January 13, 2009
Northwest Missouri State U. Tries E-Book Readers, With Mixed Results
Several students at Northwest Missouri State University recently traded their printed textbooks for Sony’s e-book reading devices, which came loaded with assigned texts. But the students quickly discovered that the gadgets have limitations.
In a pilot program during the fall semester, about 240 students were loaned Sony Readers, and university officials contracted with McGraw Hill to provide electronic textbooks for four courses.
Students were initially fascinated with their readers, said Dean L. Hubbard, the university’s president, but they soon became frustrated with the devices’ limited interactivity capabilities — which made it impossible to highlight passages, cut and paste text, or participate in interactive quizzes.
“This is a tremendous attention getter; it’s not as good an attention holder,” said Mr. Hubbard of the Sony Reader. But Mr. Hubbard added that he thinks similar devices will be extremely popular in the long run, once their features have improved.
This semester the university will continue to experiment with electronic textbooks, but it will deliver them primarily through laptops, rather than dedicated e-book devices. (The institutions requires students to have laptops.) About 500 students will try out electronic textbooks, and an additional 3,000 students will have access to them.
Laptops provide more interactivity than the Sony Readers, Mr. Hubbard said, because they let students participate in interactive quizzes and allow professors to add material to textbooks as needed.
A small group of students will also test out a new version of the Reader, which Sony says will offer increased interactivity, according Mr. Hubbard.
Northwest Missouri State currently spends about $800,000 a year on its rental textbook program, which allows its students to acquire books at a fraction of the cost of buying them, Mr. Hubbard said. Switching to electronic textbooks could shave as much as 50 percent off that figure, he added.
Mr. Hubbard himself is a devoted fan of the Kindle e-book reader, sold by Amazon, and he has pledged never to read a non-electronic book again. He said he is optimistic that electronic textbooks “will catch on like prairie fire,” especially once students, professors, and administrators realize how much money they could save by using them. —David Shieh
Posted on Tuesday January 13, 2009 | Permalink |Comments
Commenting is closed for this article.
Previous: Google Searches: Maybe a Boiling Teaspoon, Not a Kettle
Next: Guest Blogger: Report Weighs the Benefits and Risks of Social Networks
Electronic textbooks can save students a lot of money, depending upon the delivery mechanism. However, I don’t think a Sony Reader is the best format due to limitations in content. At SDSU we sold about 1500 copies of eTextbooks on just 200 tiles during the fall semester using a web based delivery model through the bookstore. We offered this as a choice, not a requirement for students.
That being said we still feel that the lowest net cost of ownership for a textbook is provided by the student buying a used textbook and then selling it back to the bookstore after the bookstore has received a request from faculty to use the textbook for the next semester. But, in those cases where the edition changes or the faculty has not yet decided on a textbook, the digital alternative can save students money.
— Tony Sanjume Jan 13, 05:40 PM #
This sounds very promising. We are working on getting electronic textbooks at Northwestern University.
— Michael McGee Jan 13, 05:46 PM #
I hope that Mr. Hubbard realizes that his pledge will limit his reading choices ti a very small percentage of in-print books. Would any of us teach students that they should choose a delivery medium over the nature and quality of the content? Sort of like riding in an airplane, becoming aviation’s “devoted fan,” and pledging thereafter never to travel by bicycle, car, or train. The destination is at least as important as the mode of transportation.
NOTE: This comment reflects my personal thinking and is not a statement on behalf of the American Library Association; I currently serve as ALA’s president.
— Jim Rettig Jan 13, 05:47 PM #
The Sony PRS 700 was released in Nov. It adds a search function, and a touch screen to replace the annoying buttons. But even this is not enough to be a viable “e-book”. Needed is an on-board dictionary, a wireless interface, and better PC-side software. The current PC-side is woefully inadequate.
Moreover, repair on the devices is costly and slow. They are easy to break, and can take upwards of three weeks to get fixed. What is needed is local support for the devices, so that you can drop it by a Sony store, and simply swap out the device with a refurbished unit.
Oh .. and Sony Customer Service is not very good.
