Textbook Effects and Efficacy

  • Yvonne Behnke
Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

The chapter ‘Textbook Effects and Efficacy’ aims to provide a brief overview of current research approaches on the effects and efficacy of textbooks, aligned to the major areas of research in this field such as textbook language; socio-cultural and socio-economic factors; visual textbook parameters; cognitive, affective and behavioural effects; and new technological and/or methodological approaches.

In doing so, it summarises empirical evidence produced in a range of fields dedicated to textbooks and educational media. The emphasis here is on experimental and quasi-experimental studies. The concluding remarks suggest potential approaches for new directions in research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

  1. Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A Conceptual Framework for Considering Learning with Multiple Representations. Learning and Instruction, 16, 183–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akyüz, V. (2004). The Effects of Textbook Style and Reading Strategy on Student’s Achievements and Attitudes Towards Heat and Temperature. Ankara: Middle East Technical University.Google Scholar
  3. Asunka, S. (2013). The Viability of E-Textbooks in Developing Countries: Ghanaian University Students’ Perceptions. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 28(1), 36–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2013.796285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Behnke, Y. (2016). How Textbook Design May Influence Learning with Geography Textbooks. Nordidactica – Journal of Humanities and Social Science Education, 1, 38–62. Retrieved from www.kau.se/nordidactica
  5. Behnke, Y. (2015). Welchen Grad an visueller Aufmerksamkeit widmen Lernende den Abbildungen in Geographieschulbüchern? Bildungsforschung, 1(12), 54–76. Retrieved from http://www.bildungsforschung.org/
  6. Beishuizen, J., Stoutjesdijk, E., & van Putten, K. (1994). Studying Textbooks: Effects of Learning Styles, Study Task, and Instruction. Learning and Instruction, 4, 151–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berkeley, S., et al. (2012). Are History Textbooks More “Considerate” After 20 Years? The Journal of Special Education, 47(4), 217–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bétrancourt, M., et al. (2012). Graphicacy: Do Readers of Science Textbooks Need It? In E. de Vries & K. Scheiter (Eds.), Staging Knowledge and Experience: How to Take Advantage of Technologies in Education and Training? Proceedings of the EARLI SIG Meeting on Comprehension of Text and Graphics, Grenoble, August 28–31, 2012 (pp. 37–39). Grenoble: Universite Pierre-Mendes-France.Google Scholar
  9. Blumberg, R. L. (2015). Eliminating Gender Bias in Textbooks: Pushing for Policy Reforms that Promote Gender Equity in Education. Paper Commissioned for the EFA Global Monitoring Report 2015, Education for All 2000–2015: Achievements and Challenges. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  10. Boeckle, M., & Ebner, M. (2015). Game Based Learning in Secondary Education: Geographical Knowledge of Austria. Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2011, Chesapeake, pp. 1510–1515.Google Scholar
  11. Brugeilles, C., & Cromer, S. (2009). Promoting Gender Equality Through Textbooks: A Methodological Guide. Paris: UNESCO – Division for the Promotion of Basic Education, in cooperation with the Division for Gender Equality, Bureau of Strategic Planning, and the Regional Office for Education in Africa (BREDA).Google Scholar
  12. Cassidy, D., Martinez, M., & Shen, L. (2012). Not in Love, or Not in the Know? Graduate Student and Faculty Use (and Non-Use) of E-Books. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 38(6), 326–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2012.08.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4), 293–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cheng, M. C., et al. (2015). Learning Effects of a Science Textbook Designed with Adapted Cognitive Process Principles on Grade 5 Students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13, 467–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Daniel, D. B., & Douglas, W. (2013). E-Textbooks at What Cost? Performance and Use of Electronic v. Print Texts. Computers & Education, 62, 18–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Diemand-Yauman, C., Oppenheimer, D. M., & Vaughan, E. B. (2010). Fortune Favors the Bold (and the Italicized): Effects of Disfluency on Educational Outcomes. Cognition, 118(1), 111–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Djokic, O. (2015). The Effects of RME and Innovative Textbook Model on 4th Grade Pupils’ Reasoning in Geometry. In J. Novotná & H. Moraová (Eds.), International Symposium Elementary Maths Teaching SEMT ’13 Proceedings (pp. 107–117). Prague: Univerzita karlova, Pedagogická fakulta.Google Scholar
  18. Dogan, D., & Zekiye, M. T. (2015). Are the Skills Really Integrated in Coursebooks? A Sample Case – Yes You Can A1.2. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(12), 1599–1632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Douglas, W., Daniel, D. B., & Baker, C. A. (2010). E-Books or Textbooks: Students Prefer Textbooks. Computers & Education, 55(3), 945–948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dremmeh, L. E. (2013). A Mixed Methods Study Examining a Successful International Collaborative Partnership: The Efficacy of Textbooks/Educational Resources on Student Achievement. Orangeburg, SC: South Carolina State University.Google Scholar
  21. Eitel, A., & Scheiter, K. (2014). Picture or Text First? Explaining Sequence Effects when Learning with Pictures and Text. Educational Psychology Review, 27(1), 153–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Farha, N. W. (2009). An Exploratory Study into the Efficacy of Learning Objects. The Journal of Educators Online, 6(2), 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fischer, L., Hilton, J., Robinson, J. T., & Wiley, D. A. (2015). A Multi-Institutional Study of the Impact of Open Textbook Adoption on the Learning Outcomes of Post- Secondary Students. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-015-9101-x
  24. Foley, B. J., & Mcphee, C. (2008). Students’ Attitudes Towards Science in Classes Using Hands-On or Textbook Based Curriculum. AERA, 1–12.Google Scholar
  25. Fotaris, P., et al. (2016). Climbing Up the Leaderboard: An Empirical Study of Applying Gamification Techniques to a Computer Programming Class. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 14(2), 94–110.Google Scholar
  26. Foulds, K. (2013). The Continua of Identities in Postcolonial Curricula: Kenyan Students’ Perceptions of Gender in School Textbooks. International Journal of Educational Development, 33(2), 165–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Frölich, M., & Michaelowa, K. (2005). Peer Effects and Textbooks in Primary Education: Evidence from Francophone Sub-Saharan Africa. Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor.Google Scholar
  28. Fuchs, E., Niehaus, I., & Stoletzki, A. (2014). Das Schulbuch in der Forschung. Analysen und Empfehlungen für die Bildungspraxis. Göttingen: V&R Unipress.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Good, J. J., Woodzicka, J., & Wingfield, L. (2010). The Effects of Gender Stereotypic and Counter-Stereotypic Textbook Images on Science Performance. The Journal of Social Psychology, 150(2), 132–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hadley, G. (2013). Global Textbooks in Local Contexts: An Empirical Investigation of Effectiveness. In N. Harwood (Ed.), English Language Teaching Textbooks: Content, Consumption, Production (pp. 205–238). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  31. Hense, J., & Mandl, H. (2012). Learning in or With Games? Quality Criteria for Digital Learning Games from the Perspectives of Learning, Emotion, and Motivation Theory. In G. G. Sampson et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in the Digital Age (pp. 19–26). Madrid: IADIS.Google Scholar
  32. Hochpöchler, U., et al. (2012). Dynamics of Mental Model Construction from Text and Graphics. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(4), 1105–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Holmqvist Olander, M., Brante, E. W., & Nyström, M. (2014). The Image of Images as an Aid to Improve Learning. An Eye-Tracking Experiment Studying the Effect of Contrasts in Computer-based Learning Material. In CSEDU 2014 – 6th International Conference on Computer Supported Education, pp. 309–316.Google Scholar
  34. Horn, R. E. (1999). Information Design. In R. Jacobsen (Ed.), Information Design (pp. 15–33). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Jang, D., Yi, P., & Shin, I. (2015). Examining the Effectiveness of Digital Textbook Use on Students’ Learning Outcomes in South Korea: A Meta-Analysis. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(1), 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Jarodzka, H. (2016). Eye Tracking in Educational Science: Theoretical Frameworks and Research Agenda. SWEAT 2016 – Scandinavian Workshop on Applied Eye Tracking, Turku, pp. 2–3.Google Scholar
  37. Joo, Y. J., et al. (2014). Structural Relationships Between Variables of Elementary School Students’ Intention of Accepting Digital Textbooks. In M. B. Nunes & M. McPherson (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning 2014, July 15–19 (pp. 95–102). Lisbon: IADIS Press.Google Scholar
  38. Khosravani, M., Khosravani, M., & Khorashadyzadeh, A. (2014). Analyzing the Effects of Iranian EFL Textbooks on Developing Learners’ Life Skills. English Language Teaching, 7(6), 54–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Knemeyer, D. (2006). Information Design: The Understanding Discipline. Boxes and Arrows, 7–12. Retrieved from http://boxesandarrows.com/information-design-the-understanding-discipline
