A Study of the
Demographic Differences
of Instructors in Using
E-Textbooks in Higher
Education
SiruiWang, Ph.D.
The Univer...
Introduction
• E-Textbooks
In this research, this refers to a textbook in its digital form or textbook converted into
cert...
State of the problem
• Incomplete adoption of e-Textbooks in education. Using e-Textbooks in
teaching in higher education ...
Research Question
Based upon the purpose of this study, which is to explore the factors that affect
instructors using e-Te...
Methodology
• Research Design
Quantitative research method (Hopkins, 2008; Muijs, 2004)
Categorical data analysis (Chi-Squ...
Findings…
• Response Rate: 39 public universities (8 in MS, 14 in AL, 8 in KY, and 9 inTN),
2309 survey through email invi...
Frequency of How Often Instructors Use
E-Textbooks inTeaching
N=7
N=27
N=16
N=109
N=188
Always
Very Often
Fairly Many Time...
N=12
N=64
N=81
N=85
N=77
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or
above
Age Group Distribution
N=13
N=29...
RESEARCH QUESTION - HYPOTHESIS 1
• Hypothesis 1:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of using
e-Textboo...
Results of Chi-squareTest and Descriptive Statistics for E-Textbook Adoption by State
Note. χ2 = 0.843, df = 3. Numbers in...
RESEARCH QUESTION - HYPOTHESIS 2
 Hypothesis 2:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of
using e-Textboo...
RESEARCH QUESTION - HYPOTHESIS 2
Results of Chi-squareTest and Descriptive Statistics for E-Textbook
Adoption by Gender
e-...
RESEARCH QUESTION -HYPERTHESIS 3
 Hypothesis 3:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of
using e-Textboo...
RESEARCH QUESTION -HYPERTHESIS 3
Results of Chi-squareTest and Descriptive Statistics for E-Textbook Adoption by Age
e-Tex...
RESEARCH QUESTION -HYPOTHESIS 4
• Hypothesis 4: There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of using
e-Textboo...
e-Textbook
Adoption
Academic Ranking
Instructor Assistant
Professor
Associate
Professor
Professor Other
Adopters
11 (8.1%)...
RESEARCH QUESTION -HYPOTHESIS 5
• Hypothesis 5:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopter of
using e-Textbooks...
Study field in Education E-TextbookAdoption
Adopters Non-Adopter
Child and Family Studies 2 (1.3%) 8 (3.8%)
School Counsel...
DISCUSSION
• 1.The adoption of e-Textbooks in higher education did not vary by states.The inconsecutiveness of the state
e...
Implication and Recommendations
 There are some factor would affect instructors interest in using e-
Textbooks in teachin...
REFERENCE
Almobarraz,A. (2007). Perceived attributes of diffusion of innovation theory as predictors of internet adoption ...
Jebeile, S. & Reeve, R. (2003).The diffusion of e-learning innovations in an Australian secondary college: strategies and ...
Nächste SlideShare
Wird geladen in …5
×

A study of the demographic differences of instructors in using e-Textbooks in higher education

345 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

This study presented at AECT 2015 was a part of my dissertation of instructors' using e-Textbooks in higher education. It examined instructors in public universities in east south central of the U.S.

Veröffentlicht in: Bildung
  • Als Erste(r) kommentieren

  • Gehören Sie zu den Ersten, denen das gefällt!

A study of the demographic differences of instructors in using e-Textbooks in higher education

