Running Head: Instructional Design and Electronic Textbooks

Instructional Design and Electronic Textbooks

Quentin Flokstra
50567072
ETEC 511, Section 64B
The University of British Columbia
Dr. Franc Feng
December 11, 2012

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

Instructional Design and Electronic Textbooks

Since the 1990s, research has been going on how to effectively maximize the efficacy of
electronic learning materials/textbooks. Two decades later and the use of textbooks as a key
format of content dissemination is still widely practiced and yet the battle to maximize
electronic textbooks (e-texts) is still ongoing. With the proliferation of e-readers entering both
mainstream and educational contexts, there is a need within all levels of education to critically
examine underlying instructional designs in relation to the use of e-texts in the classroom. It
seems that there is an ongoing dilemma between the forces of pedagogy and technology; when
technology informs pedagogy, there are issues. However, when pedagogy informs technology,
true innovation can take place.
E-texts will be implemented at all levels of education. Although there are not many
studies that examine the use of e-texts below the post-secondary level, the pedagogical
implications can be extrapolated and applied at all levels of education. This paper will examine
the use of e-texts in the recent decades, the challenges faced in widespread implementation,
pedagogical implications for maximizing efficacy, and, briefly, an examination into the ideal
platform for e-texts.
Historical Underutilization of E-Texts
E-texts have been in the market for more than a decade, yet the adoption rate has been
slow (Murray & Perez, 2011). Even more concerning is the fact that many college students
prefer print textbooks to electronic texts. As recently as 2011, a survey indicated that college
students still preferred print textbooks to e-texts for a variety of reasons (Book Industry Study
Group (BISG), 2011). Schwartz (2012) points out that e-texts are not ready to be implemented

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

on a widespread scale due to issues of usability, visual presentation, and navigation. Some of
these issues seem to indicate a lack of sound pedagogy behind the implementation of e-texts.
These are not new issues as electronic learning materials have been in place for the better part of
two decades with similar concerns.
As early as 1990, Fitz (1990) realized that computer based training would have the
potential to transform teaching and learning. However, she noted that the medium would not
compensate for poorly planned material and that many educators were not taking advantage of
the new mediums potential.
McFall (2005) also pointed out in his studies of the use of e-texts among university
students that the supplemental tools often went underused. Student feedback was generally
neutral on the uses of e-readers and their greatest concern was the underutilization of the tools by
the instructor (McFall, 2005).
It is interesting to note that the pedagogical concerns span two decades and that various
studies have shown a great need for instructors to be more purposeful in the implementation of etexts and other electronic learning materials.
Other Common Challenges and Concerns
While the historical concerns regarding the underutilization of e-texts are one factor to
the lack of widespread implementation, other factors also need to be considered. These factors
cover everything from physiological concerns to practical issues such as the economic feasibility
of wide scale adoption of e-readers.

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

The number one concern among students regarding the use of e-texts is eyestrain
resulting from prolonged periods of reading digitized text (Appleton, 2005; National Association
of College Stores (NACS), 2006; Schwartz, 2012; Wasshuber). Given that this a recurring
concern within various studies and at various times, this is a concern that needs addressing.
However, a recent article in the New York Times stated that e-readers, as a device, are not the
cause of eyestrain but the manner in which users utilize their devices (Bilton, 2010). Moreover,
it seems that with newer devices, such as the new iPad, eyestrain is less of an issue if users read
from their devices using the manufactures recommendations for reading distance (Pachal, 2012).
The implication seems that students will need to be mindful of how they are reading e-texts and,
as the quality of e-readers improve, this concerns regarding eyestrain will be lessened.
Other student concerns deal with other practical issues. Some students are concerned
with the reliability of e-texts (via e-readers) in terms of battery life and/or the device crashing
(NACS, 2006; Wasshuber). Still others are concerned with being able to access content wither
by downloading it or by reading it online (Appleton, 2005; NACS, 2006; Wasshuber). Others
are concerned with the creation of a divide between the haves and have-nots in terms of
access to the requisite e-reading devices and having access to reliable, high-speed Internet
connections (NACS, 2006). Still further, others are concerned about re-sell value that is to say
the ability to recoup some of the costs invested into purchasing core textbooks (BISG, 2011).
All of the concerns that have been listed are ones that may be addressed, and fixed, as
electronic devices improve in both quality and affordability. Connectivity is a factor that may
limit those in outlying areas from being able to reap the early benefits as the adoption of e-texts
takes place, but hopefully that can be addressed as infrastructure improves. Overall, the greatest
concern is those that deal with pedagogical issues.

