This article was downloaded by: [UOV University of Oviedo]On: 17 October 2014, At: 06:54Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Innovations in Education and TeachingInternationalPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/riie20

Students’ perceptions of the usefulnessof an E-book with annotative andsharing capabilities as a tool forlearning: a case studyEe-Lon Lima & Khe Foon Hewa

a Learning Sciences and Technologies Academic Group, NanyangTechnological University, Singapore.Published online: 03 Apr 2013.

To cite this article: Ee-Lon Lim & Khe Foon Hew (2014) Students’ perceptions of the usefulness ofan E-book with annotative and sharing capabilities as a tool for learning: a case study, Innovationsin Education and Teaching International, 51:1, 34-45, DOI: 10.1080/14703297.2013.771969

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.771969

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &

Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4

Students’ perceptions of the usefulness of an E-book withannotative and sharing capabilities as a tool for learning: a casestudy

Ee-Lon Lim and Khe Foon Hew*

Learning Sciences and Technologies Academic Group, Nanyang Technological University,Singapore

E-books offer a range of benefits to both educators and students, including easeof accessibility and searching capabilities. However, the majority of current e-books are repository-cum-delivery platforms of textual information. Hitherto,there is a lack of empirical research that examines e-books with annotative andsharing capabilities. This research study aims at exploring the usefulness of anext-generation e-book (NG-eBook), with annotative and sharing capabilities,with the focus on using the e-book to promote student learning through reflec-tion and sharing of ideas. Thirty-six tertiary level students from three diplomamodules participated in the study. Overall findings suggest that the NG-eBookpromoted student learning experiences by enabling student engagement andinteraction. Future research directions pertaining to the use of e-books in educa-tion contexts are suggested.

Keywords: annotative; sharing; e-book; pedagogy; technology

Introduction

The e-book is an emerging technology which is likely to have a large impact inteaching and learning over the next two-to-three year time horizon (Johnson,Levine, Smith, & Stone, 2010). E-books may be defined as the digital media equiv-alent of printed textbooks, read on computers or other digital devices (Rickman,Von Holzen, Klute, & Tobin, 2009). Although e-books may be the electronic ver-sion of a printed book, some can exist without any printed equivalent.

E-books may be downloadable or web accessible (Hawkins, 2000; Terry, 1999).The former refers to digital contents of a book that are available on the Internet fordownloading to a user’s hardware devices. The contents of downloadable e-booksmay be available for free (e.g. Bartleby.com, or Project Gutenberg), or titles fromdigital libraries or publishers (e.g. NetLibrary and VitalSource Bookshelf) boughtby schools or departments and loaned out to students to download to their ownhardware devices (Hernon, Hopper, Leach, Saunders, & Zhang, 2007; Rao, 2003).Web-accessible e-books, on the other hand, remain on the provider or publisherwebsite and can be read by a user for a fee or purchased for indefinite access(Hawkins, 2000).

*Corresponding author. Email: khefoon.hew@nie.edu.sg

Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 2014Vol. 51, No. 1, 34–45, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2013.771969

� 2013 Taylor & Francis

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4

Although e-books can be read on smart phones and personal digital assistants(PDAs) (Hawkins, 2000; Hernon et al., 2007), they are usually accessed on specia-lised hardware devices known as e-readers or e-book readers. One reason for this isthat users of smart phones and PDAs are often hindered by issues such as limitedbattery life and small screen size. For example, Supian wrote, ‘smart phones aregood for bite-sized reads, but painful for long, sustained period of reading’ (Suplan,2011, p. 1). Lam, Lam, Lam, and McNaught (2009), together with Waycott (2002),similarly reported that PDAs constrained reading due to limitations such as smallscreen size, and difficulty in navigating through the reading material. Dedicateddevices such as e-readers, on the other hand, tend to have the right screen size,lighting, proper navigation tools and battery lifespan, which make it easier for usersto read the e-books.

