To eText or no?

This @wiredcampus article got me thinking, once again, about the push for etexts by publishers and some in higher ed.


http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/major-publishers-join-indiana-u-project-that-requires-students-to-use-e-textbooks/33156?sid=wc&utm_source=wc&utm_medium=en



I would support use of free OER over publisher driven #etexts.  I have used etexts and digital articles in lieu of traditional textbooks because they provide increased access for students at a reduced or free price.  I was one of those students that had a very challenging time affording my textbooks.


When visiting Alex Pickett at SUNY and working with her group on their NGLC grant, I was surprised and excited that they had set a ceiling of $50 for student materials for the course, mainly the textbook.  They were looking to use OER over an expensive textbook.  This was definitely going to be a challenge for faculty.  They know needed time and new skills to locate the needed content.


For years, the textbook was an easy task for educators.  I have a few choices in my class.  I used the same one for years.  It was the same one which my instructor used when I was an undergraduate.  The textbook also guides many faculty learning outcomes, course design, and more, where really our learning outcomes, desired results, should be guiding us.  Textbooks need to stop driving us...


Also, educators need new skills in locating and evaluating OER -- rubrics, checklist, etc.  Anyone have any?


When I tried etextbooks out, 4-5 years ago, in order to give my students greater access to the text, to the content, there were lots of technical challenges with publisher "walls." Students paid, but then couldn't access the reading.  There were lots of security mechanisms in place no just-in-time technical support when needed.  Also, students needed a new username and password, which they often misplaced or lost.  Further, they weren't able to download them.  They had to read them within the publisher site.  Technical problems diminishing access is a concern.  


At the time the ebook or etext or etextbook was offered at about 40% of the price of the paper book.  However, this has changed and we are now seeing these digital versions being offered at the same or a greater price eliminating the idea of affordable access.


I moved to focus on backward design, my learning outcomes, and then used those to find free digital content for my students through an array of textbooks, journal articles, and web sites.


The second reason I see for etexts is for the ability to annotate (which can be done with any digital article in Adobe Acrobat Pro) or have rich, engaging activities integrated within them (e.g., 3D animated objects).  This is the main reason where digital texts can lead to increase learning based on the pedagogical use.


In this article, the study is troubling in ways.  We need better methodology in evaluating etextbooks.  Learning was equated to the grade, and it showed no impact on "student learning."  It also appears that the instrument didn't ask about any technological challenges, ease of use, accessing ebook (McGraw Hill authentication), cost, etc.  

On twitter, a colleauge tells me that maybe mode and method of delivery doesn't matter (See post http://screencast.com/t/SrPCOMWzRb). Is this truly the case?  


The bottom line is what does the digital delivery of text facilitate, if anything?  Like any digital technology, it will greatly depend on how it is used.  If you are not going to strategically implement the etext into your course design (e.g., in class annotation or interaction with text), then there is not going to be an impact on your desired learning outcomes.


So, again, before embarking on these etext initiatives, let's really focus on what is important and what is the desired impact on students.  Simply offering a digital version of a paper textbook is not going to necessarily increase student learning.