we be forced to pay near $100 for a textbook that has yet to be published as a paperback? In my first semester of my sophomore year,

I had the misfortune of taking such a class in which this was the case here at the University. The textbook, which my professor once described to me as “a work in progress,” was equivalent to the writing of a high school AP student; the syntax used in the online textbook was comparable to Yoda’s speech patterns. Other sentences seemed to follow the Michael Scott quote, “Sometimes I’ll start a sentence, and I don’t even know where it’s going. I just hope I find it along the way.”

Had it not been for the great teaching of my instructor, I would have never passed the course from the textbook alone. Yet, I will say not all of the self-written textbooks I’ve been required to use have created similar experiences. As part of an honors class I took, I was required to read “Engaged Scholarship,” which was written partly by the instructor Dr. Ross Bryan. 

This textbook was beneficial to my learning as well as the learning of my fellow classmates. It offered much discussion during class. But, along with this book, we were required to read other writings by other authors that gave us several different viewpoints. I believe this to be the model that most courses where teachers use their own textbooks should follow. Not only was this model effective, but Dr. Bryan didn’t profit from the book, as the proceeds went toward the Honors College. So should we allow teachers to profit off forcing their writings on their students, or should we give students all of the information?