The body of literature on e-books usage is still relatively young (Levine-Clark,2006). Advocates of e-books have suggested several advantages associated with thistechnology. Essentially, these advantages include the following:

(a) cost savings (e.g. collections of copyright-free texts including works of litera-ture at little or no cost) (Hernon et al., 2007; Johnson et al., 2010),

(b) convenience (e.g. remote access to reading materials, ease of copying andpasting quotes to a Word document, ease of searching for keywords, infor-mation) (Hernon et al., 2007; Kiriakova, Okamoto, Zubarev, & Gross, 2010;Lam, Lam, & McNaught, 2010),

(c) portability (e.g. not having to carry heavy printed books around, ability tostore collection of readings in a personalised digital library) (Lam et al.,2009; Kiriakova et al., 2010; Shiratuddin, Landoni, Gibb, & Hassan, 2003),

(d) optimising reading time (e.g. much of e-book reading can done during travelto and from the university (Lam et al., 2009), and

(e) fun (e.g. e-books make reading ‘cool’, fun and interesting) (Kiriakova et al.,2010).

Constraints of existing e-books on online learning

Despite its convenience and portability, many existing e-books lack interactivefeatures and hence may not adequately support and empower students with toolsfor learning outside the classroom, where students may not meet face-to-face toshare and discuss resources and ideas. A review of existing e-books offered bycontent publishers and aggregators such as Adobe Digital Commons, Course-Smart, CafeScribe, NetLibrary, VitalSource and Skillsoft reveals a content-focused,publisher-centric approach of delivering content. Therefore, it can be argued thatexisting e-book platforms excel in delivering static content but provide limitedopportunities for students to connect with peer learners online. The majority ofe-books are traditional ‘just-a-picture-of-the-page’ e-viewers. Some platformsprovide mark-up features whereby users can add bookmarks to documents as wellas highlight text and annotate comments for future reference with the e-books.However, the ability to share and look up annotations contributed by peer learnersis limited. Additionally, majority of the existing research involved students fromthe western cultural contexts (e.g. Europe, United States). As such, there is a need

Innovations in Education and Teaching International 35

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4

to study other cultural contexts to gain a better understanding on the use ofe-books.

Impetus for the creation of the NG-eBook with annotative and sharingcapabilities

In response to the existing limitations, a next-generation e-book (NG-eBook) wasconceived and designed. Figure 1 shows the interface of the NG-eBook. The screenshots in Figure 2 provide a brief summary of the key technical features of the NG-eBook: navigation, content management and collaboration. It is envisaged that theNG-eBook represents an e-book which can support student learning through reflec-tion and sharing of resources and ideas.

The NG-eBook is distinct as it not only encompasses the features of traditionale-books such as on-screen reading and browsing but also annotative and sharingcapabilities. The annotation and sharing features provide opportunities for studentsto reflect and exchange resources and ideas with peer learners. Students are able toadd annotations (textual comments) via posting sticky notes to any page or sectionof the e-book. Students may then share their comments with their friends and class-mates by simply requesting for an Invitation to Collaborate. Once the invitation isaccepted, everyone will be able to see each other’s annotations. Furthermore, stu-dents are able to subscribe to annotations created by their peers via RSS syndicationand aggregation and thus receive automatic updates on new annotative contents.

Purpose of the current study

The main focus of the current study is to examine how an e-book with annotativeand sharing capabilities could support student learning. This study is distinct as it issituated in an Asian-Pacific context, hence rendering the findings relevant to

Figure 1. Interface of NG-eBook used in Polytechnic North (Polytechnic North is apseudonym for the tertiary level education institute in this study).

36 E.-L. Lim and K.F. Hew

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4

educators and researchers keen in studying the perceived effectiveness of e-booksfrom a non-western perspective. This study was guided by the following researchquestions:

(1) What are students’ perceptions of using the NG-eBook as a tool forlearning?

(2) What are students’ suggestions to improve the NG-eBook as a tool forlearning?

a. Navigation

User Interface Graphic user interface for user to access the e-book (see Figure 1) Navigation User is able to navigate to any page of the e-book by using previous/next option or by entering a page number Views Supports multiple views (grid view, list view, pile view, and stack view) for ease of page navigation. Zoom in/out User is able to zoom in on the content of any page for better clarity of the content

b. Content Management

Manage Page Supports two page view whereby user has the option to add content (text, image, audio and video) into the e-book. Annotative Notes User is able add textual comments (annotations) via posting sticky notes to any page/section of the e-book.