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

Maximizing Efficacy: Pedagogical Considerations

As has been noted, there are some significant barriers to the widespread use of e-texts in
education. The most significant issue is ensuring that e-texts are used in a way to maximize the
options that make them unique. A great concern is that many e-texts simply emulate print
versions (Murray & Perez, 2011). In order to maximize efficacy, educators must not just learn
how to use the service but learn how to teach and learn from a completely new platform
(Schwartz, 2012). This means that educators will have to be familiar with all facets of the
platform including accessibility, navigation (including searchability), support features, aesthetics
and purposeful design, and so on.
E-texts cannot simply be a digitized version of a paper textbook. Although e-books cost
considerably less than paper texts (Schwartz, 2012; Wasshuber), this is not enough to justify a
changeover to e-texts. Moreover, the cost factor is not always true (McFall, 2005). When
switching from printed texts to e-texts, one must keep in mind the fixed costs associated with
switching over to a digital medium. Moreover, initial implementation will have a significant
increase in the variable costs of utilizing the e-text platforms. So while it may seem more cost
effective then printing a text, one must keep in mind the costs associated with purchasing
devices, re-designing courses, and other variable costs.
Regarding implementing e-texts based on financial reasons, Ryan McFall says that for
success to be had, [e-texts] must be designed with a goal of transforming the way students
interact with a textbook to significantly enhance student learning (2005, p.74). Murray and
Perez (2011) echo these sentiments when they argue that the value of e-texts will increase when
they are designed to enhance the teaching-learning process. Moreover, they argue that adoption

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

of e-texts should be driven by educational value not by economic factors (Murray & Perez,
2011).
Even if instructors would want to use e-texts simply as a digitized upgrade to a printed
textbook, they would need to understand that one does not read digitized text in the same
manner. Fitz (1990) postulated that people read digital text at 75% of the speed of printed text.
Moreover, students do not read the information in a linear manner (Fitz, 1990). Students are
likely to be skimming material rather than reading in a detailed manner (Murray & Perez, 2011).
These bear consideration in light of course design. The very nature of reading changes with
using e-texts and so instructional design must reflect this.
The most appealing functions of e-texts are that it facilitates annotation, collaboration,
and note sharing between instructors and students and among students (Schwartz, 2012). If
instructors would utilize these tools, students would get more out class. Many instructors
annotate their own texts for their own purposes and clarifications; sharing these annotations with
students would only benefit the overall learning environment. Moreover, if students shared their
own annotations with one another, collaboration would be realized in a much richer sense.
Additionally, students would be able post questions about the text that their peers or the
instructor could address during, or even before, class. Utilizing these tools could mean a more
meaningful use of classroom time to work on activities based on the readings (McFall, 2005).
The collaborative benefits of e-texts cannot be overemphasized. For some instructors this
may require a significant pedagogical shift. For others, it may mean envisioning collaboration
on a larger scale. Within e-texts, there is the ability for collaborative note taking, among other
annotation tools, and group highlighting (Murray & Perez, 2011). From an instructional design

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

point of view, this makes the content dissemination of a course more focussed. Moreover,
students will be able to learn how to become better readers. This can also be facilitated by
embedded discussion forums into the e-text (Murray & Perez, 2011). Additionally, the instructor
may choose to embed interactivities into the e-text to enhance student participation with the
content. This will allow immediate usage of the information in a meaningful context. Again, this
collaborative feature can only benefit the primary users of the e-text, namely students.
Taking this one step further, an instructor could seek the input from students to improve
the e-text. E-texts can be updated regularly to ensure the content is relevant. Maximizing
collaborative learning will allow an instructor to benefit from reader participation to create a
nearly flawless e-text (Wasshuber). One of the problems with printed texts is that once the
information is outdated, there is not much that can be done about it. Moreover, any errors will
remain for as long as the particular edition remains in print. Students can spot errors, provide
instant feedback, and edit them in e-texts. This will enhance the overall readability and
reliability of an e-text. The instructor will need to be flexible to allow for reader input and to be
willing to update the e-text to reap this benefit and to empower learners.
Utilization of the embedded tools within e-texts is just one, although significant, facet of
purposeful design in implementing e-texts in a class. The aesthetics of the e-text are another
factor that needs consideration. Appleton (2005) argues that the promotion and embedding of etexts be customized within a specific learning group. Ideally, the instructor of the course should
provide significant input to the overall design of the e-text to maximize the efficacy within his or
her own classes.

