{"id":7529,"date":"2017-09-20T17:02:46","date_gmt":"2017-09-20T17:02:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/citejournal.org\/\/\/"},"modified":"2018-03-05T16:40:38","modified_gmt":"2018-03-05T16:40:38","slug":"enhancing-preservice-science-teachers-use-of-text-through-e-readers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/citejournal.org\/volume-17\/issue-4-17\/current-practice\/enhancing-preservice-science-teachers-use-of-text-through-e-readers","title":{"rendered":"Enhancing Preservice Science Teachers\u2019 Use of Text Through E-Readers"},"content":{"rendered":"

A textbook can do much more than be on the one hand a mere statement of the results of reasoning, such as the ordinary geography or German grammar is, or on the other hand a mere statement of problems, such as the ordinary arithmetic or German reader is.\u00a0 (Thorndike, 1912, pp. 165-166)<\/p>\n

To put things in a historical context, the textbook has been an evolving curriculum artifact for a long time.\u00a0 Just after the turn of the last century, education thinkers like Thorndike (1912) were already reconceptualizing the textbook and its role in schools.\u00a0 Now, over 100 years later, educators are still trying to determine how the textbook should be used to aid instruction most effectively.<\/p>\n

The fundamental issues remain similar (e.g., teachers or textbooks as drivers of the curriculum, student challenges when using text in courses, cost of books); however, the advent of new technologies, like electronic text (e-text) and reading devices (e-readers) have added more complexity to the discussion.\u00a0 E-text and e-readers might be seen as a means to deliver traditional static text at a cheaper cost, but this view fails to capitalize on the power and versatility of editable, open-source text and e-reader applications.<\/p>\n

In science classrooms, teachers have been known to rely heavily on textbooks (Driscoll, Moallem, Dick, & Kirby, 1994).\u00a0 Additionally, science textbooks have tended to be written above the typical student\u2019s reading ability (Budiansky, 2001; Chall & Conard, 1991; Merzyn, 1987) and have been especially difficult for students who are reading below grade level (Curtis & Millar, 1988).<\/p>\n

In this article, we describe our work with preservice science teachers to more fully leverage the potential of this technology to modify the typical science text. The purpose of this project was to examine how preservice science teachers viewed their use of e-readers and e-text prior to their science methods course and how or if these views changed after they were required to incorporate as a resource in their lesson planning.<\/p>\n

The increase in state and district mandates to use e-text helped drive the inclusion of this topic and the design of instructional activities in a secondary science methods class.\u00a0 The goals of these activities were to develop preservice science teachers\u2019 understanding and skills when using editable e-text and e-reader technology in their curriculum planning, an area in which there has been little focus in the research literature.\u00a0 To help meet these goals, we examined a sample of preservice science teachers\u2019 orientations toward the use of e-readers and e-text, in general, and as applied to their prospective classrooms using survey data.\u00a0 Next, based on this information, preservice teachers developed the technical skills regarding the use of this technology when addressing the needs and interests of their students through activities and projects in the methods course.\u00a0 Finally, we examined our preservice teachers\u2019 perceptions of this technology for use in instruction.<\/p>\n

The Instructional Environment: Textbooks as Drivers of the Curriculum<\/h2>\n

To understand the contexts that surround the use of e-text and e-readers in K-12 classrooms, it is important to comprehend the prominent role traditional textbooks have played within their curricula.\u00a0 The concept of the textbook seems to have a fixed identity, often having an iconic and unchanging position in how people perceive education (Driscoll et al., 1994).\u00a0 Historically, commercially published curriculum materials such as textbooks were the mainstay for teaching in the United States (Goodlad, 1984).\u00a0 These published materials provided the framework, objectives, standards alignment, assessments, and more for many teachers, guided the curricula, and served as the daily concrete teaching materials to the students. Academic information was a relative scarcity, and the textbook was the only resource besides the teacher that provided content to students.<\/p>\n

