University-Wide e-Text Adoption and Students’ Use of, Preferences for, and Learning with e-Textbooks

  • Serdar Abaci
  • Joshua Quick


The consistent growth of electronic textbooks (e-texts) within higher education contexts has led cheaper, more accessible resources for students. Despite this continued growth, the introduction of technology such as e-texts does not necessarily lend itself to more effective teaching and learning practices. Student perceptions on their use of e-texts and the impact of these tools on their engagement and learning present one source of evidence for determining the efficacy of inclusive digital content delivery systems. This chapter describes a survey study conducted with undergraduate students at Indiana University, who has been running a successful university-wide e-text program since 2012. The study used a subset of the National Survey of Student Engagement, specifically designed to examine students’ use of, preferences for, and perceived learning with e-texts. Data from 284 students indicated that they generally used e-texts in relation to their class-assigned reading activities. Interactive features within the e-text were moderately to infrequently used in relation to their learning practices. Students also indicated that their use of e-texts had generally positive benefits on their learning. From these results, we discuss the implications of further integrating e-texts within higher education through extended support and scaffolding of these tools for both teaching and learning.


e-Text Indiana National Survey of Student Engagement NSSE Data Higher education Preference Instructor choice Higher education 


  1. 1.
    Abaci, S., Quick, J., & Morrone, A. (2017). Student engagement with e-texts: What the data tell us. Educause Review [Online].
  2. 2.
    Abaci, S., BrckaLorenz, A., & Quick, J. (2019). Examining students’ use of, preferences for, and learning with e-textbooks. In Paper presented at the Annual AERA 2019 Meeting, Toronto, ON.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barajas-Murphy, N. (2017). Digital textbooks: A study of factors affecting college student adoption (Doctoral dissertation, University of La Verne).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chapman, J. R., Seeley, E. L., Wright, N. S., Glenn, L. M., & Adams, L. L. (2016). An empirical evaluation of a broad ranging E-text adoption with recommendations for improving deployment success for students. E-journal of. Business Education and Scholarship of Teaching, 10(2), 1–14.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clinton, V. (2019). Reading from paper compared to screens: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Reading, 42(2), 288–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Delgado, P., Vargas, C., Ackerman, R., & Salmerón, L. (2018). Don't throw away your printed books: A meta-analysis on the effects of reading media on reading comprehension. Educational Research Review, 25, 23–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jensen, M., & Scharff, L. (2019). Improving critical Reading with E-texts: A controlled study in a collegiate philosophy course. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 19(3).
  9. 9.
    Ji, S. W., Michaels, S., & Waterman, D. (2014). Print vs electronic readings in college courses: Cost-efficiency and perceived learning. Internet & Higher Education, 21, 17–24. Scholar
  10. 10.
    Junco, R., & Clem, C. (2015). Predicting course outcomes with digital textbook usage data. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 54–63. Scholar
  11. 11.
    Knight, B., Casey, M., & Dekkers, J. (2017). Using electronic textbooks to teach mathematics in the secondary classroom: What do the students say? International Journal of Education and Development using ICT, 13(1), 87–102.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE: Benchmarks for effective educational practices. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 35(2), 24–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kuh, G. D. (2007). What student engagement data tell us about college readiness. Peer Review, 9(1), 4–8.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Reschly, A. L., & Christenson, S. L. (2012). Jingle, jangle, and conceptual haziness: Evolution and future directions of the engagement construct. In Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 3–19). Boston: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ross, B., Pechenkina, E., Aeschliman, C., & Chase, A. M. (2017). Print versus digital texts: Understanding the experimental research and challenging the dichotomies. Research in Learning Technology, 25, 1–12.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schuh, K. L., Van Horne, S., & Russell, J. E. (2018). E-textbook as object and mediator: Interactions between instructor and student activity systems. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30(2), 298–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Singer, L. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2017). Reading on paper and digitally: What the past decades of empirical research reveal. Review of Educational Research, 87(6), 1007–1041.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sommers, S. R., Shin, L. M., Greenebaum, S. L., Merker, J., & Sanders, A. S. (2019). Quasi-experimental and experimental assessment of electronic textbook experiences: Student perceptions and test performance. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 5(1), 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    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, 64(3), 407–433. Scholar
  20. 20.
    Woody, W. D., Daniel, D. B., & Baker, C. A. (2010). E-books or textbooks: Students prefer textbooks. Computers & Education, 55(3), 945–948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Serdar Abaci
    • 1
  • Joshua Quick
    • 2
  1. 1.Moray House School of Education and SportUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghUK
  2. 2.Indiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations