We need to look at a few variables before we mandate percentage changes. How often between editions in years? Then, is it a textbook in an area that is not fast changing, e.g., an English Textbook? Here we would expect only that any errors be corrected, and any dated examples be replaced by new ones. Is it a book on MOOCs? This is new rapidly changing area, and we would expect major rewrites each year, with little salvageable from the previous edition.

My supervisor had a good rule for his class notes. Each year he would take out 10% of the material and replace it with new material he had squirreled away over the year. After 6 years, half would have been replaced. The 10% could be regarded as experimental, and could be removed if it did not work, and this ensured that fresh exam questions could be asked.

While lazy lecturers might prefer to always lecture from the same text, in practice things are changing in the real world, and texts must keep up or grow outdated. I know of one example where an important textbook has not been updated to reflect how the professional actually works in this digital age. Lazy lecturers must be coaxed into recommending the new edition with gradual updates and not too many page renumbers at a time, but the frequency of updates also depends on economic print run sizes. Publishers do not mind new editions; it helps to obsolete the previous editions, and kill the second hand market.

We need to look at a few variables before we mandate percentage changes. How often between editions in years? Then, is it a textbook in an area that is not fast changing, e.g., an English Textbook? Here we would expect only that any errors be corrected, and any dated examples be replaced by new ones. Is it a book on MOOCs? This is new rapidly changing area, and we would expect major rewrites each year, with little salvageable from the previous edition.

My supervisor had a good rule for his class notes. Each year he would take out 10% of the material and replace it with new material he had squirreled away over the year. After 6 years, half would have been replaced. The 10% could be regarded as experimental, and could be removed if it did not work, and this ensured that fresh exam questions could be asked.

While lazy lecturers might prefer to always lecture from the same text, in practice things are changing in the real world, and texts must keep up or grow outdated. I know of one example where an important textbook has not been updated to reflect how the professional actually works in this digital age. Lazy lecturers must be coaxed into recommending the new edition with gradual updates and not too many page renumbers at a time, but the frequency of updates also depends on economic print run sizes. Publishers do not mind new editions; it helps to obsolete the previous editions, and kill the second hand market.

Hi Ian,

Many thanks for the very quick and informative response. I agree - it depends on the context of the text. In my case - I'm mainly referring to clinical research - so most would at least hope, I would like to think, that there would be significant change between editions.

I like your previous supervisors technique of updating 10% per year. I would argue that if many of us followed that mantra then many new editions would be all the better for it. However, I suspect that most chapter authors, of edited texts at least, would 'react', there and then, to the deadline of the requested rework.

On your other note - if the previous edition is still relevant - I tend to suggest that they can still use it but that it may disadvantage them a little. For pre-reading, I would identify, in the reading information, the page ranges of the last and most recent texts - but I, again, agree that the page ranges should not look too different - in case the students feel that the editions are 'very' different.

Hi Farhad,

Many thanks for your considered response. I agree - that the extent to which a new edition changes and when it changes involves a number of factors - so it's not always going to be a level playing field. It's not easy to determine - but I would like to think that there is an acceptable 'average' for certain types of texts in certain disciplines - especially, for me, clinical texts. I suppose that when I edit revised texts, I have the reader/student in mind. If they don't think that they are getting 'value for money', it's unlikely that they would go for the next edition after. That's purely subjective though - of course.

Another important discussion..and yes, without substantial change in an edition, I know our students will happily buy older second-hand editions and generally work around any minor changes quite nicely.

As another angle on the topic, I am observing another "formula" (percentage) methods with a text I am co-editing now. This is a Canadianization of a popular US text (clinical topic) so there is that need for currency (ie. new treatments and assessment tools such as a move to DSM-5 etc). The publisher has various "rules" (percentages) to determine if a chapter is considered an adaptation or an entirely new authorship. Any minor changes equate with an adapatation (for the new edition), like Farhad is saying, but for a chapter to be considered "new" rather than an adaptaion, I believe more than 30% content change is the general rule.

Great - practical - topics for our scholarship and teaching...thanks, everyone.

Good answer Sonya. Yes - I think it's a good idea that lecturers are aware of how much new editions have changed and advise students if the latest edition is essential - or if the previous edition would suffice. Not great for the authors royalties - but then 'good products sell well' - products 'pretending' to be good products on the basis of the previous shouldn't

Sales, royalties and so forth are key motivators to generating new editions as people feel compelled to buy the newest material; unaware that only minor changes have occurred. Thus, my personal response to this has been to buy new books within a 2-3 edition range. One exception I have is with software guides, manuals or textbooks, where the difference between one edition and the next is significant; still I do so on a case by case basis.

@Daryn thanks for the response. I agree that many 'purchasers' of new edition texts probably assume that it is fundamentally different/updated than the previous edition - or they do not think about it at all. They may well be influenced by the fact that the 'back page blurb', by the publishers, often suggests that the new edition is 'fully updated' - or something like that. You cannot blame them - they want to sell as many copies as possible. This often isn't the case though - and that may well be that 'new' buyers do not review the previous edition to see if it is that case - or it may well be that it is a 'required' or 'recommended' text, from lecturers, so any freedom of choice is taken out of readers hands. Nice to see that more discerning readers, like yourself, do purchase on the basis of case-by-case reasoning.

I'm sharing my views as a consumer. I seldom buy new edition texts. There is rapid texts revision. Texts edition changes in 3 years or less. The arrival of new edition causes price marked down. I experienced that after 1 year the price of the latest edition I bought is 50% marked down and there is no big difference in content quality comparing to the new edition. This gave me the idea of buying books with copyright date of 5 years behind the new edition. Why should I buy the new edition with no big difference in terms of content quality from the last edition that is a good buy with 50% price off. Also, second hand books are best buy. Furthermore new book edition is not always a good book. There are old edition books of good quality in terms of content than the new edition books. Reading me as a consumer, the book on Analysis and evaluation of conceptual models of nursing 1984 copyright date is one of my favorite book. I bought it for USD 2. The author can easily connect the reader to the essence of book contents with uninterrupted running thought. The author facilitates the inductive process during the connection. I have no experience in book writing but as a reader the author should feel that s/he is talking to the reader when writing a book. The emergence of second hand book selling and the quality of substantiating contents in book revision challenge the authors. Personally, if I am a book writer seeing my book 30% price off within 1-2 years from copyright date gives me a negative impression. Unless the intention of price off is to facilitate the introduction of the book in the market and immediate feedback is needed.