Photo by Paul Skorupskas on Unsplash
From diving deeper into the realm of open educational resources (OER) and reflecting on my experiences at the college and in the MALAT program, I have now realized how I will be able to focus my inquiry.
At the college, we have implemented the use of e-textbooks in September 2018. Some of the concerns from students are the following: they are having a difficult time with adopting this new technology due to the following: the inability of accessing the textbooks on their devices because of technical glitches or issues with the access codes; the cost of the e-textbooks is as high as the traditional textbooks; and the inability to have access to the textbooks after the course is completed. These observations can be supported by Pratt, Green, Rasmussen, Lai and Compton (2019) who conducted a study with a dental hygiene program and found that although e-textbooks have been considered ‘revolutionary’ in learning, “adopting this technology has been met with hesitation” (p. 1) because of the aforementioned issues. While doing the team presentation, I realized that OER particularly the use of an open textbook may be our solution; however, although OER has been around for some time, this would be an innovation that would cause a lot of change in our program. A change that may not be that easy to embrace.
To guide my inquiry, I will be looking at Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovation Theory which involves the five characteristics that are key to an innovation’s rate of adoption which are “relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability” (Rogers & Ellsworth, 1997, p. 114). Relative advantage is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the practice it replaces. It can be measured by socioeconomic factors, convenience and if it satisfies the end user. However, it may be good for one situation and not the other (Rogers & Ellsworth, 1997). Compatibility is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent with the existing values, past experiences, and needs of the potential adopters. The adoption of an incompatible innovation also often requires adoption of a new value system (Rogers & Ellsworth, 1997). Complexity is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as difficult to understand and use (Rogers & Ellsworth, 1997). Trialability is the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a limited basis (Rogers & Ellsworth, 1997). Observability is the degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to others (Rogers & Ellsworth, 1997). If all of these are appropriately factored into the innovation, then the rate of adoption for the innovation would be more rapid (Rogers & Ellsworth, 1997).
I will be comparing and contrasting the design features of open digital and open print textbooks vs. e-textbooks and traditional textbooks and analyze which is more advantageous to all students.
Lastly, I will look at the benefits and challenges of each format to determine which format is more effective in learning for all students. An example of an article that would address this is from Jhangiani, Dastur, Le Grand, & Penner (2018), where they found that “students assigned the open textbook, in either print or digital formats, performed either no differently or better on their course exams than students assigned the commercial textbook” (p. 14). Another significant finding from Jhangiani et. al (2018) was due to the “effectiveness of the research examples and the clarity of the writing”, students found the print format of open textbooks better than the commercial textbooks (p. 15).
From my inquiry, I hope to answer the question, “Do all students prefer and have better learning outcomes with open digital and open print textbooks than e-textbooks and traditional printed textbooks?
References:
Jhangiani, R. S., Dastur, F. N., Le Grand, R., & Penner, K. (2018). As Good or Better than Commercial Textbooks: Students’ Perceptions and Outcomes from Using Open Digital and Open Print Textbooks. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 9(1).
Pratt, R.S., Green, J.L., Rasmussen, K., Lai, H., & Compton, S.M. (2019). Dental hygiene students and faculty attitudes and utilization of a single source electronic textbook platform. Int J Dent Hygiene. 1– 12.
Rogers, E., & Ellsworth, J. (1997). Diffusion of innovations. Educational Technology Research and Development: Etr & D,45(4), 91.
Hi Joyce – Congratulations from making the deep dive into OER to finding your focus as related to your context! Great post! Your approach in analyzing OER through the lens of Roger’s Diffusion of Innovation Theory specific to your context is a great approach not only to your critical inquiry but to also help address some of the resistance to change. What stands out for me in the argument about adoption of OER is not just the benefits of reduced cost and open access, but also how the relationship between content and the student can change. DeRosa & Robison (2017) focus on the empowerment of students using OER which can result in a shift “from thinking about OER as open textbooks and thinking about them as
opening textbooks…and all sorts of other educational materials and processes” (p. 122). This makes me think more about your reference to Roger’s Theory through the lens of “relative advantages”. Do the students and the faculty in your program want to change the relationship they have with the content in a print or e-textbook? Do they see the value in changing this relationship?
References
DeRosa, R., & Robison, S. (2017). From OER to open pedagogy: Harnessing the power of open. In R. S. Jhangiani & R. Biswas-Diener (Eds.), Open: The philosophy and practices that are
revolutionizing education and science (pp. 115-124). London: Ubiquity Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.5334/bbc
Hi Mel,
Thanks so much for your support and great questions!
When our faculty decided to use e-textbooks, they thought that it would be easier for students since they would not have to carry heavy textbooks; however, they are finding that students are not happy with the e-texts. They are having issues with the technology, the high cost of the e-texts and are experiencing eye strain. They are finding that the students are relying mainly on the faculty’s handouts and are not using the textbooks as much. This is supported by Pratt, Green, Rasmussen, Lai and Compton (2019) who found in their study that “challenges included technical glitches, eyestrain, cost and inability to choose books as desired […], but they appreciated portability of texts and quality of clinical images” (p. 1). They know that this needs to change and have thought that perhaps more training of students and faculty in the use of the e-textbooks is required. This addresses a couple of issues, but it still does not address the cost factor to the students. A few of the faculty members have heard about open educational resources (OER); however, they do not know how to implement them in the curriculum. This is the reason why I am interested in making the deep dive and performing a critical inquiry in OER in our MALAT course, so I could eventually introduce OER to our faculty.