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

E-texts need to be differently designed than print texts. As noted earlier, students tend to
skim e-texts and do not read at the same rate as when reading printed texts. Thus, students will
need an e-text that is well laid out (Appleton, 2005). One implication of this is for designers to
write shorter paragraphs in simpler sentences (Fitz, 1990). Moreover, the e-text design should
utilize alternative presentation methods such as graphs and pictures (Fitz, 1990). E-text designers
could benefit from the principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) when designing their
materials. UDL considers the need of the entire range of learners particularly those for whom
traditional texts are insufficient (Pisha & Coyne, 2001). UDL provides multiple representations
learning materials such as multimedia tools and larger print size (Pisha & Coyne, 2001). While
these design implications will aid those for whom printed text is a challenge, these principles can
benefit all users of e-texts.
Mayer (2003) urges instructors to pursue meaningful learning utilizing multimedia tools.
This means that one should purposefully select and organize words and images for their
instructional design (Mayer, 2003). Particularly with e-texts, designers have the opportunity to
target more than one learning modality. The design of the e-text can incorporate print, video,
audio clips, and so on. The combination of media within the e-text improves the content quality
and capability (Wasshuber). When these multimedia tools are implemented into the e-text, the
opportunity for maximum efficacy is far more likely than if it remains solely a digitized version
of a printed text.
Given that a switch to e-texts requires a paradigm shift in how courses can be offered,
and how texts will be read, another instructional design implication is that instructors will need
to provide scaffolding for their students in how to maximize their usage of the e-texts. Appleton
(2005) found that scaffolding the implementation and effective usage of e-texts to be key in

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

ensuring their successful adoption by instructors and students alike. Appletons (2005) studies
showed a very deliberate and methodical approach to implementing e-texts within a course. The
instructors started by introducing the resource and training the students in how to make full use
of them. From there, students were provided with the opportunity to provide feedback on the
manner in which they were being used within their course. This type of interaction between
instructor and students is key to ensuring maximum efficacy of the e-text. Moreover, from an
instructional design perspective, more collaboration is usually a good thing. McFadden (2012)
considers stakeholder participation to be one of the key strategies in successful implementation
of e-texts. This is particularly important to do because, as McFall (2005) points out, students
have developed particular reading habits and need to learn a new way of reading. By scaffolding
their transition to the usage of e-texts, instructors will promote the principles of collaborative
learning.
This can be taken to its furthest end, namely open source, open content collaboration.
Chesser (2011) postulates that as more and more interactivities are embedded in e-texts, the
logical next step is an Open E-Text. This would function much like Wikipedia with the content
created and curated by a group of authors. In order for this to be successful, instructors would
need to work together to monitor the quality of the content (Chesser, 2011).
Maximizing the potential of e-texts requires a key shift in how instructors use textbooks.
Instructors will need to fully embrace collaborative learning in order to make the transition to etexts worthwhile. The collaborative features within e-texts as well as the design aspects require a
re-thinking of how courses will be taught.

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

Maximizing Efficacy: A Question of Hardware

As noted earlier, more and more electronic devices are entering the marketplace making
the shift to e-texts a question of when not if. Moreover, the quality of these devices are
improving, thus reducing concerns of eyestrain and visual quality. However, with the
proliferation of devices ranging from Amazons Kindle to Apples iPad, how can educational
institutions implement e-texts on a widespread scale that accounts for connectivity, reliability,
and economic feasibility? Moreover, some companies, such as Apple, are offering compelling
reasons for educational institutions to switch to one main platform. However, this may not be
desired or cost-effective. Indeed, as 2012 draws to a close, there is a need to critically examine
hardware issues that will accompany a shift to e-texts.
In January 2012, Apple announced the development of iBooks textbooks and iBooks
author, making a very compelling framework for the engineering of e-texts which encompasses
all of the previously mentioned design aspects. Many of the major textbook publishing
companies have signed up with Apple (Apple, 2012). This seems to indicate that Apples iPad
will become the de facto e-reader in the e-text revolution.
However, Perlow (2012a) cautions against consumers (educational institutions and
others) from wholesale acceptance of Apples iPad and iBooks hardware and software as the defacto choice for education. Firstly, Perlow finds the cost of implementation to be staggering; as
he says (based on US data), it is cheaper to go to another planet than to give an iPad to every
child (Perlow, 2012a).

Not only does Perlow have concerns with the hardware costs, the sales

model behind Apples iBooks eliminates the notion that textbooks are a school asset, as each
student will own the textbook. While there may be some pedagogical value behind that notion,