  40. LaSpina, J. A. (1998). The Visual Turn and the Transformation of the Textbook. Mahwah, New Jersey, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  41. Linderholm, T., et al. (2000). Effects of Causal Text Revisions on More- and Less-Skilled Readers’ Comprehension of Easy and Difficult Texts. Cognition and Instruction, 18(4), 525–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. López-Jimenéz, D. (2014). A Critical Analysis of the Vocabulary in L2 Spanish Textbooks. Porta Linguarum, 21, 163–181.Google Scholar
  43. Magner, U. I. E., et al. (2014). Triggering Situational Interest by Decorative Illustrations Both Fosters and Hinders Learning in Computer-Based Learning Environments. Learning and Instruction, 29, 141–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning. In The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 31–48). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mayer, R. E., & Estrella, G. (2014). Benefits of Emotional Design in Multimedia Instruction. Learning and Instruction, 33, 12–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Meyer, A., et al. (2015). Disfluent Fonts Don’t Help People Solve Math Problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(2), e16–e30. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Moreno, R. (2006). Does the Modality Principle Hold for Different Media? A Test of the Method-Affects-Learning Hypothesis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(3), 149–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Morgan, K. E. (2014). Decoding the Visual Grammar of Selected South African History Textbooks. Journal of Educational Media, Memory, and Society, 6(1), 59–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Müller, S. L. (2012). Suche Erklärungen für die Unterschiede: Gender in Schule und Lehrmaterialien. Eckert, Das Bulletin, 11, 42–45.Google Scholar
  51. Nofal, M. Y., & Qawar, H. A. (2015). Gender Representation in English Language Textbooks: Action Pack 10. American Journal of Educational, Science, 1(2), 14–18.Google Scholar
  52. Oleschko, S., & Moraitis, A. (2012). Die Sprache im Schulbuch. Erste Überlegungen zur Entwicklung von Geschichts- und Politikschulbüchern unter Berücksichtigung sprachlicher Besonderheiten. Bildungsforschung, 1(9), 11–46.Google Scholar
  53. de Oliveira, J., Camacho, M., & Gisbert, M. (2014). Exploring Student and Teacher Perception of E-Textbooks in a Primary School. Comunicar. Media Education Research Journal, 42, 1–8.Google Scholar
  54. Ott, C. (2014). Das Schulbuch beim Wort nehmen – Linguistische Methodik in der Schulbuchforschung. In K. Petr et al. (Eds.), Methodologie und Methoden der Schulbuch- und Lehrmittelforschung (pp. 234–263). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.Google Scholar
  55. Park, B., et al. (2015). Emotional Design and Positive Emotions in Multimedia Learning: An Eyetracking Study on the Use of Anthropomorphisms. Computers & Education, 86, 30–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Park, B., Plass, J. L., & Brünken, R. (2014). Cognitive and Affective Processes in Multimedia Learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 125–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.05.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pettersson, R. (2015). Information Design 3. Image Design. Vienna: International Institute for Information Design.Google Scholar
  58. Pintó, R., & Ametller, J. (2002). Students’ Difficulties in Reading Images. Comparing Results from Four National Research Groups. International Journal of Science Education, 24(3), 333–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Plass, J. L., et al. (2013). Emotional Design in Multimedia Learning: Effects of Shape and Color on Affect and Learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 128–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Pudas, A.-K. (2013). Investigating Possibilities to Develop Textbooks to Implement Global Education in Basic Education Instruction. IARTEM e-Journal, 5(2), 1–22.Google Scholar
  61. Reichenberg, M. (2013). Are “Reader-Friendly” Texts Always Better? IARTEM e-Journal, 5(2), 64–84.Google Scholar
  62. Rummer, R., Schweppe, J., & Schwede, A. (2015). Fortune is Fickle: Null-Effects of Disfluency on Learning Outcomes. Metacognition and Learning, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-015-9151-5
  63. Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Richter, J., Scheiter, K., & Eitel, A. (2016). Signaling Text-Picture Relations in Multimedia Learning: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis. Educational Research Review, 17, 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.12.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Scheiter, K., et al. (2015). Does a Strategy Training Foster Students’ Ability to Learn from Multimedia? The Journal of Experimental Education, 83(2), 266–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Schnotz, W. (2005). An Integrated Model for Text and Picture Comprehension. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 49–70). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Schnotz, W., et al. (2014). Focus of Attention and Choice of Text Modality in Multimedia Learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-013-0209-y.