I have had mine for almost a year, and was able to integrate it into my work flow—there are not many books available for the Sony. It is easy to download a text file (say from the Internet Archive), spell check it and format it for download to the Sony—but this all takes time. A lot of time, in fact.
Sony needs to increase the number of books available for users, whether on its WEB-site, or via grants to organizations involved in creating e-books.
E-ink is very readable, so the PRS 505/700 units are both extremely useful under most conditions. Battery life is a little short, but not too short to be unacceptable.
The PRS 700 has an address space (memory capacity) that will allow the device to hold up to 20,000 text-formatted books.
The devices are great for reading text-only (novels, etc.) works. All of the classics could be downloaded from Project Gutenberg (or some other source), and provide very cost-effective book delivery in the domain of graphics-free literature.
The Sony PRS 505 is not ready for the general school environment. The 700 is better, but more expensive than the 500s.
Even with their shortcomings, they are easy to use and increase the amount of reading that someone who is adventurous and who considers himself an “early adopter” of person technology can achieve per week.
— Wayne Martin Jan 13, 05:53 PM #
monochrome eInk devices would not be my first choice as eTextbook readers. They are too limited.
Instead, an iPod touch (or iPhone) would be better, even with its small screen.
A multi-touch 6×9 high resolution screen tablet with wifi and video playback capabilities is what we need.
Alas, modern laptop screens are too low resolution, and Apple does not seem interested in making a tablet.
It is only a matter of time, however. My 8th grade son’s science text from his school was distributed as a CD.
I look forward to writing textbooks where updating and distribution is a simply click of the mouse.
— faculty Jan 14, 09:06 AM #
I’ve been considering an an e-book for several years. The most viable I have found is Amazon’s Kindle which does allow highlighting. In addition, it has a wireless function that allows for downloads of daily newspapers, blogs, etc. Of course, it is doubtful that Amazon would sell them in batches and there is now a six week waiting list for the device.
— Mike Jordan Jan 14, 09:34 AM #
I agree that finding ways to cut some costs for both institutions and students by utilizing e-books does have some merit, but I would not agree that e-books should completely replace the traditional textbook or novel.
While I’m sure that the technology will eventually get to the point that it will be user friendly and students will be able to highlight and do the other activities that they are unable to do now; but, they will still be losing out on the ability to keep the important texts of their field with them through their educational years and into their professional environments as resources. Also, from the historians prospective, the move towards electronic information has resulted in the loss of unrecoverable primary sources. With these e-books, when new editions come out it may be as simple as clicking a button and having your old text updated or replacing it with the new version, but the old version also disappears, and with it the ability to compare the old and new. I think that our society has definately embraced the thought that “new is good” or “new is better.” I would say that this thought is true in some ways but isn’t necessarily true in all the cases. This turn toward e-books and how quickly people are jumping on this band wagon illustrates the fear I have about people not taking the time to fully understand what they are choosing to give up when they fullly embrace anything new.I’m sure that some may argue that being in an electronic format may make the information more accessible or allow students to only have to carry around one device instead of multiple volumes of books, but technology breaks, gets lost, is frequently the target of theft, malfunctions, and is typically manufactured to have a specific shelf life to ensure the sale of future products.
Once again, I remind you that I’m not speaking out against the use of e-books, rather I’m trying to warn those of you who would like 100% electronic text that their are still positive reasons to continue with traditional printed material.
— Tristan Jan 14, 09:47 AM #
The ALA Prez said, “Would any of us . . . choose a delivery medium over the nature and quality of the content?”
Is he assuming the e-medium content is lesser quality? I didn’t see anything in the article about the lack of “quality of the content.”
Many of my librarian colleagues, I’m afraid, are simply loathe to give up their books.
— ~darrell in dallas (academic librarian) Jan 14, 10:08 AM #
The bottom line on e-books and e-readers matching up in the near future is a laptop/PDA model not an independent piece of hardware such as Kindle/Sony reader. Sort of like where tvs are going vs monitors attached to computers. As an academic librarian, the content is enhanced online with hypertext possiblities that print can not offer; also the speed of updating information in disciplines that change regularly, business and sciences as opposed to humanities, favors online.
