PC – RevisedAB – Phil has revised this incorrectly. The sample should be 1,625. Please correct?JP – change made
LW – not sure I like the formatting in the column on the left. It feels weird to have two bullet pointed things and then a third tidbit with no bullet. I understand why it doesn’t have a bullet, but it looks odd. Maybe indent the bullets a few spaces?AB – Where does the information about distance ed students using more e-textbooks come from? Should provide a reference (perhaps just a different slide #) when data is presented which isn’t illustrated by the graph on the slide. SP- see next slide
AB – Again, where does this “less frugal” info come from? Need to reference the data – just like providing a footnote in a text piece.SP- Please see the next slide
AB – I would delete “…and their impact on student perceptions?” Unless you mean to imply that this study researches student perceptions about the courses profiled…. (I don’t think you do….)
JP – I have taken the liberty of combining slides 17, 18 and 19 here. Angela’s notes (on the major/minor and personal interest paragraphs) are copied below.AB – Again, where does this information come from – “Content in major courses was usually considered more valuable.” ? It’s not associated with the graph. The information on Slide 17 is very clearly associated with the graph….the information here seems pulled out of thin air without a footnote.AB – Footnote required.SP-see next slideInsert major value crosstab or add this info in lieu of 18 or 19 (JP – DONE)JP – Text re-worked on this slide and the next, to better reflect the data shown.
JP – I used the core physical textbook numbers for two reasons—one being simplicity. (There were nine other rated course elements, including study guides, integrated learning systems, online tutoring, etc.) The second reason is related to the first. The core physical textbook total was 1,176. All the other rated course elements had a much lower number of total respondents—some VERY low. I am therefore mistrustful of the satisfaction percentages, statistically, for any of these. Perhaps in the future we could ask an overall satisfaction question.JP – NEW SLIDE 20
AB – Need to figure out a way for the graphs to be easier to read.AB – When you say “The differences shown here….”, what differences are you referring to? I’m can’t tell.Sp- this has now been amended to say the difference in online participation (top graph second set of bars)
LW – Not sure I fully understand the statement on this slide. “…there was a dramatic increase in usage of paperback textbooks with declines in hardcover texts and e-textbooks…” you have me that far. But I’m not sure I understand the last bit “…that were actually used in reported classes.” As opposed to what? Textbooks that students buy for fun? Textbooks that they buy but use for anything but studying for the class? Maybe it would be clearer to just stop after “e-textbooks”.AB – What is the “first semester” referenced? Please indicate “fall 2011 semester” or “spring 2010 semester” or whatever…. -OR- just use the normal parlance of “In this survey fielding…” (which we already know was Nov 11 – 29. 2011)Sp- changed
LW – does rentals need to be capitalized?PC – Consistency of full-stops/periods – all or none. Final point could either be two separate or brought together with a , or ;AB – Need to fix slide formatting….AB – How does “Purchase of old editions indicates that students are viewing content as a commodity” ? My mind doesn’t make this connection. Please expound. Also, do you mean “used editions”, not “old editions”.SP- Angela- as described above many students are buying used versions of old editions…. Those are the cheapest of all. When students use old editions, they are choosing to use content and exercises that are not current. When I interview publishers, they freely admit that students now consider their content to be interchangeable among editions and sometimes between and among competitive books for the same coursesAB – How can something become “more digital” ? It was “less digital” (but still digital) before?SP Changed
LW – I assume “course website” means the university’s website for the course? AB – Good question from “LW”…. Also, what is the difference between slide 24 and slide 25. I see the data is different, but they seem to be answering the same question. I don’t know, however, what the exact question for the graph on slide 24 was.SP – John has added the question… this one asks where do they find out what to buy and the next one says where they will buy it
LW – should “etail” be “e-tail”? Elsewhere, digital textbooks are noted as “e-textbooks”, with the hyphen. [AB – I think so.]AB – Need a new word for “market share”. Sp- changed
LW – “…acquire a textbooks” – textbook should be singular. Also, hanging parenthesis at the end of the statement. And the sentence is missing final punctuation – period, exclamation point, it needs something.AB – This needs a sub-head. Perhaps, “Acquisition method: format preference” ? SP – Done JP – I’m not sure “format preference” is the best choice here, since we use “format” to signify print textbook vs. e-textbook. I’ve substituted “transaction preference”.