Still today, for many courses, textbooks act as a default-setting for curricula, often presenting students the facts learned in most subjects.\u00a0 Although more current data are not available, Stein, Stuen, Carnine, and Long (2001) estimated that \u201ctextbooks serve as the basis for 75 to 90% of classroom instruction\u201d (p. 6), even though pedagogical content knowledge for teaching now would include the ideas of appraising, selecting, and modifying textbooks (as recommended by Ball, 2000).<\/p>\n

Teachers have often used these books to help them organize their courses, decide what is most important to teach, and provide background content information (Ball & Feiman-Nemser, 1988; Hutchinson & Torres, 1994).\u00a0 School districts typically have some kind of evaluative process for selecting their textbooks (as they have for many years; see Carus, 1990) that are used to create common curriculum across schools. Teachers often have little input in the choice of book assigned to their course (as noted much earlier by Ball & Feiman-Nemser, 1988), however, and may feel obliged to follow the book closely.<\/p>\n

Another factor that contributes to the dominating role of the textbook in the curriculum is the teacher\u2019s content background.\u00a0 Science teachers may not be comfortable with the subject matter, especially when they work out of their certification area (e.g., biology instructors teaching physics).\u00a0 In these cases, the textbook has taken a prominent role in the curricular experience for K-12 students (Geddis, 1993).\u00a0 Experiences with such teaching methods has led a large portion of the public to regard these texts as the authoritative teaching tool, composed of accurate information and necessary to instruction.<\/p>\n

Indeed, many teachers also rely on them to organize lessons and structure subject matter (an ongoing issue, as in Tyson-Bernstein, 1988).\u00a0 Published textbooks have been seen to both constrain and control knowledge and teaching (Apple & Jungck, 1990; Ball & Feiman-Nemser, 1988), which can then have the effect of limiting a student\u2019s opportunity to learn about that topic (Elliott, 1990).<\/p>\n

In some ways these views toward textbooks as a driver of the curriculum is surprising.\u00a0 Many educators would say that these materials should be used as resources and assert that teachers who only follow a textbook\u2019s contents are teaching in a limited way (as did Hamachek, 1969; Romberg & Carpenter, 1986).\u00a0 However, today textbooks themselves are currently undergoing a shift from a static, paper-based tool to one that is dynamic and digital, providing a new opportunity for teachers to use these resources in a way that supports their instruction in a deeper way.\u00a0 In the next section, we discuss some of the factors fueling the increasing emphasis on electronic text in K-12 schools.<\/p>\n

K-12 Schools Moving to Electronic Textbooks<\/h3>\n

The U.S. Department of Education\u2019s (U.S. DOE) Office of Educational Technology is working toward systems that allow educators to move beyond traditional, paper-based textbook models in which all students use the same textbook to one in which the content is more appropriate for the learner.\u00a0 The U.S. DOE\u2019s National Education Technology Plans of 2010 and 2016 promoted the concept of using open educational resources, such as digital open textbooks, as being more dynamic and responsive to the context of the classroom over print-based textbooks, while also providing a significant cost savings to school districts.<\/p>\n

The Federal Communications Commission\u2019s (2015) E-rate program, a federal initiative to support technology in educational settings, is adapting to meet current school situations to help ensure that America\u2019s students receive effective education and skills to meet 21st<\/sup>-century challenges.\u00a0 E-text and e-readers can be more accommodating as teaching and learning tools for students and teachers over printed materials.\u00a0 For example, onscreen dictionaries can be used to address students\u2019 needs, including those for English for speakers of other languages (ESOL), and adaptable fonts and size on displays can be used with exceptional student education (ESE) students.<\/p>\n

