With additional features and increasing cost advantages, e-textbooks are becoming a viable alternative to paper textbooks. One important feature offered by enhanced e-textbooks (e-textbooks with interactive functionality) is the ability for instructors to annotate passages with additional insights. This paper describes a pilot study that examines the effects of instructor e-textbook annotations on student learning as measured by multiple-choice and open-ended test items. Fifty-two college students in a business course were randomly assigned either a paper or an electronic version of a textbook chapter. Results show that the e-textbook group outperformed the paper textbook group on the open-ended test item, while both groups performed equally on the multiple-choice subject test. These results suggest that the instructional affordances that an interactive e-textbook provides may lead to higher-level learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Abaci, S., Morrone, A., & Dennis, A. (2015). Instructor engagement with e-texts. Educause Review, 50(1). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/instructor-engagement-e-texts.
Ackerman, R., & Goldsmith, M. (2011). Metacognitive regulation of text learning: On screen versus on paper. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(1), 18–32. doi:10.1037/a0022086.
Bidwell, A. (2014). Report: High textbook prices have college students struggling. U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/01/28/report-high-textbook-prices-have-college-students-struggling.
Bransford, J., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Chen, C.-M., & Chen, F.-Y. (2014). Enhancing digital reading performance with a collaborative reading annotation system. Computers & Education, 77, 67–81. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.010.
Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445–459. doi:10.2307/1170217.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Connell, C., Bayliss, L., & Farmer, W. (2012). Effects of eBook readers and tablet computers on reading comprehension. International Journal of Instructional Media, 39(2), 131–140.
Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousands Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
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.
Dennis, A. R. (2011). e-textbooks at Indiana University: A summary of 2 years of research. from http://etexts.iu.edu/files/eText%20Pilot%20Data%202010-2011.pdf.
Dobler, E. (2015). e-Textbooks: A personalized learning experience or a digital distraction? Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 58(6), 482–491. doi:10.1002/jaal.391.
Eden, S., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2013). The effect of format on performance: Editing text in print versus digital formats. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(5), 846–856. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01332.x.
Flavell, J. H. (1981). Cognitive monitoring. In W. P. Dickson (Ed.), Children’s oral communication skill (pp. 35–60). New York: Academic Press.
Gee, T. C., & Rakow, S. J. (1990). Guiding reading comprehension: Techniques English teachers value. The Clearing House, 63(8), 341–344. doi:10.1080/00098655.1990.10114123.
Giacomini, C., Wallis, P., Lyle, H., Haaland, W., Davis, K., & Comden, D. (2013). Exploring e-textbooks at the University of Washington: What we learned and what is next. Retrieved from https://www.washington.edu/itconnect/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/UWeTextCampusReport.pdf.
Green, T. D., Perera, R. A., Dance, L. A., & Myers, E. A. (2010). Impact of presentation mode on recall of written text and numerical information: Hard copy versus electronic. North American Journal of Psychology, 12(2), 233–242.
Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79–96). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hastings, N., & Tracey, M. (2004). Does media affect learning: where are we now? TechTrends, 49(2), 28–30. doi:10.1007/BF02773968.
Hwang, W.-Y., Liu, Y.-F., Chen, H.-R., Huang, J.-W., & Li, J.-Y. (2015). Role of parents and annotation sharing in children’s learning behavior and achievement using e-readers. Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 292–307.
Indiana State University. (2013). Students perform well regardless of reading print or digital books. Science Daily. Retrieved December 14, 2015 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130524160710.htm.
Jabr, F. (2013). The reading brain in the digital age: The science of paper versus screens. Scientific American. Retrieved December 15, 2015 from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/.
Ji, S. W., Michaels, S., & Waterman, D. (2014). Print versus 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.
Junco, R., & Clem, C. (2015). Predicting course outcomes with digital textbook usage data. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 54–63. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.06.001.
Kamil, M. L., & Chou, H. K. (2009). Comprehension and computer technology: Past results, current knowledge, and future promises. In S. E. Israel & G. G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (pp. 289–304). New York: Routledge.
Kiewra, K. A., DuBois, N. F., Christian, D., McShane, A., Meyerhoffer, M., & Roskelley, D. (1991). Note-taking functions and techniques. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(2), 240–245. doi:10.1037/0022-0618.104.22.168.
Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with Media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179–211. doi:10.2307/1170534.
Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7–19. doi:10.2307/30218683.
Lee, H., Lim, K., & Grabowski, B. (2010). Improving self-regulation, learning strategy use, and achievement with metacognitive feedback. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(6), 629–648. doi:10.1007/s11423-010-9153-6.