  1. 1. A Study of the Demographic Differences of Instructors in Using E-Textbooks in Higher Education SiruiWang, Ph.D. The University of Southern Mississippi/ Colorado State University AECT, November 5, 2015
  2. 2. Introduction • E-Textbooks In this research, this refers to a textbook in its digital form or textbook converted into certain digital format or in a computer file format to be displayed on a computer screen or read on a computer through a network or viewed on a dedicated portable device or read on all types of computers or formatted for display on eBook readers (Cavanaugh, 2005; Chen, Crooks, & Ford, 2013; Dalton & Palincsar, 2013; Daniel &Woody, 2013; Lamothe, 2011; Rao, 2003;Tripathi, & Jeevan, 2007). • E-Textbooks and Education o Flexible o Interactive o Accessible (Alliance for Excellent Education, 2013; Duffey & Fox, 2012; Ihmeideh, 2014; Mardis, Everhart, Smith, Newsum, & Baker, 2010; Moody, 2010; Roskos, Burstein, Shang, & Gray, 2014;Tsang,Yuen, Li, & Cheung, 2013) • Diffusion of InnovationTheory The process by which an innovation is “communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system” (Rogers, 2003, p. 6).
  3. 3. State of the problem • Incomplete adoption of e-Textbooks in education. Using e-Textbooks in teaching in higher education is still far from its confirmation stage. o In the U.S., 19 states neither proposed any policies or guidelines of adopting or using digital content, nor included digital content in learning material (State Education Policy Center, 2012). • A contrary between students and instructors in using e-Textbooks in class. Instructors displayed unsupportive attitudes and showed lower intentions of using e-Textbooks in teaching (Kissinger, 2011), which opposed by students' higher expectations on using e-Textbooks for more interactive and collaborative learning opportunities in higher education (Center for Digital Education, 2013)
  4. 4. Research Question Based upon the purpose of this study, which is to explore the factors that affect instructors using e-Textbooks in teaching by comparing the demographic differences between adopter and non-adopters in higher education, the research question is: • How do demographics (state, gender, age, academic rank, and study field) differ between instructors using e-Textbooks (adopters) and those who are not using e- Textbooks (non-adopters) in teaching in higher education? (Five Hypotheses) o Five hypotheses were associated with the research question: Hypothesis 1:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of using e-Textbooks in terms of state of residence. Hypothesis 2:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of using e-Textbooks in terms of gender. Hypothesis 3:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of using e-Textbooks in terms of age group. Hypothesis 4:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of using e-Textbooks in terms of academic rank. Hypothesis 5:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of using e-Textbooks in terms of study fields.
  5. 5. Methodology • Research Design Quantitative research method (Hopkins, 2008; Muijs, 2004) Categorical data analysis (Chi-Square test of Independence) Questionnaire (Almobarraz, 2007; Hannan, 2007; Jebeile & Reeve, 2003; Moore & Benbasat, 1991) • Research Setting Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, andTennessee (east south central in the U.S.) • Participants Instructors in public universities who were teaching in educational-related programs in the college of education o lecturers, assistant professors, associate professors, full professors, and other instructors who were teaching
  6. 6. Findings… • Response Rate: 39 public universities (8 in MS, 14 in AL, 8 in KY, and 9 inTN), 2309 survey through email invitation, 366 responses (70 from MS, 118 from AL, 85 from KY, and 93 fromTN). • Gender ratio: 34.4% male vs. 52.7% female • Participants’ ethnicity consisted of 78.9%White, 12.1% Black, 5.3% Asian, 0.6 % Latin, 0.3% Native-American, and 1.2% others
  7. 7. Frequency of How Often Instructors Use E-Textbooks inTeaching N=7 N=27 N=16 N=109 N=188 Always Very Often Fairly Many Times Occasionally Never 0 50 100 150 200
  8. 8. N=12 N=64 N=81 N=85 N=77 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or above Age Group Distribution N=13 N=29 N=128 N=82 N=67 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Others Instructor Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor Academic Ranking
  9. 9. RESEARCH QUESTION - HYPOTHESIS 1 • Hypothesis 1:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of using e-Textbooks in terms of state. • StatisticalTest: Pearson’s chi-square test • There was no statistically significant difference between adopters and non- adopters of using e-Textbooks in higher education related to state, χ2 (3, N = 347) = .843, p = .839 • Findings indicated instructors from any of the four states might or might not use e-Textbooks in teaching in higher education.
  10. 10. Results of Chi-squareTest and Descriptive Statistics for E-Textbook Adoption by State Note. χ2 = 0.843, df = 3. Numbers in parentheses indicate column percentages. RESEARCH QUESTION - HYPOTHESIS 1
