From an article posted on TeachThought:
At present, open textbooks are developed by an eclectic mix of non-profit organizations, scholars and a few companies. The quality is often inconsistent, and some teachers complain of having to look hard for a good book.
Quality = table stakes. The fact that quality is still “inconsistent” (and it is) hampers the OER movement. I appreciate the DIY spirit, but I also believe in an editorial process and a sustainable business model. Both factors lead to better quality books.
The editorial process—that makes sense. Books that are peer-reviewed are likely to be of more utility. But what about sustainability? Please allow me to explain. A profit-sharing model incentivizes not just good content creation—but its maintenance too. A one-time payment (e.g. from a NFP foundation) might create a great book, but what happens when 1) the author’s interest is captured by something else, or 2) the community doesn’t make use of the license and sustain the content?
The work atrophies.
The profit-sharing model alone doesn’t solve this, nor does it guarantee better quality content. People are motivated by more than just money. But in making decisions about how you spend your time, compensation can help.
Coupled with an editorial process, quality doesn’t have to be inconsistent. And it can come at a fair price, too. There’s room for everyone to benefit.