The adoption of mark-up tools in an interactive e-textbook reader

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 64, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 407-433

  Van Horne, Sam ^a   Russell, Jae eun ^a   Schuh, Kathy L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

Diffusion theory; E textbook; Interactive; Survival analysis; Technology adoption

Indexed keywords

EID: 84971333847     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: 15566501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11423-016-9425-x     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Abdullah, N., & Gibb, F. (2008a). Students’ attitudes towards e-books in a Scottish higher education institute: part 1. Library Review, 57(8), 593–605.
2. Abdullah, N., & Gibb, F. (2008b). Students’ attitudes towards e-books in a Scottish higher education institute: Part 2: analysis of e-book usage. Library Review, 57(9), 676–689.
3. Ackerman, R., & Goldsmith, M. (2011). Metacognitive regulation of text learning: On screen versus on paper. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 17(1), 18–32. doi:10.1037/a0022086.
4. Allison, P. D., & Institute, S. A. S. (2012). Survival analysis using SAS: A practical guide. Cary: SAS Institute.
5. Azevedo, R. (2005). Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? The role of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 199–209. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4004_2.
6. Azevedo, R., & Hadwin, A. F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition—Implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33(5), 367–379. doi:10.1007/s11251-005-1272-9.
7. Bahr, P. R. (2009). Educational attainment as process: Using hierarchical discrete-time event history analysis to model rate of progress. Research in Higher Education, 50(7), 691–714. doi:10.1007/s11162-009-9135-x.
8. Bannert, M., Hildebrand, M., & Mengelkamp, C. (2008). Effects of a metacognitive support device in learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 829–835. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.07.002.
9. Berg, S. A., Hoffmann, K., & Dawson, D. (2010). Not on the same page: Undergraduates’ information retrieval in electronic and print books. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 36(6), 518–525. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2010.08.008.
10. Brunet, D. P., Bates, M. L., Gallo, J. R., & Strother, E. A. (2011). Incoming dental students’ expectations and acceptance of an electronic textbook program. Journal of Dental Education, 75(5), 646–652.
11. Buchanan, T., Sainter, P., & Saunders, G. (2013). Factors affecting faculty use of learning technologies: implications for models of technology adoption. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 25(1), 1–11. doi:10.1007/s12528-013-9066-6.
12. Cassidy, E. D., Martinez, M., & Shen, L. (2012). Not in love, or not in the know? Graduate student and faculty use (and non-use) of e-books. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(6), 326–332. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2012.08.005.
13. Caverly, D. C., Orlando, V. P., & Mullen, J. L. (2000). Textbook study reading. In R. F. Filippo & D. C. Caverly (Eds.), Handbook of college reading and study strategy research (pp. 105–147). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
14. Cuillier, C. A., & Dewland, J. C. (2014). Understanding the key factors for E-textbook integration into a business course: A case study. Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship, 19(1), 32–60. doi:10.1080/08963568.2013.824338.
15. Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2005). Using web-based pedagogical tools as scaffolds for self-regulated learning. Instructional Science, 33(5–6), 513–540. doi:10.1007/s11251-005-1278-3.
16. 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. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.016.
17. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–340. doi:10.2307/249008.
18. Davis, F. D. (1993). User acceptance of information technology: System characteristics, user perceptions and behavioral impacts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 38(3), 475–487. doi:10.1006/imms.1993.1022.
19. Dillon, A., McKnight, C., & Richardson, J. (1988). Reading from paper versus reading from screen. The Computer Journal, 31(5), 457–464.
20. Fouh, E., Breakiron, D. A., Hamouda, S., Farghally, M. F., & Shaffer, C. A. (2014). Exploring students learning behavior with an interactive etextbook in computer science courses. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 478–485. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.061.
21. Hardgrave, B. C., Davis, F. D., & Riemenschneider, C. K. (2003). Investigating determinants of software developers’ intentions to follow methodologies. Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(1), 123–151. doi:10.1080/07421222.2003.11045751.
22. Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na (t) ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the “net generation”. Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92–113. doi:10.1111/j.1475-682X.2009.00317.x.
23. Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2010). Digital natives: where is the evidence? British Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 503–520. doi:10.1080/01411920902989227.