  11. 11. RESEARCH QUESTION - HYPOTHESIS 2  Hypothesis 2:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of using e-Textbooks in terms of gender.  StatisticalTest: Pearson’s chi-square test  There was no statistically significant difference between adopters and non- adopters of using e-Textbooks in higher education related to gender, χ2 (1, N = 319) = 0.006, p = .940  Findings indicated both male and female instructors had similar preferences regarding using or not using e-Textbooks in teaching.
  12. 12. RESEARCH QUESTION - HYPOTHESIS 2 Results of Chi-squareTest and Descriptive Statistics for E-Textbook Adoption by Gender e-TextbookAdoption Gender Male Female Adopters 53 (39.3%) 82 (60.7%) Non-adopters 73 (39.7%) 111(60.3%) Note. χ2 = 0.006, df = 1. Numbers in parentheses indicate column percentages.
  13. 13. RESEARCH QUESTION -HYPERTHESIS 3  Hypothesis 3:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of using e-Textbooks in terms of age group.  StatisticalTest: Pearson’s chi-square test  There was no statistically significant difference between adopters and non- adopters of using e-Textbooks in teaching related to age, χ2 (4, N = 319) = 2.797, p = .592  Findings indicated there were young instructors who are using or not using e- Textbooks, while instructors who were older are also using or not using e- Textbooks in teaching.
  14. 14. RESEARCH QUESTION -HYPERTHESIS 3 Results of Chi-squareTest and Descriptive Statistics for E-Textbook Adoption by Age e-Textbook Adoption Age Group 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or above Adopters 6 (4.4%) 22 (16.3%) 38 (28.1%) 35 (25.9%) 34 (25.2%) Non-adopters 6 (3.3%) 42 (22.8%) 43 (23.4%) 50 (27.2%) 43 (23.4%) Note. χ2 = 2.797, df = 4. Numbers in parentheses indicate column percentages.
  15. 15. RESEARCH QUESTION -HYPOTHESIS 4 • Hypothesis 4: There is a difference between adopters and non-adopters of using e-Textbooks in terms of academic ranking. • StatisticalTest: Pearson’s chi-square test • There was no statistically significant difference between adopters and non- adopters of using e-Textbooks in teaching relating to their academic ranking, χ2 (4, N = 319) = 1.919, p = .751 • Findings indicated instructors at any academic level might use or not use e- Textbooks in teaching.
  16. 16. e-Textbook Adoption Academic Ranking Instructor Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor Other Adopters 11 (8.1%) 54 (40.0%) 39 (28.9%) 25 (18.5%) 6 (4.4%) Non-adopters 18 (9.8%) 74 (40.2%) 43 (23.4%) 42 (22.8%) 7 (3.8%) Results of Chi-squareTest and Descriptive Statistics for E-Textbook Adoption by Academic Ranking Note. χ2 = 1.919, df = 4. Numbers in parentheses indicate column percentages. RESEARCH QUESTION -HYPOTHESIS 4
  17. 17. RESEARCH QUESTION -HYPOTHESIS 5 • Hypothesis 5:There is a difference between adopters and non-adopter of using e-Textbooks in terms of study field in education. • Statistical Test: Crosstabulation • Findings indicated most instructors (both adopters and non-adopters of e- Textbooks) in this study had their study fields in Curriculum and Instruction and Educational Leadership and Administration.
  18. 18. Study field in Education E-TextbookAdoption Adopters Non-Adopter Child and Family Studies 2 (1.3%) 8 (3.8%) School Counselling 2 (1.3%) 8 (3.8%) Curriculum and Instruction 36 (22.8%) 44 (20.7%) Educational Leadership andAdministration 27 (17.1%) 23 (10.8%) Educational Studies and Research 12 (7.6%) 20 (9.4%) InstructionalTechnology and Design 12 (7.6%) 9 (4.2%) Library and Information Science 9 (5.7%) 1 (0.5%) Music Education 0 (0.0%) 1 (0.5%) Psychology 8 (5.1%) 16 (7.5%) Special Education 13 (8.2%) 19 (8.9%) Descriptive Statistics for E-Textbook Adoption by Study Field (N =319) RESEARCH QUESTION -HYPOTHESIS 5
  19. 19. DISCUSSION • 1.The adoption of e-Textbooks in higher education did not vary by states.The inconsecutiveness of the state educational policies between pre K-12 education and higher education might be the culprit.The SEPC report stated to include digital content and e-Textbooks in through pre K-12 education by state educational policies, but did not clearly involve higher education in that process, which might lead to a less emphasis of using e-Textbooks in higher education than pre K-12 education. • 2.Younger instructors did not express a higher tendency in using e-Textbooks in teachingthan older ones; instructors who were with higher academic ranks did not play their role as pioneers in using e-Textbooks in teaching. Several reasons might pay for the situation. For instance, “no e-Textbook available” in their teaching subject areas makes it impossible for instructors to use e-Textbooks, even if they had the intention. Students’ unresponsiveness made instructors hard to use e-Textbooks. Without supports from students or e-Textbooks publishers in the social system, instructors could only abandon e-Textbooks, regardless of their age or social status. • 3. It is promising to promote instructors to use e-Textbooks in Curriculum & Instruction and Educational Leadership & Administration, since which have the most people of using e-Textbooks. So, the interpersonal communication channel could be broadened in higher education, and the adoption rate of using e-Textbooks in other areas in teaching could be increased. It also suggests a direction for those colleges and institutions that intend to use e-Textbooks but were unaware of where to start. • In a sum, the adoption of digital content and e-Textbooks in higher education was not influenced by states’ policies, adopters’ gender, age, academic ranking, or their study fields.