Please let me know if you have any other questions. Thank you!
Cheers!
Reference:
Pratt, R.S., Green, J.L., Rasmussen, K., Lai, H., & Compton, S.M. (2019). Dental hygiene students and faculty attitudes and utilization of a single source electronic textbook platform. International Journal of Dental Hygiene. 00: 1-12.
I was reading about your experience with interest Joyce. A few years ago, we found that the provided regular paper textbooks’ price was high. We switched for e-books, and the saved amount covered an iPad for each student. We considered it a win-win situation, as it was lighter to carry the books, and the students ended up having an iPad what they could use for testing websites and watching tutorials as well. It was not successful, as the actual device was not integrated into the curriculum, and we did not “teach” how and why to use them for learning. When we started to incorporate the use of the device into the curriculum by actively using the tablets in courses for example to sketch wireframes, take notes, use video tutorials for information seeking and for completing assignments, the use of the e-books significantly increased as well.
On the other hand, your note on eye strain is valid. I researched earlier the difference between print and digital reading and comprehension: Baron (2017) and Jabr (2013) state that dedicated e-readers’ e-ink reflect ambient light, but shining screens like the tablets or computers can cause eyestrain, headaches and blurred vision, making screen reading more mentally taxing and physically tiring, which might dull comprehension. Baron (2017) reveals that learners enjoy the convenience of digital readings, including the ability to quickly search and find particular words and phrases but suggests that these features lead to “using” the digital text as opposed to reading. The challenge of reading attentively on digital platforms is that people mostly use digital devices for quick action, thus hard to switch the mindset for something substantive (Jabr 2013). People might abandon careful reading in favour of what Hayles (2012, as cited in Baron, 2017, p. 19) called “hyper reading” which aims to focus attention on finding the relevant information and reading only a section of the text, as opposed to reading the whole.
References
Baron, N. S. (2017). Reading in a digital age. Phi Delta Kappan, 99(2), 15–20.
Jabr, F. (2013). Why the brain prefers paper. Scientific American, 309(5), 48–53.
Hi Beata,
Thanks so much for sharing your experience and readings. This is valuable information for me to consider in my inquiry especially since I would like to compare the different formats.
Talking about eyestrain, I have personally experienced this when I was reading 10 online articles and did not enjoy the headache I received afterwards. I can just imagine what our students must deal with when trying to study for exams. I have found that to address this issue, I first print the articles to read them while on my commute, and then use the online articles when I need to cut and paste quotes into essays. This demonstrates the point that you brought up from Jabr (2013) where people use the digital platform for quick action only. This is supported by the findings from Pratt, Green, Rasmussen, Lai and Compton (2019) where they found that students liked the e-textbooks for only the conveniences that they offer. The students liked not only the portability, but the search feature to quickly look up certain information and the ability to transfer pictures, figures, quotes, etc. However, one student felt that “[the e-textbook] is convenient but I don’t see it making a huge impact to my learning” (Pratt et al., 2019, p. 7). Furthermore, in a study by Ackerman and Goldsmith (2011) as cited by Jhangiani, Dastur, Le Grand and Penner (2018), they found that test scores did not differ between digital and print formats; however, “performance was worse for screen readers when the study time was self-regulated” (p. 4). Jhangiani et al. (2018) also pointed out that “[a] factor that might account for low adoption rates of e-textbooks is low digital literacy on the part of both students and instructors”.
I’m really enjoying this inquiry and look forward to sharing more with you!
Cheers!
References:
Jabr, F. (2013). Why the brain prefers paper. Scientific American, 309(5), 48–53.
Jhangiani, R. S., Dastur, F. N., Le Grand, R., & Penner, K. (2018). As Good or Better than Commercial Textbooks: Students’ Perceptions and Outcomes from Using Open Digital and Open Print Textbooks. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9 (1). https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2018.1.5
Pratt, R.S., Green, J.L., Rasmussen, K., Lai, H., & Compton, S.M. (2019). Dental hygiene students and faculty attitudes and utilization of a single source electronic textbook platform. International Journal of Dental Hygiene. 00: 1-12.
After 40+ academic articles and two books, my research ended up finding non-conclusive information on comparing the digital reading materials with print reading. Both Baron (2017) and Jabr (2013) show some bias toward print reading but concede that attitudes towards digital reading are shifting while the mindset is changing. Learners might still prefer the paper format, but on-screen reading is here to stay.
My conclusion was that although there are numerous research on comparing the digital and print reading in different situations and under different parameters, e-reading is part of living in the 21st century, but none of the reviewed studies consider those, mainly young people who have no or insignificant paper reading experience, and for them a print-digital reading comparison is not necessary anymore. Educators need guidelines on how to preserve deep reading processes in the future iterations of the reading brain for digital materials.
I look forward to hearing your findings!
Wow! That was a lot of research on your part! Talk about an awesome deep dive! Funny that you mention that e-reading is here to stay for this century. One of my colleagues said the same thing. We can’t beat it, so join it! 🙂 This is why I’m hoping that my inquiry of using open textbooks (digital and/or print) will help to address issues of cost and the actual use of a textbook (not just two chapters).