24. Henderson, C., Beach, A., & Finkelstein, N. (2011). Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(8), 952–984. doi:10.1002/tea.20439.
25. Henderson, C., Finkelstein, N., & Beach, A. (2010). Beyond dissemination in college science teaching: An introduction to four core change strategies. Journal of College Science Teaching, 39(5), 18–25.
26. Hernon, P., Hopper, R., Leach, M. R., Saunders, L. L., & Zhang, J. (2007). E-book use by students: Undergraduates in economics, literature, and nursing. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(1), 3–13. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2006.08.005.
27. Hora, M., & Holden, J. (2013). Exploring the role of instructional technology in course planning and classroom teaching: Implications for pedagogical reform. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 25(2), 68–92. doi:10.1007/s12528-013-9068-4.
28. Hosmer, D. W., Lemeshow, S., & May, S. (1999). Applied survival analysis. Regression modeling of time-to-event data. New York: Wiley.
29. Hyman, J. A., Moser, M. T., & Segala, L. N. (2014). Electronic reading and digital library technologies: Understanding learner expectation and usage intent for mobile learning. Educational Technology Research and Development,. doi:10.1007/s11423-013-9330-5.
30. Ishitani, T. (2006). Studying attrition and degree completion behavior among first-generation college students in the United States. Journal of Higher Education, 77(5), 861–885. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3838790
31. Ishitani, T. (2008). How to explore timing of intervention for students at risk of departure. New Directions for Institutional Research., 2008(137), 105–122. doi:10.1002/ir.241.
32. Jairam, D., & Kiewra, K. A. (2010). Helping students soar to success on computers: An investigation of the SOAR study method for computer-based learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(3), 601–614. doi:10.1037/a0019137.
33. Januszewski, A., Molenda, M., & Association for Educational Communications and Technology. (2008). Educational technology: A definition with commentary. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34. Jao, C. S., Brint, S. U., & Hier, D. B. (2005). Making the neurology clerkship more effective: Can e-textbook facilitate learning? Neurological Research, 27(7), 762–767. doi:10.1179/016164105X35639.
35. Ji, S. W., Michaels, S., & Waterman, D. (2014). Print vs. electronic readings in college courses: Cost-efficiency and perceived learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 17–24. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2013.10.004.
36. Kauffman, D. F., Zhao, R., & Yang, Y. S. (2011). Effects of online note taking formats and self-monitoring prompts on learning from online text: Using technology to enhance self-regulated learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 313–322. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.04.001.
37. Kelly, S. (2010). An event history analysis of teacher attrition: Salary, teacher tracking, and socially disadvantaged schools. The Journal of Experimental Education, 72(3), 195–220.
38. Kiewra, K. A. (1989). A review of note-taking: The encoding-storage paradigm and beyond. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 147–172. doi:10.1007/BF01326640.
39. Kim, M., Yoo, K., Park, C., & Yoo, J. (2010). Development of a digital textbook standard format based on XML. Advances in Computer Science and Information Technology, 6059, 363–377. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-13577-4_32.
40. Kirschner, P. A., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 169–183. doi:10.1080/00461520.2013.804395.
41. Kissinger, J. (2013). The social & mobile learning experiences of students using mobile e-books. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 17(1), 155–170.
42. Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of educational research, 61(2), 179–211. doi:10.3102/00346543061002179.
43. Li, L., Chen, G., & Yang, S. (2013). Construction of cognitive maps to improve e-book reading and navigation. Computers & Education, 60(1), 32–39. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.010.
44. Liang, T. H. (2015). The effects of keyword cues and 3R strategy on children’s e-book reading. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 31(2), 176–187. doi:10.1111/jcal.12072.
45. Lund, T. J., & Stains, M. (2015). The importance of context: an exploration of factors influencing the adoption of student-centered teaching among chemistry, biology, and physics faculty. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(1), 1–21. doi:10.1186/s40594-015-0026-8.
46. Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Brønnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 61–68. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2012.12.002.
47. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
48. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.
49. Mizrachi, D. (2015). Undergraduates’ academic reading format preferences and behaviors. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(3), 301–311. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2015.03.009.
50. Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kalman, H. K., & Kemp, J. E. (2013). Designing effective instruction. Hoboken: Wiley.