AB – Would be better to have the full cross tab question. Sp- Done
AB – Where does this information come from: “…along with the percentage of students who are now renting their books.” Need a footnote or slide reference.Sp- Done
AB – Need to show cross tab question as well. doneAB – This headline doesn’t follow form. Previous headlines do not provide interpretations of data. Please change – consider calling this “Purchase timing: by source” Sp- done
LW – just noticed: why are some slide titles fully capitalized (see previous and subsequent slides) while others, like this one, are not?AB – Per LW’s question, I made sure all slide titles are in sentence case – this seemed to be how you did it most of the time.
LW – point three sounds awkward to me. Maybe “Tablets are sparking interest but currently are not widely used in courses”Sp- doneAB – Slide needs proper formatting.AB – Headline doesn’t seem to be in proper English. Are the devices interested? Or… “Increasing interest in, but low penetration of, devices other than laptops”Sp- doneAB – Where is the proof of this statement “Dedicated apps could help mobile students be more productive” ? SP – see slide 45
LW – something to keep in mind for the next survey: why is a plain old paper notebook not on here? I know, I know, the world is all about digital right now, but if you’re asking what tools students use to study, those are still valid tools. Plus, based on these results, I’m not sure it’s clear whether the question means “secondary to the textbook” or “secondary to your primary computer”. This is a question about digital devices… This question is asked earlierSp- This is a question about technology devices so that we can trend acquisition and usage patternsPC – (Please select just one.) [AB – Yes, the question should read here just as it did/does in the survey.]
LW – “There is enormous interest I the iPad…” should be “in the iPad”.PC – (Please select up to two.) (JP – DONE)AB – Yes to PC’s comment: please put in just as it was written in the survey. I hope, for example, we didn’t say “please specify which you plan to get.” That’s not great English!AB – How can something be “mobile-related” ? It either is mobile or isn’t, yeah? Used to read “Mobile-related device purchase intent”. My edits are in the slide.Sp- Use this one with PC’s added still don’t see PC addedJP – I used a different question (P41 29), because the original question for this slide (11) did not include PCs. I’ve re-worked the headline and text accordingly.
(AB – I don’t understand how these two graphs relate to each other. Which graph answers the question? What’s the other question?)JP – I’ve separated the previous version of this slide into two – each with its own graph and question.
AB -- Where is the proof for this statement: “However, among those with smartphones only 43% are actually using this capability at present.” on the slide?SP - 17% (yes, frequently) plus 26% (yes, occasionally) = 43%
AB – I don’t think it’s “rather than e-books” when students say they’re “interested in learning solutions that would save them time”. It could be an e-book that’s the learning solution that saves time. I see how the reference comes from the graph, but the logic here doesn’t hold. Please rephrase.SP – done
SP - Can this be trended? Lets replace the graphs with color coded tables and let’s omit class room technologies like clickers, lecture capture and blackboardJP - I’ll look into trending these, but the questions may be too dissimilar.jP – Trending was not possible. I limited the graph to the top eight (ranked by “item used to a large extent”).Sp- thanks
AB – Need to standardize on “e-textbook” vs. “e-book” for this report – particular if “e-textbook” is in the question.Sp- done
AB – Need to add the question. It’s not clear where does the “50% more” come from. Had to study this graph awhile to figure it out. Please try to made the written explanation tell the story? $65 for permanent access vs. $41 for semester access is 50% moreAB – I think it’s “..permanent access to their e-textbook…” ? Sp- Changed in text.