HighlighterHighlighter enables user to highlight important sections of text in a range of colours. ScribbleUser is able to scribe anything on the page. This would be helpful when user wants to add some drawings on a page for better understanding.

c. Collaboration

Share Content User is able to share their annotated content with other users who have the access to same e-book. Sharing includes the pages, notes, and scribble. User can provide READ ONLY or FULL ACCESS to other users. Users can also subscribe to peer-learners’ content via the RSS feature in NG-eBook. Book shelf and LMS IntegrationUser is able to view the books/module that is available for him/her. The list of the books/modules would be fetched from the Blackboard LMS APIs.

Figure 2. Technical features of the NG-eBook.

Innovations in Education and Teaching International 37

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4

Methodology

A case study approach that involved the collection and analysis of qualitative datawas carried out in this study. The case study approach was chosen because the keypurpose of the study was to gain a deeper understanding of a phenomenon or situa-tion (Merriam, 1998).

Participants and procedure

Thirty-six tertiary level students, between 17 and 19 years old, were invited to par-ticipate in this study. These 36 students were studying at Polytechnic North, a pseu-donym. The sample consisted of 12 students from the Introduction to Pharmacymodule, 14 students from the Clinical Biochemistry module and 10 students fromthe Real Estates Law module. Specifically, there were 23 male and 13 female par-ticipants. The students come from a variety of background with different nationality(80% Singaporeans, 15% Singapore permanent residents and 5% foreigners fromthe South East Asian regions), gender (64% male, 36% female), and ethnicity (85%Chinese, 8% Malay, 5% Indian, 2% Burmese). The majority of the students had lit-tle or no experience with e-books. Table 1 summarises the demographics data ofthe participants.

Prior to the study, all the students were oriented to the NG-eBook interface andfunctionalities. The NG e-Book was an Adobe Flex Rich Internet Application –accessible from the students’ laptop browser. Each student used a laptop to accessthe NG-eBook. The NG-eBook was employed within a blended learning approachby using it to complement the face-to-face lecture and tutorials in the aforemen-tioned modules. Participation in the NG-eBook was a class requirement, and stu-dents’ contributions were part of the course assessment. Students reflected onspecific issues related to one of the aforementioned modules by posting theirthoughts via annotations in the e-book. These annotations were then shared onlinewith their classmates. The exchange process required students to comment on atleast one of their peers’ annotations as well as respond to those comments in theirown annotations. Altogether, the whole study spanned a period of three weeks to

Table 1. Demographics of participants.

Category Frequency (n= 36 total)

GenderMale 23Female 13Discipline of studyIntroduction to pharmacy 12Clinical biochemistry 14Real estate law 10NationalitySingapore citizen 29Singapore permanent resident 5Foreigner 2EthnicityChinese 30Malay 3Indian 2Burmese 1

38 E.-L. Lim and K.F. Hew

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4

provide students with sufficient time to reflect, annotate, and respond to theannotations.

Data collection and analysis

At the end of the three weeks, qualitative data via reflection and focus group inter-views were collected. A reflection template containing ‘trigger’ questions or‘probes’ was provided to help the students think about the various elements of theirexperience as they worked through the NG-eBook. The reflection template incorpo-rated the following questions:

(1) What do I like about using the NG-eBook as a tool for learning?(2) What do I not like about using the NG-eBook as a tool for learning?(3) What are some suggestions to improve the NG-eBook as a tool for learning?

All 36 students answered the reflection questions. After the reflection formswere submitted, a focus group interview was conducted. Ten students volunteeredto participate in the focus group interview (see Table 1 for the questions).

Focus group interviews are able to generate richer data than those obtained fromone-to-one interviews (Thomas, MacMillan, McColl, Hale, & Bond, 1995). Partici-pants of a focus group interview often offer additional comments beyond what theyoriginally had to say once they hear other responses (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2006).However, one major shortcoming is that members may not feel comfortable to dis-close information because it requires trust for a focus group interview to be success-ful (Krueger & Casey, 2000). In order to ameliorate this shortcoming in this study,we obtained participants from the same tutorial group as there would already be anextent of trust amongst the members which could encourage the expression ofviews. This is consistent with the recommendation of other researchers (Kitzinger,1994; Rabiee & Thompson, 2000). After the completion of the focus group, mem-ber cheques of the students’ responses were done via email to ensure the validity ofthe focus group data (Johnson, 1997).

The students’ data were examined by a qualitative coding approach thatfollowed the methods of Neuman (2006). The responses were initially examined to

Table 2. Focus group questions.

No. Question

1 How would you describe your experiences with the NG-eBook?2 How did you prepare for posting your annotations in the NG-eBook? Did you read

others’ annotations before you posted? What impact did this have on your learning?What did you do before you posted your annotations in NG-eBook?

3 What resources did you use as searched for content to add to the NG-eBook pages?4 How did annotating and sharing content in the NG-eBook impact your learning the

course content?5 Can you share about an instance when you were able to use or apply information that

others had annotated in NG-eBook pages?6 How would you use the NG-eBook in the future?7 What are the problems or drawbacks of using NG-eBook?8 What kinds of annotations did you make in response to other students’ annotations on

the NG-eBook pages?9 Are you keen to participate in similar e-book learning activities in the future?

Innovations in Education and Teaching International 39

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4

group similar comments into themes. The relationship between the themes and thefit between each statement and the theme were then evaluated. Finally, each themewas given a label, the number of students who contributed comments to the themewas tabulated, and representative statements for each were selected. Since com-ments from the students were openly solicited via reflection and focus group inter-views, a student could list multiple opinions.

Results

In this section, we examine each of the research questions in turn. Table 2 providesa description of the results including a list of categories, the number of responses ineach category and some typical comments.

Table 3. Results of content analysis and sample comments.

Categories Counts Excerpt of comments

Positive perceptions of using the NG-eBookContent creation andsharing

24 ‘the annotation feature provides me with opportunitiesto work with my classmates in creating and sharingcontent’, ‘this could revolutionise how we constructknowledge’

Engagement andinteraction

15 ‘makes learning more social as compared toBlackboard’, ‘encourages a greater sense ofparticipation … contrast this with my normal tutorialexperiences where some shy or distracted students justkeep quiet and don’t contribute in class!’

Graphical user interface 9 ‘the interface is effective, attractive, and easy to use’,‘3D book view allows me to do realistic page turning!’

Remote access 3 ‘I like the cloud-based access that ensures that I canaccess and participate anywhere, anytime’

Negative perceptions of using the NG-eBookDisconnect 14 ‘my first time being exposed to the features … feels

overwhelming and distracting to learning …’, ‘am notused to interacting online … doesn’t fit my learningstyle and socio-psychological profile’

Accessibility 5 ‘reckon that if I had had faster broadband access, myoverall experience will be enhanced’, ‘sometimesapplication takes ages to upload media content andhangs frequently on my laptop’

Poor etiquette 5 ‘it’s unfortunate that some students just don’t haveonline communication etiquette. …’, ‘Selfish classmateswho do not contribute much and selfishly accessothers’ annotations

Eyestrain 1 ‘interface is too bright … and long periods ofimmersive reading cause eyestrain’

What are some suggestions to improve the NG-eBookVersatility 5 ‘e-book presentation is too linear and rigid’Connection with web 4 ‘Integration of tools e.g. dictionaries and web-based

research destinations’Alleviate eyestrain 1 ‘… have a read-aloud feature to provide a natural voice

to read the ebook content’Synchronouscommunication

2 ‘live chat similar to Windows Live Messenger withinthe NG-eBook will help communication’

40 E.-L. Lim and K.F. Hew

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4

Major findings are as follows:

(1) Overall, the NG-eBook promoted positive learning experiences by enablingstudent engagement and participation.

(2) Reasons for liking the NG-eBook were diverse: the NG-eBook provided stu-dents with a platform for enabling knowledge sharing, infusing new dimen-sions of engagement and interactivity to the learning experience.

(3) Students’ positive perceptions appeared strong enough to balance and com-pensate for their initial disconnect and accessibility issues.

(4) The NG-eBook’s pedagogical value was enhanced by its annotative and shar-ing capabilities (Table 3).

Detailed analysis

Based on the content analysis of the respondents’ data, four positive themesemerged (a) content creation and sharing, (b) engagement and interaction, (c) graph-ical user interface and (d) remote access. Students cited the ability to create andshare content, as well as engagement and interaction, as the two top reasons in sub-stantiating their positive learning experience. Students reported that they were ableto understand a topic better because they were able to share and compare ideas viaannotations. To a slightly lesser degree, respondents cited the graphical user inter-face as a motivating reason for using the NG-eBook to reflect, and share opinions.Cloud-based remote access was also cited as a positive experience. In general, stu-dents expressed appreciation of the polytechnic’s efforts to introduce a new innova-tive learning platform and felt that their learning experience was enhanced using theNG-eBook as a supplement to the traditional lectures and tutorials. The reasons forstudents’ positive perceptions of the NG-eBook were diverse; these were principallycentred on the ability to interact and share knowledge via the annotation and shar-ing capabilities of the e-book.

However, not all students appreciated the use of the NG-eBook as a tool forlearning. The evaluation of negative experiences yielded four themes. The majornegative perception was a sense of disconnect. This was attributed to various fac-tors, including a sense of being overwhelmed by the range of features and function-alities of the NG-eBook, and students who were inclined towards a more passive,rather than active learning style. For example, these students preferred the teacherto present the content rather than reading the content themselves, reflecting uponthem, and subsequently sharing their thoughts.

A number of students also shared their frustrations with the lack of response oretiquette amongst some students. Students also reported having a low tolerance fortechnical and accessibility issues. However, initial technology concerns and prob-lems lessened as students grew accustomed to using NG-eBook. Perhaps these stu-dents who were studying sciences and engineering were able to overcome technicaland accessibility challenges easily. Nevertheless user support is vital especially forstudents who are less comfortable with technology. One interviewee reported havingeyestrain due to long periods of reading.

In terms of suggestions to improve the NG-eBook, respondents cited the impor-tance of versatility. Some students lamented that the e-Book was too structured andlinear and does not align with the digital nimbleness that most students come to

Innovations in Education and Teaching International 41

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4

expect with Web 2.0 social media platforms. Students suggested that the NG-eBookhas a connection to the Internet that could allow web pages to be inserted into thetext to enhance meaning. Other suggestions include the following: having the e-Book to suggest related resources after completion of each set of notes (e.g. howYouTube recommends other relevant videos), having a text-to-speech ability forread-aloud and live chat features to help communication.

Discussion

It can be concluded from the students’ reflection and interview data that the NG-eBook appeared to support students’ learning activities. Learning happens when stu-dents read the e-Book contents, reflect upon them, and externalise their thoughtsand ideas. Learning also happens when students share their ideas with others andobtain feedback (Biggs & Tang, 2007). Towards this end, the NG-eBook enabledstudents to first reflect and then participate in the construction of knowledge primar-ily via its annotative and sharing capabilities. As one student summed up her partic-ipation in using the NG-eBook, ‘it was a novel learning platform that goes beyondjust e-reading to participative learning with my peers.’ Had the NG-eBook beenused as a mere repository-cum-delivery platform, its use would have been very lim-ited because prior research has suggested that students overwhelmingly expresseddissatisfaction with merely reading text online (Lam et al., 2009; Strother, Brunet,Bates, & Gallo III, 2009). In fact students in the Lam et al. (2009) study reportedthat they wished for functions that would allow them to add comments or notes inan e-book, something that we had done in the NG-eBook. Thus, it is suggested thatfuture designs of e-books be incorporated with annotative and sharing capabilities;perhaps even supporting rich media annotations (e.g. audio and video), beyondtext-based annotations. Going forward, one possibility to further support annotationand sharing activities is to offer an NG-eBook application for the iPad tablets.According to Lam et al. (2009), the issue of portability is an important factor thatcan affect e-book usage. Compared to laptops, iPads might be better tool as far asportability is concerned. The high-resolution LED-backlit display on an iPad, alongwith its ability to display content in either portrait or landscape orientation withevery turn, light weight and long battery usage of up to 10 h helps make reading onthe go easy.

However, negative experiences were also reported by some students. Not all stu-dents found the NG-eBook efficient from a learning standpoint, whilst othersexpressed resistance to participate in collaborative activities and dissatisfaction withthe degree of effort and participation from other classmates (e.g. lack of commentfrom others). Perhaps some of these negative experiences could be addressed bydeploying the e-book towards the latter part of the semester, when students wouldhave formed stronger social relationships with others. Stronger ties amongst stu-dents could motivate them to contribute their opinions and viewpoints (Nonaka &Takeuchi, 1995). Another suggestion is to establish certain ground rules for partici-pation. In a face-to-face classroom environment, students are typically expected toparticipate in a discussion by replying promptly to other students’ questions or com-ments (Cheung & Hew, 2005). This should also be expected for students using theannotative and sharing capabilities of an e-book. Students should perhaps berequired to respond within 24 h since prior research has found that individuals

42 E.-L. Lim and K.F. Hew

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4

generally continue to contribute if they receive responses within one day (Hewitt &Teplovs, 1999).

A key consideration when introducing e-books for the present digital-native stu-dents is the human–computer interaction element. Current social networking plat-forms such as Facebook and Twitter have set the bar high in terms of ease-of-use.Invariably, students will expect a similarly intuitive experience from technologiessuch as e-books. Thus, it is critical that e-books incorporate ‘digital-native friendly’design features that offer a rich and intuitive user experience, appealing interfaceand personalised user settings – aligned with expectations of the Gen-Y to Gen-Mil-lennium users.

There were also complaints of eyestrain caused by long periods of reading onscreen, as compared to reading printed text. Consequently, a student’s suggestion toincorporate a ‘text-to-speech ability for read-aloud learning’ may be worth consider-ing for future designs of e-books to alleviate eye fatigue. The ability for users tomagnify text will also help enable a more comfortable reading experience.

Like any other research, there are a number of limitations in this research. Dueto the relatively small number of participants (n= 36), the results of this studyshould be interpreted with caution. A larger sample would be needed to further testand confirm the veracity of the findings. Whether the findings would hold true withstudents from other courses, disciplines and academic abilities is unclear. Furtherresearch about the use of the NG-eBook by a larger cohort of students from variousdisciplines needs should be conducted.

We also propose that longitudinal studies be undertaken to assess the effective-ness of the NG-eBook over longer periods of time such as one year or more. Theintroduction stage on use of the e-book is particularly important and could havebenefited from additional time dedicated to a more detailed overview and orienta-tion of the key functionalities. It is also possible that the results of this case studybe attributed to novelty effect, as this was the first time that such an e-book wasused by the students. Whether the students would evaluate the use of the NG-eBookpositively if they used it over a sustained period of time is not known.

Conclusion

In this study, the learning environment enabled by the NG-eBook was positivelyperceived by students but had not been validated by outcomes such as studentgrades. Additional research about the relationship between using the NG-eBook andlearning outcomes would lend to a deeper understanding of the NG-eBook usage.

In terms of the NG-eBook’s annotative capabilities, future research directionscould explore how annotations shape learning practices, the learning impact thatannotations might offer, as well as the design and pedagogical implications that canbe inferred based upon the findings to the aforementioned questions. As such, thereis scope for further research to help in identifying the key aspects around how theNG-eBook could be designed and used to optimal effect for promoting learning ine-book supported environments. Additionally, individual learner characteristics suchas gender, age, course discipline and prior technology experience may influence par-ticipation and learning with the e-book. The present study focused on the disci-plines of life sciences and engineering. E-books with annotative and sharingcapabilities may be more effective in disciplines that value open ended discussionand reflection through writing, such as the social sciences. The investigation of

Innovations in Education and Teaching International 43

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4

these issues will give a more comprehensive understanding of the effectiveness andaffordances of the NG-eBook.

Notwithstanding the above limitations and the directions for future research, it isbelieved that this study has contributed to a deeper understanding of e-books. Wehope that our findings will be useful to other researchers and educators who aresimilarly interested in the use of e-books to engage student learning.

Notes on contributorsEe-Lon Lim earned his master degree in Instructional Design and Technology at theNational Institute of Education (Singapore). His research interests include instructionaldesign and e-learning.

Khe Foon Hew earned his doctorate in Instructional Systems Technology from IndianaUniversity. His research primarily focuses on online facilitation strategies, as well as studentinteraction, cognition and knowledge sharing in online discussion environments. He hasrecently published a book entitled Student Participation in Online Discussions: Challenges,Solutions, and Future Research.

ReferencesBiggs, J. B., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university. Open University

Press.Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2005). How can we facilitate students’ in-depth thinking and

interaction in an asynchronous online discussion environment? A case study. Proceed-ings of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 28, 114–121.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education.New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Hawkins, D. T. (2000). Electronic books: A major publishing revolution (part 1). Online, 24,14–28.

Hernon, P., Hopper, R., Leach, M. R., Saunders, L. L., & Zhang, J. (2007). E-book use bystudents: Undergraduates in economics, literature, and nursing. The Journal of AcademicLibrarianship, 33, 3–13.

Hewitt, J., & Teplovs C. (1999, December). An analysis of growth patterns in computer con-ferencing threads. In C. Hoadley & J. Roschelle (Eds.), Proceedings of the computersupport for collaborative learning conference (pp. 232–241). Palo Alto, CA: StanfordUniversity Press.

Johnson, R. B. (1997). Examining the validity structure of qualitative research. Education,118, 282–292.

Johnson, L., Levine, A., Smith, R., & Stone, S. (2010). The 2010 Horizon Report. Austin,TX: The New Media Consortium.

Kiriakova, M., Okamoto, K. S., Zubarev, M., & Gross, G. (2010). Aiming at a moving tar-get: Pilot testing ebook readers in an urban academic library. Computers in Libraries,30, 20–24.

Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus group: The importance of interactionsbetween research participants. Sociology of Health and Illness, 16, 103–121.

Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for appliedresearch (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Lam, P., Lam, S. L., Lam, J., & McNaught, C. (2009). Usability and usefulness of eBookson PPCs: How students’ opinions vary over time. Australasian Journal of EducationalTechnology, 25(1), 30–44.

Lam, P., Lam, J., & McNaught, C. (2010). How usable are eBooks in an mLearning envi-ronment? International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-longLearning, 20, 6–20.

Levine-Clark, M. (2006). Electronic book usage: A survey at the University of Denver.Libraries and the Academy, 6, 285–299.

44 E.-L. Lim and K.F. Hew

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education (Rev.ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches(6th ed.). London: Pearson Education.

Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese com-panies create the dynamics of innovation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Rabiee, F., & Thompson, D. (2000). Widening participation – increasing access to highereducation for muslim women. Birmingham, AL: University of Central England and Bir-mingham University.

Rao, S. S. (2003). Electronic books: A review and evaluation. Library Hi Tech, 21, 85–93.Rickman, J. T., Von Holzen, R., Klute, P. G., & Tobin, T. (2009). A campus-wide e-textbook

initiative. Educause Quarterly Magazine, 32, 2009.Shiratuddin, N., Landoni, M., Gibb, F., & Hassan, S. (2003). E-book technology and its

potential applications in distance education. Journal of Digital Information, 3. RetrievedFebruary 15, 2013 from http://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/article/viewArticle/90/89

Strother, E. A., Brunet, D. P., Bates, M. L., & Gallo III, J. R. (2009). Dental students’ atti-tudes towards digital textbooks. Journal of Dental Education, 73, 1361–1365.

Supian, H. (2011). Time-shift reading: How the iPad has changed the way I read. RetrievedMarch 4, 2011 from Today Online website: http://www.todayonline.com/Commentary/EDC110218-0000185/Time-shift-reading

Terry, A. A. (1999). Demystifying the e-Book – what is it, where will it lead us, and who’sin the game? Against the Grain, 11, 18–20.

Thomas, L., MacMillan, J., McColl, E., Hale, C., & Bond, S. (1995). Comparison of focusgroup and individual interview methodology in examining patient satisfaction with nurs-ing care. Social Sciences in Health, 1, 206–219.

Waycott, J. (2002). Reading with new tools: An evaluation of personal digital assistants astools for reading course materials. ALT-J, 10, 38–50.

Innovations in Education and Teaching International 45

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UO

V U

nive

rsity

of

Ovi

edo]

at 0

6:54

17

Oct

ober

201

4