51. Noyes, J., & Garland, K. (2005). Students’ attitudes toward books and computers. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(2), 233–241. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.02.016.
52. Noyes, J., & Garland, K. (2006). Explaining students’ attitudes toward books and computers. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(3), 351–363. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.09.004.
53. Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International journal of educational research, 31(6), 459–470. doi:10.1016/S0883-0355(99)00015-4.
54. Pintrich, P. R. & Zusho, A. (2002). The development of academic self-regulation: The role of cognitive and motivational factors. In A. Wigfield & J. Eccles (Eds.) Development of Achievement Motivation (pp. 249–284). San Diego: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/B978-012750053-9/50012-7
55. Ponce, H. R., López, M. J., & Mayer, R. E. (2012). Instructional effectiveness of a computer-supported program for teaching reading comprehension strategies. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1170–1183. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.013.
56. Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J., Courduff, J., Carter, K., & Bennett, D. (2013a). Electronic versus traditional print textbooks: A comparison study on the influence of university students’ learning. Computers & Education, 63, 259–266. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.022.
57. Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J., Wendt, J., & Lunde, R. (2013b). Electronic versus print textbooks: the influence of textbook format on university students’ self-regulated learning strategies, motivation, and text anxiety. American Journal of Distance Education, 27(3), 179–188. doi:10.1080/08923647.2013.796230.
58. Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.
59. Salmerόn, L., & García, V. (2011). Reading skills and children’s navigation strategies in hypertext. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1143–1151. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.12.008.
60. Scales, A., & Rhee, O. (2001). Adult reading habits and patterns. Reading Psychology, 22(3), 175–203. doi:10.1080/027027101753170610.
61. Schmid, R. F., Bernard, R., Borokhovski, E., Tamim, R., Abrami, P., Wade, C. A., et al. (2009). Technology’s effect on achievement in higher education: a stage I meta-analysis of classroom applications. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21(2), 95–109. doi:10.1007/s12528-009-9021-8.
62. Shepperd, J. A., Grace, J. L., & Koch, E. J. (2008). Evaluating the electronic textbook: Is it time to dispense with the paper text? Teaching of Psychology, 35(1), 2–5. doi:10.1080/00986280701818532.
63. Soifer, R., Irwin, M. E., Crumrine, B. M., Honzaki, E., Simmons, B. K., & Young, D. L. (1990). The complete theory-to-practice handbook of adult literacy: Curriculum design and teaching approaches. New York: Teachers College Press.
64. Stone, R. W., & Baker-Eveleth, L. J. (2013). Students’ intentions to purchase electronic textbooks. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 25(1), 27–47. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.007.
65. Sullivan, S. A., & Puntambekar, S. (2015). Learning with digital texts: exploring the impact of prior domain knowledge and reading comprehension ability on navigation and learning outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 299–313. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.016.
66. Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning a second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational Research, 81(1), 4–28. doi:10.3102/0034654310393361.
67. R Core Team (2014). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org/
68. Terpend, R., Gattiker, T. F., & Lowe, S. E. (2014). Electronic textbooks: Antecedents of students’ adoption and learning outcomes. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 12(2), 149–173. doi:10.1111/dsji.12031.
69. Van Horne, S., Schuh, K. L., & Russell, J. E. (in progress). College students’ and instructors’ usage of interactive e-textbooks.
70. Wang, S. K., Hsu, H. Y., Campbell, T., Coster, D. C., & Longhurst, M. (2014). An investigation of middle school science teachers and students use of technology inside and outside of classrooms: considering whether digital natives are more technology savvy than their teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(5), 637–662. doi:10.1007/s11423-014-9355-4.
71. Winne, P. H. (2010). Improving measurements of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 267–276. doi:10.1080/00461520.2010.517150.
72. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. Metacognition in educational theory and practice, 93, 27–30.
73. Woody, W. D., Daniel, D. B., & Baker, C. A. (2010). E-books or textbooks: students prefer textbooks. Computers & Education, 55(3), 945–948. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.005.
74. Worm, B. S. (2013). Learning from simple ebooks, online cases or classroom teaching when acquiring complex knowledge. A randomized controlled trial in respiratory physiology and pulmonology. PLoS ONE, 8(9), e73336. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0073336.