In an effort to increase access to this technology, Congress established the E-rate program to bring connectivity to all schools and libraries in America. The program now includes a component called Learning on the Go Mobile Pilots.\u00a0 Schools can use Learning on the Go E-rate funds to install mobile learning solutions through off-premises wireless connectivity for mobile learning devices, including digital textbooks (Federal Communications Commission, 2012b).\u00a0 This connectivity allows students to use these devices even when they are not in school.<\/p>\n

In addition to the national push toward digital textbooks by 2017 (Federal Communications Commission, 2012a), there is local and regional support for this change.\u00a0 For example, the governor of Florida signed legislation that will change the nature of textbooks in primary and secondary schools in the coming years.\u00a0 The passage of Florida Senate Bill 2120 in spring 2011 signaled to educators that the state legislature had decided the future of classroom textbooks will be digital.\u00a0 In the 2015-2016 school year, Florida PK-12 students switched from opening a paper book to flipping through one on an iPad, Kindle, or Nook Simple Touch (K-20 Education Code of 2010, 2012).<\/p>\n

Florida is not isolated in this regard, as several states have called for the use of e-text.\u00a0 For example, the California state legislature passed a law that provides for the creation of free, openly licensed digital textbooks and the use of e-readers. \u00a0Not only is state legislation changing technology and textbooks, but several schools and districts have made the shift to digital textbooks.\u00a0 Arizona\u2019s Empire High School in Tucson was one of the first U.S. public schools to switch to electronic textbooks in 2004 (Murray, 2004), and a 2006 Project Tomorrow NetDay survey found that 22% of middle and high school students were already using electronic versions of textbooks (Evans, 2007).<\/p>\n

The creation of these options for these resources is not limited to states that use a state-adopted textbook model.\u00a0 For example, education officials in Georgia are working with CK-12 flexbooks (Williams, 2013).\u00a0 A flexbook is a digital textbook authoring platform, offered by the CK-12 Foundation (http:\/\/www.ck12.org<\/a>\/), which allows users to produce and customize content by repurposing it using different modules.\u00a0 Teachers can draw information from several sources to build the fullest picture of content. For example, when teaching a unit in chemistry on biochemical processes, the instructor can excerpt text directly from a biology textbook to provide salient, in-depth content about chemical processes. \u00a0Teachers can select material that most directly relates to students\u2019 interest, backgrounds, and curricula.\u00a0 They can also choose the order in which the text topics are presented to match local curricular guidelines.<\/p>\n

In Utah, a state network of school officials developed its own digital mathematics textbooks and worked on adding more e-books in mathematics, science, and language arts (Utah Education\u00a0Network, n.d.).\u00a0 Nationwide, teachers have been creating even more digital texts (DiLaura, 2013; Jackson, 2013; Niederberger, 2012; Schencker, 2013).<\/p>\n

As an additional motivation for adopting digital books, the cost of paper textbooks has been on the rise: The U.S. Government Accountability Office reported that between 1988 and 2005, the cost of textbooks had nearly tripled (Government Accountability Office, 2005).\u00a0 An evaluation of five U.S. higher-education textbook publishers, representing more than 85% of college textbook sales, found an 82% increase in textbook prices since 2002, as compared to a 28% rise in the overall Consumer Price Index during the same period.\u00a0 Today, a quick perusal of a local college bookstore will show many books costing well over $100. \u00a0In fact, according to Greco (as cited in National Public Radio, 2012) the average high school science textbook costs $105 (para. 15).<\/p>\n

Upfront costs may be a source of resistance when K-12 schools consider e-text and e-readers, though upon closer examination this perspective may be shortsighted.\u00a0 An e-reader device that costs approximately $100 may look like an even greater expense than a pricey textbook, but the cost of the device is only paid once and allows the owner to load free e-texts or purchase others, often at a much lower expense than a print copy. To provide a content methods class with a set of traditional grade-level or discipline-specific science or mathematics textbooks is very expensive.\u00a0 By using e-readers, tablets, laptops, or desktop computers loaned by the college or owned by individuals, users can have access to a variety of current, up-to-date e-texts for far less expense and in many cases for free.<\/p>\n

Lowering textbook costs may have appeal to most affected stakeholders (e.g., school administrators, taxpayers, and college students,), but focusing only on this benefit fails to capture fully the opportunities e-readers and e-text offer educators to transform their practice.\u00a0 These resources provide teachers the ability to reimagine the relationship between course text and curricular decisions.\u00a0 To be sure, with these opportunities come specific challenges to teacher educators and preservice teachers.\u00a0 To better address these challenges, educators need to understand how e-text and e-readers are being used both by the general public and preservice teachers.<\/p>\n

The Increase of E-Reader and E-Text Use<\/h3>\n

Overall, e-readers are increasing in prevalence.\u00a0 In January 2012, researchers from the Pew Research Center\u2019s Internet and American Life Project conducted a survey to gather data about ownership and use of e-readers or tablets (Rainie & Duggan, 2012).\u00a0 According to the report, 33% of Americans 16 years and older owned an electronic reading device such as a Kindle or an iPad, an increase of 18% when compared to survey results from the previous year.\u00a0 There was a similar change with the general population, with the number of people who read e-books rising in 2014 to 28% (an increase of 7%), and a drop in printed book readers to 69% from 2011\u2019s 71% \u00a0(Zickuhr & Rainey, 2014).\u00a0 This shift from print to digital reading has been found in younger ages as well, as might be expected.\u00a0 In Scholastic\u2019s (2013) report, titled Kids and Family Reading Report<\/em>, researchers found that approximately half of the pupils aged 9-17 reported they would read more books for fun if they had greater access to e-text.\u00a0 The pressure to shift to digital also applied to the classroom: A majority of K-12 pupils have stated that they also want to start using their mobile devices within the school classroom not only for reading, but for all content areas (Booker, 2013).<\/p>\n

These trends hold when examining e-text use and ownership among students at our university. \u00a0In surveying a sample of preservice teachers who were in the process of entering a college of education, a group of mostly freshmen and sophomores, Cavanaugh and Eastham (2014) found that 87% had smartphones with Internet and application abilities, 41% already had their own e-text reading devices, 29% had their own tablet device such as an iPad, and 12% were limited to using a desktop or laptop for e-text access. \u00a0They also reported that a majority (69%) was already reading e-text for their own enjoyment, choosing digital content more often.<\/p>\n

Electronic reading devices in the form of e-readers, tablets, and smartphones are commonly used technology in the general population.\u00a0 From 2010 to 2012, the number of tablets in use has approximately doubled each year, from 5% of the population in 2010, to 10% in 2011, and 19% in 2012.\u00a0 It was estimated that in 2012, 29% of adults had either a tablet or an e-reader (Rainie, 2012).\u00a0 Some individuals have multiple devices that can act as readers (i.e., smartphones, tablets, and e-readers).<\/p>\n

Other studies are finding similar results. In Project Tomorrow\u2019s (2013) Speak Up survey, researchers found that approximately 50% of high school students and 40% of middle school students owned or had personal access to a smartphone \u2014 a 400% increase in 5 years \u2014 with 67% of their parents having smartphones.\u00a0 At slightly less than a majority of the total population, digital device saturation is nonetheless significant.<\/p>\n

Because of financial, legislative, and technological changes, the use of open-source digital textbooks is likely to increase in the future.\u00a0 Therefore, it is important to integrate digital textbooks into preservice teacher education programs. \u00a0To help preservice teachers in our program to be effective in this digital environment, we introduced the use of e-readers and e-text into the science education curriculum in our secondary science methods courses.<\/p>\n

Purpose and Research Questions<\/h2>\n

The primary goals of the project were to increase preservice science methods teachers\u2019 understanding of e-readers and e-text and for them to incorporate this technology into their curriculum planning.\u00a0 Toward this end, and to better comprehend their perspectives concerning this technology prior to instruction, we administered a survey that examined their attitudes toward the use of e-readers and e-text and the ways they might use such technology in their classrooms.\u00a0 Preservice teachers were taught how to use the technology and modify text for use in their science curriculum.\u00a0 After the instruction, we examined how our preservice teachers viewed the potential use of e-readers and e-text in their future classrooms.\u00a0 The research questions that guided this work were as follows:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. How did the preservice secondary education science methods teachers in our study view and use e-readers and e-text prior to their methods course?<\/li>\n
  2. Were there differences in preservice secondary education science methods teachers\u2019 views of their use of e-readers and e-text after they were required to incorporate them into a lesson plan as part of their methods course?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Method<\/h2>\n

    The instruction described in this article incorporated several textbook resources, including CK-12 Foundation (www.ck12.org<\/a>) and Florida\u2019s Orange Grove (http:\/\/florida.theorangrove.org<\/a>), both of which provide current open-source text appropriate for the secondary science curriculum.\u00a0 As part of an undergraduate secondary science methods course, the university faculty member\u00a0Brian Zoellner guided the preservice secondary education science methods teachers through the open textbook design, showing them flexible book options for adapting and building their own textbooks, as well as exploring options for differentiated instruction.<\/p>\n

    Preservice teachers incorporated e-text and e-readers into a lesson design project to give them the means to better address the needs and interests of their students.\u00a0 We undertook this work to understand better how preservice secondary education science methods teachers viewed and used e-readers and e-text prior to their science methods course and how they viewed this instructional resource after incorporating it into their lesson planning as part of a course project.<\/p>\n

    Participants and Context<\/h3>\n

    The project took place at a midsized regional public university in the southeastern U.S. within a college of education with a student population of approximately 1,000 students.\u00a0 It was conducted within two semester-long secondary science teaching methods courses.\u00a0 The course was chosen as a sample of convenience; however, because of the challenges K-12 students typically face with both the terminology and the abstract nature of science subject matter, we believed that the nature of the e-reader and e-text technology would be useful in addressing this subject.<\/p>\n

    Participants were recruited from the secondary science methods course via email to complete online surveys pre and post instruction.\u00a0 The courses had 14 preservice secondary education science methods teachers each, for a total of 28 across two semesters during fall 2012 and 2013.\u00a0 The population included students of mixed ages (span of 18-45 years of age), backgrounds, interests, and personal commitments (i.e., families, full-time jobs, etc.).\u00a0 Ethnicity was predominately Caucasian.\u00a0 Of the 28 students in the two courses, 15 agreed to participate in the preinstructional survey (60% female) and 14 agreed to complete the postinstructional survey (71% female). \u00a0Participants for both surveys were drawn from the same pool of students, with one participant failing to complete the postinstructional survey after completing the first survey.<\/p>\n

    To teach the preservice secondary education science methods teachers e-text and e-readers technical skills, they were loaned a Nook Simple Touch e-ink e-reader to use throughout the semester.\u00a0 These were purchased using a college teaching improvement grant from the university foundation fund.\u00a0 The Nook Simple Touch was chosen because of its nonpropriety e-text format (ePub) and the support facility in close proximity to the university.\u00a0 Providing preservice teachers an opportunity to work with the e-reader platform and using digital text is important in teacher education, as this type of technology is becoming a mandated format in area K-12 schools.<\/p>\n

    The first step in teaching the preservice teachers about the Nook was to familiarize them with the Nook\u2019s Simple Touch platform. \u00a0After receiving their devices, they were tasked with loading class readings onto their loaned devices for their own use.\u00a0 The intent of this activity was to provide the preservice secondary education science methods teachers with a straightforward task that allowed them to use the devices. \u00a0Tasks like loading a PDF document onto the e-reader were intended to help preservice teachers become more familiar using the technology.<\/p>\n

    For the novices, these activities allowed them to explore the technology and develop skills. \u00a0The more experienced users learned how to use a new platform, since none of them owned a Nook Simple Touch.\u00a0 The preservice teachers were encouraged to work with each other to troubleshoot issues and use the e-readers for in-class activities in the science methods course. \u00a0Those users who had difficulty were ultimately successful and able to learn multiple ways of working with the devices.<\/p>\n

    As the second set of experiences to promote the preservice teachers\u2019 use of the Nook Simple Touch devices, they were asked to prepare science lesson plans with them.\u00a0 As part of the project requirements, preservice teachers designed their lesson to (a) delve deeply into an important scientific topic (lasting from one to five class periods), (b) help their students answer an important research question, and (c) address a pressing societal issue. Within the design of those lesson plans, they articulated their use of these devices in accessing specific content knowledge appropriate to their lesson plans. \u00a0Additionally, they identified opportunities for the use of e-text to differentiate instruction for students with identified exceptionalities, such as ESOL learners.<\/p>\n

    Part of this process was to inform them about free electronic text sources available, specifically the Orange Grove Digital Repository and CK-12 websites (see Figure 1), which provide open textbooks for math and science at a variety of grade levels and courses. \u00a0After learning about the websites and their capabilities, the preservice teachers selected text that was relevant to their respective secondary school science topics that included climatology, plate tectonics, and genetics.<\/p>\n

    \"Figure<\/a>
    Figure 1<\/strong>. Screenshot from<\/em>\u00a0CK-12 website. This figure shows several open-source biology e-books on the website.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

     <\/p>\n

    As the third step, the preservice teachers were taught how to use software such as Microsoft Word to rate the reading level of the texts they selected to provide ESOL students with appropriate material to match their reading skill level.\u00a0 Additional available adaptive technology included the use of text display options, a search function instead of an index, and text-to-speech applications, digital annotation, and auto-summary tools.\u00a0 They also chose different sources of editable e-text to create reading materials most relevant to their lesson topic.\u00a0 Figure 2 shows an edited physical science e-text.<\/p>\n

    \"Figure<\/a>
    Figure 2.<\/strong>\u00a0Screenshot of edited physical science e-book. This figure shows how preservice teachers can edit text to meet the specific needs of their classrooms.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

     <\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Finally, the preservice teachers described explicitly how they incorporated the e-reader and e-text into their lessons. \u00a0As a reflective component, they justified their e-text and pedagogical choices to explain how they met the needs of their students and created relevant readings for their lesson topic. \u00a0This requirement is outlined in our rubric (see Figure 3).<\/p>\n

    \"Figure<\/a>
    Figure 3.<\/strong> Excerpt from lesson plan rubric. This excerpt describes the e-book\/e-reader elements necessary for preservice teachers\u2019 lesson plans.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

    \u00a0<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

    The uses of e-text and e-readers included gathering supplemental readings for background information related to the topic of the lesson plan.<\/p>\n

    The instructional activities centered on both developing basic skills using e-text and the Nook Simple Touch e-reader and incorporating this technology into an inquiry-based lesson plan related to an important topic in science.\u00a0 All preservice teachers used the e-text and e-readers in their science methods classes to explore and create resources for digital text to be used as a tool for differentiated instruction.<\/p>\n

    Instrument<\/h3>\n

    To assess participants\u2019 background and dispositions about technology through their self-reported skills and attitudes toward the use of e-readers and e-text, we administered pre- and postinstructional surveys online. \u00a0Outside of class time, 54% of preservice teachers volunteered to complete the preinstructional survey in the first weeks of the course.<\/p>\n

    The preinstructional survey contained 37 items.\u00a0 We began with general demographic questions (e.g., age, gender, and occupation), and a block of 17 questions was used to capture preservice secondary education science methods teachers\u2019 descriptions of their personal use of technology and e-readers (e.g., the use of the Internet, smartphones, and e-readers for their university courses and work within secondary classrooms). \u00a0Likert-type questions were also used to investigate the preservice teachers\u2019 attitudes about various statements (e.g., \u201cI love technology,\u201d and\u00a0 \u201cI rush out to buy the latest electronic gadget.\u201d). \u00a0The preservice secondary education science methods teachers were provided a range with five items (1 = Strongly Agree<\/em>, 3 = Neutral<\/em>, and 5 = Strongly Disagre<\/em>e). To justify and support their ratings, students were given open-ended questions.<\/p>\n

    The questions of the postinstructional survey concerning the project were the same as the preinstructional survey; however, the postinstructional survey included 10 additional questions about their specific use of e-readers in the secondary science methods course for both lesson design and use for course readings and ways they might use the technology in the future.\u00a0 Fifty percent of the preservice teachers completed the postinstructional survey outside class time.<\/p>\n

    Data Analysis<\/h3>\n

    We analyzed the pre- and postinstructional surveys through both quantitative and qualitative methods. \u00a0We conducted descriptive statistical analysis by calculating the means of the closed-answer and Likert-style questions to determine trends in agreement, disagreement, or neutrality toward survey statements.\u00a0 We tallied technological and e-reader and e-text usage and preferences using number counts using these questions. \u00a0Finally, short answer responses were examined for emerging themes and used strictly to support Likert- and closed-answer questions. \u00a0Here, we looked for positive, negative, or neutral attitudes toward the use of e-readers and e-text and specific examples that participants used to support their positions.<\/p>\n

    We coded and tallied the qualitative responses to these questions for preservice secondary education science methods teacher views toward e-readers (as in Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1998).\u00a0 A response to justify a negative view toward e-text would be, for example, \u201c[I prefer paper text] because I can write notes on the pages and use highlighters.\u201d<\/p>\n

    We also examined and tallied open-answer responses to find emerging themes.\u00a0 For example, the storage capacity of e-readers became a recurring response among the preservice secondary education science methods teachers.\u00a0 Responses coded for \u201cstorage capacity\u201d included, \u201cIt contains a lot of books on hand,\u201d and \u201cThere are many books that can be on it at any one time.\u201d<\/p>\n

    Limitations<\/h3>\n

    Due to the exploratory purpose and the design of this study, there are several major limitations important to note.\u00a0 First, the instrument used was not validated and was limited in the depth in self-reported responses.\u00a0 Second, the small sample size at a single institution and recruitment focused on strictly future secondary science teachers limits the generalizability of our findings.\u00a0 Without comparison groups, causal claims cannot be made.\u00a0 Finally, e-book technology is in a state of flux, with new versions being released on a regular basis, and as such, the device in this project is a limitation as applied to this situation.<\/p>\n

    Results<\/h2>\n

    To answer our first question, we examined how preservice science teachers viewed and used e-readers and e-text through the preinstructional surveys. \u00a0With the diversity of preservice teacher background and technology within the participant pool, we anticipated high variability in their use and views of e-readers and e-text, and the preinstructional survey data supported this assertion.<\/p>\n

    As related to usage of e-readers, some had their own devices that they used for recreational reading or to retrieve class materials, but this minority was small.\u00a0 According to the data they did not use e-text or e-readers as their primary reading source for course materials.\u00a0 The open-ended responses presented us with a view of preservice teachers as either being resistant or ambivalent to e-text and e-readers.\u00a0 However, they reported feeling at ease using electronic content for secondary school use, with 100% of the preservice teachers reporting being comfortable using the Internet to find class materials and 80% agreeing or strongly agreeing with the statement \u201cI have incorporated content from the Internet into lesson plans.\u201d<\/p>\n

    Although 67% of respondents had used e-readers or e-text, most preservice teachers reported preferring to read from paper text, with 67% stating that they agreed or strongly agreed that they preferred paper to electronic text on the preinstructional survey.\u00a0 The following are exemplar quotations reported in the open-ended questions:<\/p>\n