  20. 20. Implication and Recommendations  There are some factor would affect instructors interest in using e- Textbooks in teaching in higher education, such as the availability of e- Textbooks, students’ corporations, institutions’ supports, etc.  Institutions have the responsibilities to assist instructors to adopt and spread any innovation in education, technically and economically, and make e-Textbooks compatible to the existing learning environment and current standards.  E-Textbooks publishers should not only contribute to exploit features of e-Textbooks, but also consider a proper method to extend the life of e- Textbooks for users.  Instructional technologists and designers should work with faculty collaboratively on course design.
  21. 21. REFERENCE Almobarraz,A. (2007). Perceived attributes of diffusion of innovation theory as predictors of internet adoption among the faculty members of Imam Mohammed Bin Saud University. Dissertation for University of NorthTexas. Alliance for Excellent Education. (2013). What is digital learning? Retrieved from http://www.all4ed.org/digitallearning/what-is-digital-learning Cavanaugh,T. (2005). The digital reader: using ebooks in k-12 education. Eugene, OR: International Society forTechnology in Education (ITSE). Center for Digital Education. (2013). Digital Content Strategy Guide, Microsoft & Dell. Retrieved from http://marketing.dell.com/Global/FileLib/Connected_Classroom/DigitalContentStrategyGuide.pdf Chen, X., Crooks, S., & Ford, S. (2013, March). NoteTaking on eText with Digital NoteTakingTools. In Society for Information Technology &Teacher Education International Conference, 2013(1), 303-308. Dalton, B., & Palincsar, A. S. (2013). InvestigatingText–Reader Interactions in the Context of Supported etext. In International Handbook of Metacognition and Learning Technologies (pp. 533-544). NewYork: Springer. Daniel, D. B., &Woody,W. D. (2013). E-textbooks at what cost? Performance and use of electronic v. print texts. Computers & Education, 62, 18-23. Duffey, D., & Fox, C. (2012). National educational technology trends 2012: state leadership empowers educators, transforms teaching and learning. Washington, DC: State EducationalTechnology Directors Association (SETDA). Hopkins, W.G. (2008). Quantitative research design. Retrieved from http://sportsci.org/jour/0001/wghdesign.html Ihmeideh, F. M. (2014).The effect of electronic books on enhancing emergent literacy skills of pre-school children. Computers & Education, 79, 40-48.
  22. 22. Jebeile, S. & Reeve, R. (2003).The diffusion of e-learning innovations in an Australian secondary college: strategies and tactics for educational leaders. The Innovation Journal, 8(4), 2003. Retrieved from http://www.innovation.cc/scholarlystyle/jebeile-reeve-elearning.pdf Kissinger, J. S. (2011, January). A Collective Case Study of Mobile E-book Learning Experiences. (Doctoral Dissertation). UNF Theses and Dissertations. paper127. http://digitalcommons.unf.edu/etd/127 Lamothe, A.R. (2011). Factors influencing the usage of an electronic book collection: Size of the e-book collection, student population, and faculty population. College & Research Libraries, 74(1), 39-59. Moore, G.C & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information System Research 2(3), 192-222. Moody, A.K. (2010). Using electronic books in the classroom to enhance emergent literacy skills in young children. Journal of Literacy andTechnology, 11(4), 23-52. Muijs, D. (2004). Doing quantitative research in education with SPSS. London, UK: Sage Publications. Rao, S. S. (2003). Electronic books:A review and evaluation. Library HiTech, 21(1), 85-93. Rogers, E. M (2003). Diffusion of innovations, Fifth ed. NewYork: Free Press. Roskos, K., Burstein, K., Shang,Y., & Gray, E. (2014).Young Children’s Engagement With E-Books at School. SAGE Open, 4(1). Retrieved from http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/4/1/2158244013517244.full-text.pdf+html State Education Policy Center (SEPC). (2012). Database: http://sepc.setda.org/, 2008-2010. Tripathi M. & Jeevan,V.K.J. (2007). E-book subscription in a distance education institution: a case of indira gandhi national open university, India, 104-114. Tsang, E.Y. M.,Yuen, K. S., Li, K. C., & Cheung, S. K. (2013). Designing OpenTextbooks for EffectiveTeaching and Learning. In Knowledge Sharing throughTechnology (pp. 43-55). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer. REFERENCE cont.

×