In one of its several new initiatives this semester, the Undergraduate Council recently began working on a proposal to reduce the cost of course materials. Inspired by one of the presidential campaign promises from current Vice President Sietse K. Goffard ’15, the initiative seeks to rein in expenses by requiring faculty to state the prices of required materials on syllabi. Students would fully understand the costs of taking a course before enrolling. Over the long run, they could see which courses have worked to decrease the cost of materials. The UC also aims to push for more online-available materials in the longer term. Instructors should take note of the UC’s proposal and work to make class materials more affordable.

Course materials have perennially presented a serious expense for students.  Students spend  an average of $1,340 per year on course materials, and though those with financial aid receive a significant sum towards covering this expense, many must sacrifice other items for books and supplies. As former Dean of the College Benedict Gross ’71 and former Interim Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles wrote in a letter to faculty on this subject in 2007, “Students either skimp on daily expenses to purchase course materials, or skimp on their books to make ends meet.” Renewing efforts to reduce this burden should be a priority, and we applaud the UC for making a serious attempt to tackle this issue.

In its specifics, the current plan is wise to focus on increasing the information available to students about course materials costs. The increased transparency would certainly be a boon for students choosing courses. It would encourage professors to create cost-conscious syllabi and to use online resources more effectively in order to attract enrollment. Despite the apparent frugality of online materials, however, we caution against overreliance on their use as a method of cost-containment; if professors are insistent that students come to class with physical copies of readings, the expense and inconvenience of printing might outweigh any benefits gained. Instructors should also pay careful attention to copyright law, a consideration that increasingly seems to have fallen by the wayside, as scanned books are placed on course websites without permission.

The effort to rein in the cost of course materials is a positive example of the useful issues that the UC’s new leadership has begun to tackle. While we have expressed certain reservations about the details of the UC’s recent request for $250,000 from the University, initiatives like the funding push and “Operation Ghost Protocol” and now the course materials effort attest to the many serious proposals emanating from a reinvigorated UC.

Ultimately, practical issues that directly impact students—like the cost of course materials—are ideal areas in which the UC can improve student life. The current proposal, with its focus on transparency and incentivizing faculty action, merits support and thoughtful implementation to ensure that the cost of books and supplies becomes a less persistent detriment to a positive student experience.