Quality and Cost Matter: Students’ Perceptions of Open versus Non-Open Texts through a Single-Blind Review

Feng-Ru Sheu, Judy Grissett

Abstract


Although prior research has examined student perceptions of open materials, research investigating students’ perceptions of open versus copyright-restricted textbooks through a direct, experimental approach is lacking. To better understand how students perceive open textbooks outside the context of the classroom, we examined students’ perceptions of unfamiliar open and non-open (copyright-restricted) psychology textbooks. Forty-four introductory psychology students reviewed chapters from two open textbooks and two traditional/copyrightrestricted textbooks and then ranked the textbooks from most to least favourite. Students rated each chapter on several quality measures, including layout structure, visual appeal, ease of reading, and instructional features. Next, bibliographical information and cost were revealed, and students re-ranked the textbooks accordingly. Before knowing the bibliographic information and cost, students were more likely to prefer the two traditional textbooks. There after, they were more likely to select the open texts. Students often referred to textbook price as a determining factor for their change.


Keywords


open textbook; copyright restricted textbook; textbook cost; textbook evaluation; student perceptions

Full Text:

HTML PDF XML

References


Anonymous. (2015). Introduction to Psychology. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Library Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.24926/8668.1201

Bliss, T., Hilton, J., Wiley, D., & Thanos, K. (2013). The cost and quality of open textbooks: Perceptions of community college faculty and students. First Monday, 18, 1. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v18i1.3972

Bliss, T. J., Robinson, T. J., Hilton, J., & Wiley, D. (2013). An OER COUP: College teacher and student perceptions of open educational resources. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1. http://doi.org/10.5334/2013-04

Cavanagh, S. (1997). Content analysis: concepts, methods and applications. Nurse Researcher, 4(3), 5-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.7748/nr.4.3.5.s2

Clinton, V., Legerski, E., & Rhodes, B. (2019). Comparing student learning from and perceptions of open and commercial textbooks excerpts: A randomized experiment, Frontiers in Education, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00110

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). London, England: Routledge.

Dimitrov, D. M. (2008). Quantitative research in education: Intermediate and advanced methods. Oceanside, NY: Whittier Publications.

Feldman, R. S. (2010). Understanding Psychology (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Feldstein, A., Martin, M., Hudson, A., Warren, K., Hilton, J., & Wiley, D. (2012). Open textbooks and increased student access and outcomes. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 15(2). Retrieved from https://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=archives&year=2012&halfyear=2&article=533

Gil, P., Candelas, F., Jara, C., Garcia, G., & Torres, F. (2013). Web-based OERs in computer networks. International Journal of Engineering Education, 29(6), 1537–1550.

Grissett, J. & Huffman, C. (2019). An open versus traditional psychology textbook: Student performance, perceptions, and use. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 18(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725718810181

Hilton, J. (2016). Open educational resources and college textbook choices: a review of research on efficacy and perceptions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(4), 573-590. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9434-9

Illowsky, B. S., Hilton III, J., Whiting, J., & Ackerman, J. D. (2016). Examining student perception of an open statistics book. Open Praxis, 8(3), 265-276. http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.8.3.304

Jhangiani, R. S., & Jhangiani, S. (2017). Investigating the perceptions, use, and impact of open textbooks: A survey of post-secondary students in British Columbia. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(4). http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i4.3012

Lindshield, B., & Adhikari, K. (2013). Online and campus college students like using an open educational resource instead of a traditional textbook. Journal of Online Learning & Teaching, 9(1), 26-38. Retrieved from https://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no1/lindshield_0313.htm

Petrides, L., Jimes, C., Middleton‐Detzner, C., Walling, J., & Weiss, S. (2011). Open textbook adoption and use: Implications for teachers and learners. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 26(1), 39-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2011.538563

Pitt, R., Ebrahimi, N., McAndrew, P., & Coughlan, T. (2013). Assessing OER impact across organizations and learners: Experiences from the bridge to success project. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2013(3), 17. http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/2013-17

Rosengren, K. E. (1981). Advances in Scandinavia content analysis: An introduction. In K. E. Rosengren (Ed.), Advances in content analysis (pp. 9-19). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Spielman, R., Dumper, K., Jenkins, W., Lovett, M., Perlmutter, M. (2014). Psychology. Open Access Textbooks. 1. Retrieved from https://commons.erau.edu/oer-textbook/1

Wiley, D. (2014, March 5). The Access Compromise and the 5th R. iterating toward openness (web blog). Retrieved from https://opencontent.org/blog/archives/3221

Wood, S. E., Wood, E. G. & Boyd, D. (2014). Mastering the World of Psychology (5th ed.). Pearson.

Woodward, S., Lloyd, A., & Kimmons, R. (2017). Student Voice in Textbook Evaluation: Comparing Open and Restricted Textbooks. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(6). http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i6.3170




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.12.1.1012

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.