— John Jan 14, 11:37 AM #
To #8, I think Jim Rettig was clear that he was referring to overall selection availability, not the quality of the individual titles that are currently available in that format. I think that will change in time, just as the availability of full text scholarly journals has grown from its early days. With every passing year it becomes a little more reasonable for an undergrad to click on that “limit to full text” checkbox in our databases.
— Melissa Belvadi Jan 14, 12:30 PM #
Nearly everyone here has acknowledged that the Amazon Kindle is a superior medium, but its stringent publishing requirements limit the number of texts it can offer. Also, I’ve noticed that academic texts are as expensive in Kindlebook format as they are in hard copy, sometimes $400.
However, its digital-paper screen and capacity for user marginalia will point competitors like Google in the right direction. If Google or some other company appropriated the Kindle’s screen and capacity for marginalia while diversifying the types of documents it can display, it would sweep the university system. And I’m looking forward to that day.
— Gray Kane Jan 14, 02:13 PM #
Melissa Belvadi said: “I think Jim Rettig was clear that he was referring to overall selection availability, not the quality of the individual titles that are currently available in that format.”
That may be, but the quality of the work in the e-book format may be inferior anyway. Halftones may simply be dropped in the e-format; line drawings and tables may display across several screens; color illustrations cannot display on the current e-ink readers. Straight text, fine; anything more complicated, beware.
— Dean Jan 14, 04:41 PM #
As a Kindle owner and long time e-book reader, my first preference for reading text-based books is in an e-format. That said, I recognize limitations for wider acceptance.
For e-readers to truly catch on like wildfire, here’s what they must provide:
-Ability to read multiple format e-books: html, txt, pdf and a widely available generic format (i.e., non-device specific) such as Mobipocket or Microsoft Reader;
-Easy interface with PC and Mac to load ebooks with the ability to maintain folder structure in the e-reader’s table of contents;
-Highlighting, bookmarking, and note taking ability;
-Content at a much lower cost than traditional print books.
None of the available e-readers so far fill all of these needs. After these requirements, the introduction of color, a bigger screen (but not too big), and a touch screen would greatly increase acceptance.
— Catherine Jan 15, 11:52 AM #
During the Fall semester of 2008 I ran a modest exercise with Freshman students at California State University, Monterey Bay comparing levels of reading among Freshmen students using and not using Sony eReader devices, some 60 students participating in all. While the results are by no means statistically relevant we learned a few interesting lessons. At first, the eReader is an attention grabber. Students like gadgets. They were eager and interested in utilizing the new tool. It is apparent that students will not necessarily share the fear most of us have regarding leaving behind the traditional printed medium, a fear so well expressed by the current ALA President. Did they stay with the eReader? As in the case of Midwest Missouri we also ended up with mixed results. However, it was clear that those students who were given structure and incentive to incorporate the use of the eReader (taking advantage of periodicals and pdf files) did stay with the device. We ended up with the impression that once this technology is tailored by the manufacturers to address students needs the technology will be adopted. Some of the questions to be addressed: Where is the dictionary? Can I highlight? Can I transfer segments to quote in my paper? Can I find all of my textbooks at a fraction of the cost?)
Regarding the lack of interconnectivity, I see that as the main advantage of a dedicated reading device and never as a drawback. If we go back to the findings of the NEA Survey of 2007 [NEA (2007) To Read or Not To Read. A Question of National Consequence. Research Report #47] you may pause for a moment and think about the importance of dedicated attention to good-old linear reading. Dedicated devices show promise precisely because they are conducive to a type of reading that involves sustained processing and engagement with the text. The hyper-connected world where they live (some of them will be able to send well over 200 text messages with their iphones every day) is indeed conducive to a superficial encounter with the text, I contend.
Both the economy of scale of access to printed versus electronic materials as well as historical trends in adoption of technologies is rendering mute the discussion about its adoption. It is not a matter of if but when. Universities and educators do the right by actively engaging with the developers of the new technology and markets so they get the technology just right for students.
— Juan J. Gutierrez Jan 23, 04:33 PM #