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

10

there does need to be some consideration on the overall cost of such a program. However, cost
alone cannot be the only issue to consider, as has been previously discussed within this paper.
While cost is not the only factor, e-texts should still be cost-effective while retaining the
key features that enhance their use as a tool for learning as outlined earlier. Perlow (2012b)
argues that the ideal e-reader is durable, is fairly inexpensive, is easily managed from an
educators perspective ... and has zero value from a theft perspective. What Perlow suggests is
an Educational Pad. Such a device would be something that is educationally based and powerful
enough to render media-rich textbooks, present web curriculum, play videos and run educational
apps but without all of the clutter of a mainstream touch screen device. The device should be
intuitive to use, utilize a standardized charging station and an operating system that resembles
those of current devices but focussed more on running educational software. Perlow (2012b)
argues that open source might be the viable option for a device like this and that the overall cost
of this device could be had for around two hundred dollars. Given the specific design functions
to maximize educational value this notion is certainly worth exploring.
An open source e-reading device designed to maximize the efficacy of e-texts while
remaining cost efficient is the future challenge in the journey to implement e-texts on a wide
scale. A proliferation of devices presents the challenge of ensuring that e-texts are accessible on
all devices. The use of a single device presents challenges regarding corporate involvement in
education. An open source e-reader seems logical but it does not yet exist, which presents its
own set of issues. Clearly, the path to widespread use of e-texts in educational institutions at all
levels is still some years away.

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

11

Conclusions
Despite some of the questions and concerns that have been presented with recent
developments within electronic platforms that can be used in conjunction with e-readers, there is
still a trend within educational institutions to transition to widespread use of e-texts. Hardware
concerns are one avenue that still needs exploration prior to wide scale adoption, particularly in
K-12 contexts. Moreover, there is a need to re-examine pedagogy in light of how textbooks will
be used in future classrooms.
With a renewed focus on collaboration and integrating the principles of UDL, educators
at all levels will be able to reap the benefits that e-texts bring to education no matter which
device is being utilized. As with the integration of any technological device in the classroom, the
educator needs to be prepared and to be able to scaffold students into integrating the technology
into a meaningful learning experience. The transition to e-texts will be of major importance in
education, both at the K-12 level and at the post-secondary level, as long as purposeful
instructional design is utilized alongside the implementation of cost-effective devices.

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

12

References
Apple. (2012). iBooks textbooks for iPad. Retrieved from:
http://www.apple.com/education/ibooks-textbooks/
Appleton, L. (2005). Using electronic textbooks: promoting, placing and embedding. The
Electronic Library, 23, 54-63. doi: 10.1108/02640470510582736
Book Industry Study Group. (2011). College studetns want their textbooks the old-fashioned
way: in print: the landmark research into preferences of colelge student reveals e-texts
lagging far behind print, for now, news release, Jan. 6, 2011, http://www.bisg.org/news-5603-press-releasecollege-students-want-their-textbooks-the-old-fashioned-way-in-print.php

Chesser, W. D. (2010). The e-textbook revolution. In S. Polanka (Ed.), The no shelf guide to
e-book purchasing (pp.28-40). Atlanta: ALA Publishing.
Fitz, J. (1990). Conquering the dreaded electronic textbook. (1990). Training,15-15.
Retrieved from: http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?
url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/203396717?accountid=14656
Mayer, R. A. (2003). Elements of a science of e-learning. Journal of Educational Computing
Research, 29(3), 297-313 Retrieved from:
http://www.metapress.com.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/content/300321/?
genre=journal&issn=0735-6331
McFadden, C. (2012). Are textbooks dead? Making sense of the digital transition. Publishing
Research Quarterly , 28(2), 93-99. doi:10.1007/s12109-012-9266-3
McFall, R. (2005). Electronic textbooks that transform how textbooks are used. The
Electronic Library, 23(1), 72-81. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02640470510582754
Murray, M. C. & Perez, J. (2011). E-Textbooks are coming; are we ready? Issues in
Informing Science and Information Technology, 8, 49-60. Retrieved from:
http://iisit.org/Vol8/IISITv8p049-060Murray307.pdf
National Association of College Stores. (2006). The great textbook debate: Examining
implications and applications: Participant reaction white paper [White Paper]. Retrieved
from: http://www.nacs.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=_86eyM3nhY
%3D&tabid=1426&mid=1871

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND ELECTRONIC TEXTBOOKS

13

Oliver, S. P. (2007). A framework for conceptualizing the impact of technology on teaching

and learning. Educational Technology & Science, 10(1), 16-27. Retrieved from
http://www.ifets.info/journals/10_1/3.pdf
Perlow, J. (2012a). Textbook of the future: The challenges. Retrieved from:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/perlow/textbook-of-the-future-the-challenges/19733
Perlow, J. (2012b). Textbook of the future: The hardware. Retrieved from:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/perlow/textbook-of-the-future-the-hardware/19756
Pisha, B. & Coyne, P. (2001) Smart from the start: The promise of universal design for
learning. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 197-2-3. doi: 10.1177/074193250102200402
Schwartz, K. (2012). Why college sudents still prefer print over e-books. Retrieved from:
http://blogs.kqed.org/mindshift/2012/09/why-college-students-still-prefer-print-over-e-books/
Wasshuber, C. (n.d.). Pros and cons of ebooks. Retrieved from:
http://www.lybrary.com/free_ebooks/pros_and_cons_of_ebooks.pdf