Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 4 (2012) 262–266
1h
Research
E-books in the classroom: A survey of students and faculty at aschool of pharmacy
Eve C. Elias, PharmD, MS, David C. Phillips, PharmD, BCPS*,Melissa E. Luechtefeld, PharmD Candidate
UMKC School of Pharmacy at MU, Columbia, MO
Abstract
Objectives: To identify the availability and interest in the adoption of e-textbooks by a school of pharmacy’s students andfaculty.Methods: An initial identification of all required and suggested textbooks used within a school of pharmacy’s required courseswas completed. Two anonymous questionnaires (Appendix A) were then administered through an online survey instrument toboth students and faculty via a link in an e-mail asking for voluntary participation.Results: Responses were received from 41% of faculty and 42% of students. Seventy percent of required textbooks and 33%of suggested textbooks were available for purchase in an e-book format. Responses to the survey questions revealed thatprinted textbooks were preferred over electronic textbooks by students (78.7%) and faculty (84%). Factors that affected theirdecision to use printed or electronic textbooks were also identified.Conclusions: Electronic books have the potential to offer many benefits to readers. However, it appears that students andaculty at this school of pharmacy are not interested in adopting electronic textbooks at this time. As the availability oflectronic textbooks increases and people become more aware of their capabilities, future surveys may reveal a change intudents’ and faculty’s attitudes toward this medium.
College students readily embrace technology, fromiPhones (Cupertino, CA) and KindlesTM (Seattle, WA) tointeractive white boards and video-conference classes; ad-vanced learning tools are rapidly moving into the educa-tional setting. E-textbooks are gaining popularity amongcollege students because they are often less expensive, eas-ily searched, accessible from almost anywhere, and essen-tially weightless.1 These added conveniences are catchinghe attention of frugal students.2
At our institution it is estimated that by graduation, the
* Correspondence to: David C. Phillips, PharmD, BCPS, UMKCSchool of Pharmacy at MU, 701 S. Fifth Street, 811 Lewis Hall,Columbia, MO 65211.
verage pharmacy student will have spent approximately1500 on textbooks (M.E. Luechtefeld, unpublished data,ompiled from list of required texts for the school of phar-acy), and hard copy textbook costs are only rising with
ach new edition published. Many e-books can be obtainedy purchasing a lifetime download or by ‘renting’ the textor a period of 180 to 360 days. Universities are movingoward increased use of electronic resources.3 As a rela-
tively new technology, many faculty and students may nothave had the opportunity to use an electronic format book orown a book reader device. Familiarity with the new tech-nology may lead to acceptance over time, much as cellphones have become an essential item in our daily lives.
A study of resources used by first year medical studentsat Texas A&M showed that textbooks are an importantresource and many are now available in electronic formats.4
This research focused on the comparison of title-specific use
263E.C. Elias et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 4 (2012) 262–266
of e-textbooks within a collection, such as AccessMedicine(New York, NY). The authors found that electronic accessincreased the use of reference materials over their textcounterparts.4 A similar study conducted at the Universityof Denver showed that users of e-textbooks only read asmall portion of the text, as opposed to full immersion in theprint version. However, they seemed to be preferred bymost respondents, who added that ‘convenience, remoteaccess, and ability to search within a text contributed to userpreference for e-books over print counterparts.’5
Despite this, not all students are so apt to let go of hardcopy texts. Beginning in 2005, students at Louisiana StateUniversity School of Dentistry (LSUSD) were required toparticipate in a digital textbook program where they pur-chased the VitalSource Technologies, Inc. Bookshelf (Ra-leigh, NC).6 Environmental preservation, cost savings, con-venience, and flexibility were the driving forces behind thisuniversity requirement. In spring 2008, LSUSD designed aSurveyMonkey (Palo Alto, CA) questionnaire for dentalstudents in years one, two, and three. In 2009, they gave thesame questionnaire to the new first-year class. Eighty-twoout of 240 students, or 34.2%, completed the survey. Ofstudents who responded, 42.7% indicated they used e-booksfor class preparation and only 17% said they used thecollection to prepare for National Board examinations;52.7% reported that they planned to use the e-books aftergraduation, and 58.5% of dental students regarded using theVitalSource Bookshelf as a positive experience. However,when students were asked if they prefer printed textbooksover e-books, 57.3% responded ‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree.’Over their 4-year program, VitalSource Bookshelf fees to-taled $3602 per student for the LSUSD class of 2009, wherethe correlating 28 required hard copy textbooks averaged$2240. This fact, along with the ‘monotonous’ reading for-mat and a common dislike for reading text on a computer,reported at 34.1%, left many students disgruntled with e-books.6 Clearly, pros and cons exist for both electronic andard copy texts.