Leutner, D., Leopold, C., & Den Elzen-Rump, V. (2007). Self-regulated learning with a text-highlighting strategy: A training experiment. Journal of Psychology, 215(3), 174–182.
Linn, M. C., & Eylon, B. (2011). Science learning and instruction: Taking advantage of technology to promote knowledge integration. New York: Routledge.
Liu, Z. (2005). Reading behavior in the digital environment. Journal of Documentation, 61(6), 700–712. doi:10.1108/00220410510632040.
Margolin, S. J., Driscoll, C., Toland, M. J., & Kegler, J. L. (2013). e-readers, computer screens, or paper: Does reading comprehension change across media platforms? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(4), 512–519. doi:10.1002/acp.2930.
Marshall, C. C. (1997). Annotation: From paper books to the digital library. Paper presented at the 2nd ACM International Conference on Digital Libraries, Philadelphia, PA.
Martinez, M. E. (1991). A comparison of multiple-choice and constructed figural response items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28(2), 131–145. doi:10.2307/1434795.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Morrison, G. R. (1994). The media effects question: “Unresolvable” or asking the right question. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 41–44. doi:10.2307/30218686.
Murray, M. C., & Pérez, J. (2011). e-textbooks are coming: Are we ready? Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 8, 49–60.
Nathan, M., & Robinson, C. (2001). Considerations of learning and learning research: Revisiting the “media effects” debate. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12(1), 69–88.
Niccoli, A. (2015). Paper or tablet? Reading recall and comprehension. Educause Review, 50(5). Retrieved from http://er.educause.edu/articles/2015/9/paper-or-tablet-reading-recall-and-comprehension.
Nokelainen, P., Miettinen, M., Kurhila, J., Floréen, P., & Tirri, H. (2005). A shared document-based annotation tool to support learner-centred collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(5), 757–770. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00474.x.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Reiner, C. M., Bothell, T. W., Sudweeks, R. R., & Wood, B. (2002). Preparing effective essay questions: A self-directed workbook for educators. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.
Richardson, J. S., Morgan, R. F., & Fleener, C. E. (2012). Reading to learn in the content areas (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J., Courduff, J., Carter, K., & Bennett, D. (2013). 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.
Sawyer, R. K. (2006). The new science of learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 1–16). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Senack, E., & The Student PIRGs. (2014). Fixing the broken textbook market: How students respond to high textbook costs and demand alternatives. Retrieved from http://uspirg.org/reports/usp/fixing-broken-textbook-market.
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.
Siebenbruner, J. (2011). Electronic versus traditional textbooks: A comparison of college textbook formats. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 22(3), 75–92.
Simpson, M. L., & Nist, S. L. (2000). An update on strategic learning: It’s more than textbook reading strategies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 43(6), 528–541. doi:10.2307/40016831.
Taylor, A. K. (2011). Students learn equally well from digital as from paperbound texts. Teaching of Psychology, 38(4), 278–281. doi:10.1177/0098628311421330.
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.
van der Pol, J., Admiraal, W., & Simons, P. R. J. (2006). The affordance of anchored discussion for the collaborative processing of academic texts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 339–357. doi:10.1007/s11412-006-9657-6.
Van Horne, S., Russell, J.-E., & Schuh, K. L. (2016). The adoption of mark-up tools in an interactive e-textbook reader. Educational Technology Research and Development,. doi:10.1007/s11423-016-9425-x.
Vassiliou, M., & Rowley, J. (2008). Progressing the definition of “e-book”. Library Hi Tech, 26(3), 355–368. doi:10.1108/07378830810903292.
Walling, D. R. (2014). Designing learning for tablet classrooms: Innovations in instruction. Switzerland: Springer.
Weisberg, M. (2011). Student attitudes and behaviors towards digital textbooks. Publishing Research Quarterly, 27(2), 188–196. doi:10.1007/s12109-011-9217-4.
Yang, S. J. H., Zhang, J., Su, A. Y. S., & Tsai, J. J. P. (2011). A collaborative multimedia annotation tool for enhancing knowledge sharing in CSCL. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(1), 45–62. doi:10.1080/10494820.2011.528881.
A previous version of this paper was presented at the 48th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2015. We would like to thank David A. Goodrum and Sarah Engel for reviewing and providing their valuable comments in preparation of this manuscript.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
About this article
Cite this article
Dennis, A.R., Abaci, S., Morrone, A.S. et al. Effects of e-textbook instructor annotations on learner performance. J Comput High Educ 28, 221–235 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-016-9109-x
- Print textbook
- Reading comprehension
- Instructor annotations
- Experimental study