PC – ‘E-Textbooks’ (plural) in title ? sp- changed
LW – why the funny indents on the discussion points? Also, second point has an unnecessary space after “price”.We’ll use this to replace the non xtab slidePC – ‘E-Textbooks’ (plural) in title.AB – How can you prove this?.... “When the e-textbook is well integrated into the course, satisfaction ratings are much higher.Sp- Changed
AB – Please do find out and indicate if this is only for students who have used an e-textbook. AB – “fall sample” is another way your referencing this survey fielding. Please standardize on a single reference and use it throughout.AB – Where is it proven that “e-textbook sales have declined among participants…” Need a footnote or slide reference. SP – Slide 25JP – I have re-worked the text.Sp- thanks
LW – should be “…ratings of traditional textbooks.”PC – should it be ‘Inclusion OF an integrated learning solution... ‘? —NO (JP)AB – What does “ILS Xtab” mean? Please redraft the headline here. Also, what were the “five other questions”..JP – Headline and question revised to address these concerns.Sp- thanks
LW – the wording of this point is awkward. “…many students must have purchased them voluntarily sometimes even without buying the textbook.” Yes. According to the bottom image, that’s what the survey says. There’s something about the tone of the sentence that I don’t like. Maybe I’m reading into it, but it sounds surprised or incredulous to me. It should be more neutral. Yes, access codes are available as a standalone purchase and many students choose to do that. It’s a fact that we were clearly aware of, having offered the response choice. I think this point should be phrased more like this: “Many students had the choice to purchase the access code without the accompanying textbook; a full ___% took this advantage of this option.” SP – John please re-write…JP – Done.
AB – Maybe “Students are becoming increasingly more likely to skip class when materials are available online. To take the greatest advantage of digital learning systems, the overall teaching approach may need to be adjusted so students continue to perceive value from their classroom experience.”SP – John, please adjust accordinglyJP – Done
LW – not much can be done about it now, but I find this question strange. What does music piracy have to do with textbooks? Is there a connection we’re exploring? And I also don’t agree that downloading content from Sparknotes is illicit. Those are freely available supplemental course materials. Just because a student obtained some Sparknotes doesn’t mean that they didn’t purchase the required course text. Further, would anyone say that purchasing a paper copy of Spark or Cliff’s notes is “illicit”? Was using these supplements illicit 25 years ago, before e-books existed and book prices skyrocketed? Is the illicitness because the material was obtained for free? I don’t see what this has to do with lost sales of primary textbooks, unless it has always caused sales to be lost, in which case it’s not terribly noteworthy. However, downloading public domain texts from sites like Project Gutenberg is not illicit either; again, those are freely available texts. If a student wishes to download Shakespeare’s plays from Gutenberg rather than buying The Complete Arden Shakespeare, there’s really, technically, nothing wrong with that. Certainly, I wouldn’t put it in the same class as downloading pirated books or photocopying entire copyrighted textbooks. “Illicit” is a synonym for “illegal” and there is nothing illegal about some of the behaviors mentioned. It can also mean “morally wrong or undesirable” but what’s morally wrong about obtaining alternate, legal versions of course materials? Or obtaining supplementary materials of one’s own choosing? The behaviors may be undesirable for the publishers’ interests, but not illegal. Using the word “illicit” in this context simply gives this question a ring of bitterness that feels inappropriate for a professional survey. I suggest a better phrase than “illicit behavior” needs to be coined. SP – any suggestions?? This wording was negotiated in earlier editionsJP – Steve and I will discuss these concerns. (Also, I will create a new graph, showing trending over each of the three surveys—NOT just the merged data plus the current survey.) [NOTES: The music data point has been dropped, as it was in all previous reports. The Sparknotes example has always been part of the question.]AB – Will wait for revised slide before commenting.
AB – “We will measure these activity levels again in the spring fielding.” When? Now? Suggest pulling this sentence.Sp edited accordingly
Transcript of "BISG's MIP for Higher Ed 2012 -- PAXHIA"
Price and Value matter• Students are savvy shoppers who explore all options in acquiring their learning materials at the best price• Many students are shopping earlier and looking for better deals online• Price and convenience are the key criteria when making a purchase decision• Purchase of old editions indicates that students are viewing content as a commodity• The popularity of rentals is growing• Textbook bundling is still common, with more bundled elements being offered in digital formats 14