AFFORDABLE AND OPEN TEXTBOOKS: An Exploratory Study of Faculty Attitudes

D. Harley, Shannon G. Lawrence, S. K. Acord, Jason Dixson
{"title":"AFFORDABLE AND OPEN TEXTBOOKS: An Exploratory Study of Faculty Attitudes","authors":"D. Harley, Shannon G. Lawrence, S. K. Acord, Jason Dixson","doi":"10.5070/P2D60T","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The textbook industry is in significant flux that is fueled by evolving technologies, increased availability of online open content and curricula, active used textbook markets, and, most recently, a rash of textbook rental start-ups, just to name a few of the factors at play. At the same time, Open Educational Resources (OERs)—learning materials distributed openly for either no or minimal cost—may have become commonplace enough that a credible, viable infrastructure for open textbooks, one that mainstream faculty would accept, could be imagined. Our research, which employed an online survey and focus groups, explored faculty perceptions about affordability and open textbooks. Our results indicate that faculty want a diversity of choices when they choose a textbook. They are independent thinkers, exceptionally busy, suffer from extreme information overload, are generally dedicated to ensuring their students’ success, and do not take well to “one size fits all” solutions. Our data indicated that any discussion about textbook affordability solutions must also take into account that most faculty are active and independent decision makers when it comes to choosing a textbook or other curricular materials for their courses; the top-down high-school model of textbook adoption is anathema to many professors and instructors. Complicating the picture are the natural, heterogeneous needs among the institutions, disciplines, and courses encompassed by higher education; the type of institution and the level and content of the course will ultimately determine which curricular forms offer the best solutions. Faculty made clear that their students represent a plethora of learning backgrounds and goals, and also desire flexibility and choice in textbook options. What is notable and cannot be ignored is that purely electronic solutions will not be universally embraced in the near term. Reasons for resistance included students’ need for the safety net of a printed textbook and the positive pedagogical practice of engaging with the text by “writing in the margins” (which is not a practical reality in current electronic platforms). Regarding the demand for open textbooks, there simply are not enough currently available in enough disciplines to satisfy the multitude of faculty and student needs in lower and upper division courses; a much wider array of high-quality, easy-to-use, and reliable open textbooks will have to be produced for more widespread faculty adoption to be realized. Even then, open textbooks will likely be only one of many players in the curricular materials market. This work, directed by Diane Harley, was conducted under the aegis of the Higher Education in the Digital Age Project at the Center for Studies in Higher Education: http://cshe.berkeley.edu/people/dharley","PeriodicalId":347104,"journal":{"name":"Center for Studies in Higher Education","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Center for Studies in Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5070/P2D60T","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

Abstract

The textbook industry is in significant flux that is fueled by evolving technologies, increased availability of online open content and curricula, active used textbook markets, and, most recently, a rash of textbook rental start-ups, just to name a few of the factors at play. At the same time, Open Educational Resources (OERs)—learning materials distributed openly for either no or minimal cost—may have become commonplace enough that a credible, viable infrastructure for open textbooks, one that mainstream faculty would accept, could be imagined. Our research, which employed an online survey and focus groups, explored faculty perceptions about affordability and open textbooks. Our results indicate that faculty want a diversity of choices when they choose a textbook. They are independent thinkers, exceptionally busy, suffer from extreme information overload, are generally dedicated to ensuring their students’ success, and do not take well to “one size fits all” solutions. Our data indicated that any discussion about textbook affordability solutions must also take into account that most faculty are active and independent decision makers when it comes to choosing a textbook or other curricular materials for their courses; the top-down high-school model of textbook adoption is anathema to many professors and instructors. Complicating the picture are the natural, heterogeneous needs among the institutions, disciplines, and courses encompassed by higher education; the type of institution and the level and content of the course will ultimately determine which curricular forms offer the best solutions. Faculty made clear that their students represent a plethora of learning backgrounds and goals, and also desire flexibility and choice in textbook options. What is notable and cannot be ignored is that purely electronic solutions will not be universally embraced in the near term. Reasons for resistance included students’ need for the safety net of a printed textbook and the positive pedagogical practice of engaging with the text by “writing in the margins” (which is not a practical reality in current electronic platforms). Regarding the demand for open textbooks, there simply are not enough currently available in enough disciplines to satisfy the multitude of faculty and student needs in lower and upper division courses; a much wider array of high-quality, easy-to-use, and reliable open textbooks will have to be produced for more widespread faculty adoption to be realized. Even then, open textbooks will likely be only one of many players in the curricular materials market. This work, directed by Diane Harley, was conducted under the aegis of the Higher Education in the Digital Age Project at the Center for Studies in Higher Education: http://cshe.berkeley.edu/people/dharley
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
可负担的和开放的教科书:教师态度的探索性研究
由于技术的发展、在线开放内容和课程的增加、活跃的二手教科书市场,以及最近涌现的大量教科书租赁初创企业,教科书行业正处于巨大的变化之中,这只是其中的几个因素。与此同时,开放教育资源(OERs)——免费或以最低成本公开分发的学习材料——可能已经变得足够普遍,以至于可以想象一个可信的、可行的开放教科书基础设施,一个主流教师会接受的基础设施。我们的研究采用了在线调查和焦点小组,探讨了教师对负担能力和开放教科书的看法。我们的研究结果表明,教师在选择教科书时希望有多样化的选择。他们是独立的思考者,异常忙碌,承受着极度的信息过载,通常致力于确保学生的成功,并且不喜欢“一刀切”的解决方案。我们的数据表明,任何关于教科书可负担性解决方案的讨论都必须考虑到,在为他们的课程选择教科书或其他课程材料时,大多数教师都是积极和独立的决策者;采用教科书的自上而下的高中模式令许多教授和教师深恶痛绝。高等教育所包含的机构、学科和课程之间自然的、不同的需求使情况更加复杂;学校的类型、课程的水平和内容将最终决定哪种课程形式能提供最好的解决方案。教师们明确表示,他们的学生代表了大量的学习背景和目标,他们也希望在教科书选择上具有灵活性和可选择性。值得注意且不容忽视的是,纯电子解决方案在短期内不会得到普遍接受。抵制的原因包括学生需要纸质教科书的安全网,以及通过“在空白处写作”来参与文本的积极教学实践(这在当前的电子平台上是不现实的)。在对开放教材的需求方面,目前在足够多的学科中根本没有足够的教材来满足上下级课程中众多教师和学生的需求;为了实现更广泛的教师采用,必须制作更多高质量、易于使用和可靠的开放教科书。即便如此,开放教科书也可能只是教材市场众多参与者中的一个。这项工作由戴安·哈利(Diane Harley)指导,是在高等教育研究中心的数字时代高等教育项目的支持下进行的:http://cshe.berkeley.edu/people/dharley
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Beyond the Master Plan: The Case for Restructuring Baccalaureate Education in California. Research & Occasional Paper Series: CSHE.16.10. AFFORDABLE AND OPEN TEXTBOOKS: An Exploratory Study of Faculty Attitudes Can Public Research Universities Compete The Influence of Academic Values on Scholarly Publication and Communication Practices Race, Income, and College in 25 Years: Evaluating Justice O'Connor's Conjecture. Center for Studies in Higher Education, Research & Occasional Paper Series: CSHE.19.06.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1