Shepperd et al. surveyed students in an introductorysychology course to determine if course grades and theuantity of time spent reading differed between studentsho used electronic versus printed textbooks.7 Students
were given the option of which text to purchase, and 90%chose the printed textbook even though the cost of theelectronic textbook was significantly less than its printedcounterpart ($104 vs. $40). Thirty-six students who hadpreviously used an electronic textbook did not purchase itfor the course. The study found that students who used theprinted textbook spent more time studying; however, therewas no statistically significant difference in final coursegrades between the groups.7 When surveyed, students whoad purchased the electronic textbook responded that theedium was somewhat user-friendly, but they were not
nclined to endorse the format for future use or to a friend.n addition, they did not respond positively when rating
heir convenience or liking for the electronic format.7
Woody et al. surveyed a cohort of 91 students enrolled ina general psychology course who had previously had theoption of using an e-book in a university course. The surveyassessed students’ computer usage, preference, and satisfac-tion for e-books and printed textbooks based on previouse-book experience, and use of special features in e-booksand printed textbooks. Based on the results of the survey,the authors concluded that the students favored printedtextbooks for learning versus the e-book. The survey alsoshowed that the preference for printed textbooks was notaffected by the students’ previous use or knowledge ofe-books, and students used special features within printedtextbooks more than in e-books.8
The primary objective of this study was to identify theavailability and interest in the adoption of e-textbooks byschool of pharmacy students and faculty.
Methods
The authors wished to determine the interest level ofelectronic textbook adoption among faculty and students attheir school of pharmacy. With the assistance of theschool’s Director of Student Affairs, initial identificationwas made of all textbooks used in the school of pharmacy,both required and suggested. Subsequent internet searchesconfirmed which textbooks were available in e-textbookformat. Pricing for the books was obtained from theschool’s university bookstore and internet searches of websites selling new and used textbooks.
Faculty survey subjects were identified through a listingfrom the school of pharmacy web site and included thedivisions of pharmacy practice, pharmaceutical sciences,and pharmacology and toxicology. Faculty within the threedivisions were invited to participate. All full-time facultyand students (with the exception of those on clinical rota-tions) within the school of pharmacy were invited to reply.Participation was voluntary and no identifying informationwas collected. Faculty questionnaires consisted of ten ques-tions and included multiple-choice, multiple answer, andyes/no/other questions with the option to create a free textresponse. Student survey subjects were identified as thosestudents enrolled in the school of pharmacy in professionalyears 1-4 (of 5) of their pharmacy curriculum. Studentquestionnaires consisted of the initial eight items on thefaculty questionnaire. Both surveys (Appendix A) were ad-ministered via a link (SurveyMonkey) sent to subjectsthrough their university e-mail account asking for theirvoluntary participation. During the period of the survey tworeminder e-mails were sent requesting participation. Thesurveys were open for approximately 16 days, with re-minder e-mails sent to both groups before closing the sur-veys.
Descriptive statistics were used for reporting purposes.Sample size was the number of faculty (61) and students
(509) asked to participate in the survey. The study protocol
264 E.C. Elias et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 4 (2012) 262–266
and survey instruments were presented to the university’sinstitutional review board and subsequently approved.
Results
The university’s pharmacy curriculum includes 32 coreclasses, and of those classes, 20 textbooks were required atthe time of the study. Fourteen out of the 20 required books,or 70%, were available for purchase in an e-book format asof August 2011, leaving 30% available only in hard copyformat. There were just three suggested books according tothe 2010-2011 syllabi from the pharmacy faculty list ob-tained from the pharmacy school’s Director of Student Af-fairs, and only one of those texts was available in an e-bookformat. Further investigation proved that all 14 e-bookswere less expensive than the print counterpart availablethrough the university bookstore. Generally, the electronicversion was also less expensive than the new print bookprice at http://Amazon.com, but the e-book was more ex-pensive than the Amazon.com lowest, used print book price.Because http://Amazon.com allows individual sellers topost items, pricing varies on a daily basis.
Twenty-five of 61 faculty members (41.0%) and 216 of 509(42.4%) students responded to the questionnaires. When askedif print or electronic texts were preferred, 84% of faculty and78.7% of students responded that they preferred print.
In response to the frequency of taking books to class, thereplies were widely varied from faculty to students. Fig. 1shows responses.
Among faculty, responses to why books are not taken toclass included that the texts were not necessary (76%) and
8.0%
32.0%
1.9%
5
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
All the �me Some�
Fig. 1. Survey of faculty and student use of textbooks in the classroom.
weight (44%). Additional faculty responses included notowning all the textbooks (20%) and 8% responding thatthey shared texts with another faculty member. Commentsfrom faculty included photocopying of chapters taken toclass, use of guidelines for written information, or journalarticles. Student responses to this question were similar,with weight (83.3%) and texts were not necessary (86.1%)being the most common responses. Thirty-one percent didnot own all the textbooks and 9.7% shared their textbookswith another student. Additional comments included thatthe books take up too much space, they won’t fit in theirbag, are too expensive, and never required. Other studentscommented that most textbooks come with a free downloadof the book, so they have that on their computer, and use thebooks online.
Forty percent of faculty responded that if their texts wereavailable electronically, they would take them to class, withapproximately 56% of students either agreeing or stronglyagreeing with that statement.
Among factors that would be important and influential tothe decision to use electronic textbooks, there were differ-ences in the level of importance of these factors betweenfaculty and students. Readability and ability to search withinthe text were identified as important factors by both groups.Respondents had the opportunity to identify all factors theyconsidered important, as well as a chance to provide otherfactors identified by respondents as ‘other.’ Responses areshown in Table 1. Other characteristics of electronic text-books identified by faculty included the ability to accessfrom anywhere and whether the electronic text had thecapability of highlighting passages. For students, other im-
60.0%
39.4%
Never
Faculty
Students
8.8%
mes
Answers to the question, “Do you take your textbooks to class?”
265E.C. Elias et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 4 (2012) 262–266
portant factors included portability, environmental impact,and the ability to take notes and highlight within the elec-tronic text.
Another question focused on respondents’ beliefs con-cerning costs of e-books. While 64% of the faculty believede-books cost less than traditional textbooks, 36% believedthey were about the same cost. Student responses weresimilar, with 64.8% believing that e-books cost less, 27.3%thought they cost the same, and 7.9% believed they costmore.
In response to the question, ‘If you could not obtain alltextbooks electronically, would this affect your decision touse an electronic textbook?’, 92% of faculty replied that itwould not affect their decision, while the remainder chose‘it depends.’ That response included that they would pur-chase the electronic version if the main textbook being usedwas available. Thirty-three percent of students answered‘Yes,’ meaning if all textbooks were not available electron-ically, that it would affect their decision. More than half ofthe students responded that it would not affect their deci-sion, and 10% responded ‘it depends.’ Student responsesincluded the desire to print pages, whether any specialsoftware would be needed for e-books, and that they wouldfavor e-books if the prices were significantly lower.
The faculty questionnaire contained two additional ques-tions. The first asked if the texts used for classes wereavailable electronically, would the faculty member be morelikely to make them required texts? There were three re-sponse categories for this question: yes, no, and it depends.Thirty-two percent responded ‘yes’, 48% responded ‘no’,and the remaining responses stated that it would be impor-tant for the student to be able to use the technology, and thatthe cost of the electronic format would affect their decision.The remaining question asked ‘What factors affect yourdecision to make a textbook required versus suggested?’Response options were not mutually exclusive and includedapplicability (92%) and cost (72%).
Discussion
Most of the textbooks currently used in this school ofpharmacy’s curriculum are available electronically and are
Table 1Factors affecting decision to use an electronic textbook
What factors would affect your decisionto use an electronic textbook to read anassigned text?
generally less expensive than the new printed counterpart. E
However, most students and faculty still prefer printed text-books over electronic textbooks. This result is interestinggiven the responses to other parts of the questionnaire.
When students and faculty were asked if they take theirtextbooks to class, more than 90% of both cohorts re-sponded sometimes or never. A majority of students andfaculty responded that weight and necessity were factorsthat prevented them from taking their textbooks to class.Other barriers stated by both faculty and students includedlack of ownership, shared ownership, lack of use, and cost.Over 50% of students and 40% of faculty agreed or stronglyagreed that if the textbooks used in the curriculum wereavailable electronically, they would be more likely to takethem to class. It is possible that some faculty understand thephysical barriers of printed textbooks and therefore they donot use them in class or require students to bring them.Electronic textbooks have the potential to overcome manyof these barriers that could allow for greater use in theclassroom.
Factors, such as readability, resolution, cost, and theability to search within the text would affect students’ andfaculty’s decision to use an electronic book to read assignedtexts. Other factors included the ability to highlight and takenotes in electronic textbooks, terminal subscriptions, eyestrain, distractions from technology, ability to use currentversions in the future as technology advances, and accessi-bility. Electronic textbooks currently offer many of thesefeatures and are more portable than a printed textbook.Other advanced features available in electronic textbooksthat printed textbooks cannot offer include interactive quiz-zes, videos, audio clips, graphics, frequent updates, andother supportive material, and these features may have theability to provide learning and teaching benefits.9,10 Stu-dents’ and faculty’s lack of knowledge and familiarity withelectronic books could have affected their responses to thesurvey questions and their decision to use this medium. It iscommon knowledge that active learning strategies enhancelearning. Although the study by Shepperd et al.7 did nothow a difference in grades between the students who usedhe electronic text versus the printed text, they do not de-cribe if there were additional features available in thelectronic format that the printed text could not offer. Thetudy also found that students who used the electronic textpent less time studying; however, they achieved the samerade in the course.
Most students and faculty also believed that electronicextbooks cost less than their printed counterpart, whichorrelates with the findings of this study. With the increas-ng costs of higher education, electronic books have theotential to save students and universities money. E-booksppear to be an economical, convenient, and “greener”ption when compared with their printed counterparts. Also,ost and applicability were the two major factors that af-ected a faculty’s decision on making a textbook required.
ven though most faculty believe electronic textbooks cost
266 E.C. Elias et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 4 (2012) 262–266
less, only 32% would be more likely to make a text requiredif it were available electronically.
There are several potential limitations of this study.First, only one school of pharmacy was surveyed. Eventhough the studies by Shepperd et al.7 and Woody et al.8
found similar results, it is unknown whether otherschools of pharmacy would have the same findings. Sec-ond, because the survey was voluntary and there was alow response rate for students and faculty, nonresponseerror and response bias may have affected the results. Finally,participants were not surveyed on their previous experiencewith electronic books which could have provided beneficialinformation in regard to how other questions were answered.
Acceptance and adoption of e-books has the capability tonot only improve the use of the references without theconcerns of physical weight and volume of traditional texts,but also cut costs for students and schools. Even with thesebenefits, it appears that students and faculty at this school ofpharmacy are not interested in adopting electronic text-books. Factors, such as necessity of books for courses andthe lack of familiarity with e-books may contribute to thishesitation.
Future implications and research
Based on the results and limitations of this study, furtherresearch is needed to determine if e-books are an alternativeto printed textbooks in schools of pharmacy. It is reassuringthat the results of this survey are in line with similar studiesin higher education; however, these studies suffered fromsimilar limitations. Even though most of the texts used inthe school’s curriculum are available in an electronic for-mat, a lack of familiarity with e-books may be a reason forthe students’ and faculty’s hesitation to use them. Thisresearch revealed several textbooks used in the curriculumthat were available to students at no cost through librarydatabases. In the upcoming year, students will be providedwith information about the free electronic textbooks. An
additional survey of students and faculty in the future may
show a change in the population’s attitude when morepharmacy related e-books are available and people are moreaware of the abilities of e-books. Also, the review of phar-maceutical texts that are available electronically could allowother institutions to evaluate the use of e-books in theirschool.
References
1. Pearson Foundation survey on students and tablets 2012. Pear-son Foundation. Available at: http://www.pearsonfoundation.org/great-learning/Survey-Students-and-Tablets.html. Access-ed March 23, 2012.
2. Winkler R. Apple Kindles textbook war. The Wall Street Jour-nal. January 20, 2012. Available at: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203750404577171240218755650.html. Accessed June 22, 2012.
3. Young JR. 5 Universities to test bulk-purchasing of e-text-books in bid to rein in costs. The Chronicle of Higher Educa-tion. January 18, 2012. Available at: http://chronicle.com/article/5-Colleges-to-Test/130373. Accessed June 22, 2012.
4. Ugaz AG, Resnick T. Assessing print and electronic use ofreference/core medical textbooks. J Med Libr Assoc 2008;96:145–7.
5. Levine-Clark M. Electronic book usage: A survey at the Uni-versity of Denver. Libraries and the Academy 2006;6:285–99.
6. Strother EA, Brunet DP, Bates ML, et al. Dental students’attitudes towards digital textbooks. J Dent Educ 2009;73:1361–5.
7. Shepperd JA, Grace JL, Koch EJ. Evaluating the electronictextbook: Is it time to dispense with the paper text? TeachPsychol 2008;35:2–5.
8. Woody WD, Daniel DB, Baker CA. E-books or textbooks:Students prefer textbooks. Comput Educ 2010;55:945–8.
9. Franzoni AL, Assar S. Student learning styles adaptationmethod based on teaching strategies and electronic media.Educational Technology and Society 2009;12:15–29.
266.e1E.C. Elias et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 4 (2012) 262–266
Appendix A
E-books in the classroom: A survey of students andfaculty at a school of pharmacy
1. Do you take your textbooks to class?a. All the timeb. Sometimesc. Never
2. If you answered sometimes or never to question 1, whatprevents you from taking your textbooks to class? Checkall that applya. Weightb. Unnecessaryc. Do not own all or some textbooksd. Share textbooks with another student or facultye. Other: __________________________
3. If you answered sometimes or never to question 1, arethere times when you have needed your textbooks inclass?a. Strongly Agreeb. Agreec. Neutrald. Disagreee. Strongly Disagree
4. If the textbooks used in your classes were availableelectronically, would you be more likely to take yourtextbooks to class?a. Strongly Agreeb. Agreec. Neutrald. Disagreee. Strongly Disagree
5. Do you prefer reading electronic textbooks or hardcopy textbooks?a. Electronic textbooks
b. Hard copy textbooks
6. What factors would affect your decision to use anelectronic textbook to read an assigned text? Check allthat applya. Readabilityb. Resolutionc. Costd. Ability to search within texte. Other: __________________________
7. Do you believe electronic textbooks (not including theelectronic device) cost less than, more than, or aboutthe same as traditional textbooks?a. Less than traditional textbooksb. More than traditional textbooksc. About the same
8. If you could not obtain all textbooks electronically,would this affect your decision to use an electronictextbook?a. Yesb. Noc. It depends: __________________________
(Questions 9 and 10 were included on the faculty survey only)
9. If the textbooks you utilize for class were availableelectronically, would you be more likely to make themrequired texts?a. Yesb. Noc. It depends: __________________________
10. What factors affect your decision to make a textbookrequired versus suggested?a. Costb. Applicabilityc. Other: __________________________