  68. Schnotz, W., et al. (2011). What Makes Text-Picture-Integration Difficult? A Structural and Procedural Analysis of Textbook Requirements. Ricerche di Psicologia, 1, 103–135.Google Scholar
  69. Schüler, A., Arndt, J., & Scheiter, K. (2015). Processing Multimedia Material: Does Integration of Text and Pictures Result in a Single or Two Interconnected Mental Representations? Learning and Instruction, 35, 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.09.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Shadiev, R., Hwang, W.-Y., Huang, Y.-M., Tzu-Yu, L. (2015). The Impact of Supported and Annotated Mobile Learning on Achievement and Cognitive Load. Educational Technology and Society, 18(4), 53–69.Google Scholar
  71. Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., & Groff, C. (2008). Effective Programs in Middle and High School Mathematics: A Best-Evidence Synthesis, Version 1.3, The Best Evidence Encyclopedia (BEE) Empowering Educators with Evidence on Proven Programs, Johns Hopkins University School of Education’s Center for Data-Driven Reform in Education (CDDRE), Baltimore.Google Scholar
  72. Smiciklas, M. (2012). The Power of Infographics: Using Pictures to Communicate and Connect with Your Audiences. Indianapolis: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  73. Stern, L., & Roseman, J. E. (2004). Can Middle-School Science Textbooks Help Students Learn Important Ideas? Findings from Project 2061’s Curriculum Evaluation Study: Life Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(6), 538–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Stone, R. W., & Baker-Eveleth, L. (2013). Students’ Expectation, Confirmation, and Continuance Intention to Use Electronic Textbooks. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 984–990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Szapkiw, A. J. R., et al. (2013). Electronic Versus Traditional Print Textbooks: A Comparison Study on the Influence of University Students’ Learning. Computers & Education, 63, 259–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Testa, I., Leccia, S., & Puddu, E. (2014). Astronomy Textbook Images: Do They Really Help Students? Physics Education, 49, 332–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Thomas, A. (2014). The Effect of Textbook Format on Mental Effort and Time on Task. Minneapolis, MN: Walden University.Google Scholar
  78. Tufte, E. R. (1990). Envisioning Information. Columbia: Graphics.Google Scholar
  79. Um, E., et al. (2012). Emotional Design in Multimedia Learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(2), 485–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. UNESCO, G.E.M.R. Team. (2016). Global Education Monitoring Report 2016. Gender Review. Creating Sustainable Futures for All. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  81. Uyan Dur, B. I. (2014). Data Visualisation and Infographics in the Visual Communication Design Education at the Age of Information. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 3(5), 39–40.Google Scholar
  82. Wertheimer, M. (1923). Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der Gestalt. Psychologische Forschung, 3(1), 302–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00405549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Willard, A. M., & Brasier, D. J. (2014). Controversies in Neuroscience: A Literature-Based Course for First Year Undergraduates that Improves Scientific Confidence While Teaching Concepts. The Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education (JUNE), 12(2), 159–166.Google Scholar
  84. Willberg, H. P., & Forsmann, F. (1997). Lesetypographie. Mainz: Schmidt.Google Scholar
  85. Yalman, M. (2015). Preservice Teachers’ Views About E-Book and Their Levels of Use of E-Books. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 255–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Young, M. (2011). What Are Schools for? Educaçåo Sociedade & Culturas, 32, 145–156.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yvonne Behnke
    • 1
  1. 1.Geography EducationHumboldt-Universität zu BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations