Research in Science Education, 19~Y2, 22, 91 - 100.

THE IMPORTANCE OF SELECTED TEXTBOOK FEATURES TO SCIENCE TEACHERS

Alan Cook and David Tulip Queensland University of Technology

ABSTRACT

This paper reports the results of a study of teacher opinions about the features considered important in an ideal textbook. A survey of Queensland high school teachers revealed that they favoured texts that focus on student cognition and which provide useful features such as exercises and practical activities. Differences were found between the preferences of Queensland teachers and the preferences of teachers reported in two American studies. The significance of these differences for writers and publishers is discussed.

INTRODUCTION

Despite many experts advising against a textbook-centred approach to science teaching (Memory & Uhlhorn, 1991) science textbooks are widely used in science instruction (Chiappctta, Sethna & Fillman, 1991; Harms, 1981; Exline, 1984; Elfick, 1984) and, according to Yore (1991), they will continue to have a high profile. Textbooks have a considerable influence on what and how teachers teach and what and how students read and learn. In an analysis of the science reading issue Yore (1986) identified six research loci and related interactions that he believes need consideration. They are: the nature of science, the nature of scientific text, the nature of the reader, the nature of the reading process, the knowledge and attitudes of science teachers, and the uses of science textbooks.

Teachers' attitudes towards and opinions about junior science textbooks were the focus of this study. In particular the study sought to determine what features of science textbooks teachers consider to be important. It also sought to identify the common needs or big ideas that underpinned their choices.

The question of what teachers look for in a science textbook is particularly important in Queensland which has in place a system of school-based program development and assesssment. It is the teachers of a school who choose a textbook to be used by their students. No external bodies give advice on the selection of textbooks. Thus a comparison of the features identified by classroom teachers and the features of textbooks considered important by experts should prove enlightening to textbook writers, curriculum designers, publishers and other educators.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The characteristics that are considered to be important in textbooks have been studied from two perspectives: from the viewpoint of experts based on theoretical considerations and from the viewpoint of the tcacher, based on personal practical requirements.

92

Recommendations from experts fall into two groups: those that refer to big ideas and those that refer to specifics. Chiappetta, Sethna and Fillman (1991) believe that there needs to be a curriculum balance in textbooks between scientific literacy and science, technology and society. Anderson and Armbruster (1984) have suggested four important general characteristics for textbooks: a structure (that conveys the informative purpose; coherence (so that there is a flow of meaning); unity (so that only one idea at a time is addressed); and audience appropriateness (so that the text fits the knowledge base of the reader). A number of workers have counted and commented on the plethora of terms used in science texts (Merzyn, 1987; Vachon & Haney, 1983; Yager, 1983) and have called for a reduction in the number of concepts presented.

At a more specific level writers have identified a long list of features considered to be characteristic of good textbooks. They include readability (appropriate type face, underlining, italicising, word density, layout, interest and linguistic complexity) (Knutton, 1983); the inclusion of many concrete explicit examples, simplified explanations, consistent organisational patterns in chapters, content compatible with students' prior knowledge, absence of clutter and meaningless jargon (Holliday, 1984); the inclusion of chapter summaries, solved problems, end-of-chapter problems, problems in the text, answers to problems and suggested experiments (Brattin et al., 1982). In an analysis focussing on inquiry, Tamir (1985) checked for the existence in textbooks of features such as a history of ideas and discoveries, personal and social backgrounds of researchers, the formulation of problems, the description of experiments and the presentation and interpretation of tables, graphs and photographs.

There is a certain amount of debate about the utility of illustrations. Kozma (1991) reported that research indicates that pictures have a positive effect on learning especially for poor readers. Holliday (1990) on the other hand cautioned against "the widespread use of fancy decorative photographs (which) merely add pages to science texts without necessarily clarifying important science concepts and processes". Instead he advocated the use of elaborative visuals to reiterate and reinforce information and summarising visuals such as diagrams, tables and flow charts.

It has been observed that the beliefs of teachers about science textbooks do not match the sort of contemporary research findings entioned above (Yore, 1991). This is supported by the findings of a number of studies of teachers' preferences for various text features. Yore found that most teachers believed titles and headings were useful for reading comprehension. Yore and Denning (1989) reported that science teachers identified (in order of frequency) chapter summaries or reviews; a good glossary; questions at the end of a passage or section; higher order questions; underlining, highlighting or bold print; relevant examples; solved and unsolved problems; exercise questions throughout chapter; and objectives to be important features. Spiegel and Wright (1984) found the ten features considered most important by biology teachers were (in order of importance): figures and diagrams; bold face type; real life references; charts, tables and graphs; a glossary; recent copyright; photographs; inclusion of recent research findings; end-of-chapter study questions; and colour in photographs and diagrams. Comparison of these lists of preferences confirms a finding by Yore and Denning (1989) that teachers do not have consistent expectations from texts.

93

PURPOSE

The purpose of this research was therefore to determine the importance of various textbook features to teachers of junior science in Queensland. In particular this investigation sought to answer the following questions:

* How important would selected textbook features be in an ideal junior science textbook?

* What common needs or big ideas underpinned the choices made by Queensland teachers?

METHOD

The Instrument

Teacher questionnaires were developed based on the previous work on teacher preferences for textbook features (Yore & Denning, 1989; Spiegel & Wright, 1984). The features obtained from these sources were augmented by the researchers in direct response to current social concerns about multiculturalism and gender equity. The main part of the questionnaire eventually consisted of 40 items. Teachers were asked to indicate on the following five-point scale how important each selectcd textbook feature would be in an ideal textbook:

"Very important" indicates that this feature of a text should be fundamental to the manner in which the text is developed. It must be used consistently throughout the text.

"Fairly important" indicates that this feature of a text should be important but not absolutely binding. That is, there may be times when circumstances prohibit its usage and you would not object to this.

"Of moderate importance" indicates that you think this feature of a text has merit but it is not essential.

"Of little importance" indicates that this feature could be included but it would be more by chance than design.

"Of no importance" indicates that you have never thought about this feature of a text or that you do not see it as being important in any way for a text.

In addition to the 40 questions, teachers were asked to add any further comments about an ideal text.

Sample

Three, four or five teacher questionnaires were sent (depending on the estimated size of the school) to 250 secondary high schools in Queensland. One thousand questionnaires were mailed in June 1991; teachers in 130 schools returned a total of 390 questionnaires.

94

Rczults

Responses were assigned values of 5 through 1 with 5 assigned to "Very Important". Listed in Table 1, in descending order of means, are the means and standard deviations for the 40 items.

TABLE 1 TEACt lER RATINGS OF IMPORTANCE OF TEXTBOOK ITEMS

Rank Item Mean SD

1 Exercises for students 2 Bold face type to identify key words 3 Figures and diagrams 4 Level of reading difficulty 5 Integration of text, lab activities and problems 6 Lab activities included in text 7 Real life situations 8 End of chapter questions with answers 9 Features motivate student to work on own 10 Design of the layout 11 Scientific terminology 12 A glossary 13 Charts and tables 14 Matches junior science syllabus 15 Australian examples 16 Graphs 17 Self assessment tests for students 18 Concepts requiring higher levels of thought 19 Summaries 20 Number of new concepts per section 21 Writing style, tense, person, number 22 New scientific discoverics 23 Photographs 24 Inclusion of student objectives 25 Recent research findings 26 Cost of textbook 27 A pronunciation guide 28 Colour in illustrations 29 Materials that prep for what follows 30 Physical size of textbook 31 Balance of males and females in photos and illustrations 32 Balance of male and female scientists as examples 33 Cross referencing 34 Suggestions for extra reading 35 Information on careers in science 36 ltistorical items of interest 37 Recent copyright 38 Study questions at the beginning of each chapter 39 Multi-cultural subjects in photographs 40 A preview for each topic

4.82 0.45 4.74 0.50 4.71 0.50 4,67 0.56 4.66 0.62 4.65 0.69 4.65 0.58 4.62 0.71 4.61 0.62 4.57 0.59 4.52 0.63 4.46 0.75 4.45 0,62 4.45 0.83 4,43 0,76 4.38 0.68 4.36 0.81 4.35 0.65 4.26 0.86 4.26 0.76 4.25 0.85 4.24 0.74 4.22 0.76 4.17 0.98 4.09 0.83 4.04 0.90 3.86 0.98 3.81 0.92 3.80 0.97 3.75 0.98 3.72 1.19 3.64 1.22 3.60 0.91 3.50 0,95 3.50 0.98 3.48 0.79 3.47 1.23 3.28 1.10 3.15 1.09 3.15 0.89

On cursory inspection the means of many of the items in Table 1 would not seem to be very different. However, when a one-way ANOVA was performed on items 10 and 31 the differences in the means was found to be significant at the 0.01 level (F= 1~57). Thus there should be significant differences between the top ten and the bottom ten items

95

enabling comparisons to be made between preferred and non-preferred items. Also, for many of the items, the standard deviation was quite large indicating a wide range of views expressed by teachers.

In view of current debate about equity issues, the responses of male and female teachers were separately processed for items 31, 32 and 39, the three items that clearly address these issues. The results are presented in Table 2.

TABLE 2 RESPONSES OF MALE AND FEMALE TEACHERS FOR ITEMS RELATED

TO SOCIAL ISSUES

Item Males (N -- 233) Females (N = 143) Mean SD Mean SD

31 Balance of males and females in photos 3.46 1.19 32 Balance of male and female scientists 3.35 1.23

as examples 39 Multicultural subjects in photos 2.99 1.10

4.19 0.99 4.15 0.97

3.40 1.04

When a one-way between-subjects ANOVA was pcrforme.d on the data in Table 2 the differences between the means for males and females for items 31, 32 and 39 were found to be significant at the 0.01 level (F= 37.9, 44.09 and 12.93 respectively). It can be seen that, especially for items 31 and 32, the mean for female teachers is considerably higher than that for male teachers.

DISCUSSION

One of the aims of this study was to identify the big ideas that underpinned teachers' preferences in text characteristics. In Table l the 10 items rated highest by teachers shared some interesting similarities. There were a number of items, such as 'exercises for students', 'figures and diagrams', 'laboratory activities' and 'end of chapter questions with answers', that teachers could immediately use in their classroom practice. We call the big idea underpinning these preferences Teacher Utility.

Other items could be thought of as facilitating student learning. For instance 'bold face type', 'a suitable level of reading difficulty' and 'figures and diagrams' could help students better recognise and assimilate important concepts. 'Exercises' and 'end of chapter questions' could help them test their understanding. The underlying idea could be labelled Student Cognition.

There were also items that could be thought of as influencing the attitude of students about information such as 'real life situations' and 'features that motivate a student to work on their own'. This we call Student Affect.

By contrast, of the ten items rated least important, some dealt with issues of social relevance such as 'the balance of males and females in photographs', 'the balance of male and female scientists as examples' and 'the inclusion of multi-cultural subjects in

96

photographs'. Items featuring careers and historical references were rated much lower than those dealing with scientific knowledge. The idea underpinning these features we call Social Issues.

Given the prevalence, in the top 10 items, of items promoting student cognition, it was surprising to find, near the bottom of the list, two items, 'study questions at the be~nrting of each chapter' and 'a preview for each topic', that prepared students for what followed in a chapter.

Items in the questionnaire developed for this study were based on studies cited earlier with American science teachers. In Table 3 teacher preferences from these studies are compared with the top 10 preferences from the current study.

TABLE 3 COMPARISON OF TEACHER PREFERENCES IN TEXTBOOK

CHARACTERISTICS FOR TWO US AND ONE AUSTRALIAN SAMPLE

US Sample US Sample

Spiegel & Wright Yore

Australian Sample

Cook & Tulip

1 Figures and diagrams 2 Bold face type 3 Real life references 4 Charts/tables/graphs 5 Glossary 6 Recent copyright 7 Photographs 8 Recent research findings 9 End chapter questions 10 Colour photos and diagrams

1 Summaries/reviews 2 Glossary 3 End of section Qs 4 Higher order Qs 5 Bold/underline 6 Relevant examples 7 Solved etc problem 8 Qs thru chapter 9 Objectives

1 Exercises 2 Bold face type 3 Figures and diagrams 4 Reading difficulties 5 Integrating text etc 6 Lab activs in text 7 Real life situations 8 End Chapt Q/Answers 9 Motivation to work on own 10 Design of layout

A comparison of the American surveys of teacher preferences in text features and those of the current study reveals certain similarities. Of the top ten items in the present study, 'bold face type', 'real life situations' (relevant examples) and 'end of chapter questions with answers' (or end of section) were found in both the Spiegel and Wright and the Yore and Denning studies. 'Exercises for students' was common with the Yore and Denning findings and 'figures and diagrams' was common with the Spiegel and Wright study.

All three studies would seem to highlight a strong teacher preference for features promoting student cognition: not unexpected, since textbooks are designed to help students learn the material. This preference can be seen in the typical comments of Queensland teachers who reported looking for textbooks that emphasise the nurturing of higher cognitive processes rather than recall:

I feel it has too much content and detracts from the actual process skills of science.

Not enough higher process questions as exercises or revision questions.

The following response nearly highlights the emphasis on student cognition:

A textbook should be used as an 'aid' --not as a crutch. It is there to give direction to the student in the following ways: a) for clarification of a topic that the student may have failed to comprehend in class; b) questions to encourage the student's own thinking process and to consolidate information being taught.

These teachers would seem to want textbooks not so much for the knowledge content per se but as an additional means of stimulating student thinking. They see the textbook as providing opportunities for promoting thought through such features as exercises and questions but also facilitating learning through the highlighting of 'real life situations'.

Items that could be seen as favourable to student motivation featured in all three lists. Spiegel and Wright identified 'real life references' and 'recent research findings'. Yore and Denning identified 'relevant examples'. In the present study 'real life situations' and 'features to motivate students to work on their own' were identified. Teachers comments on motivation concentrated on the effect that the current textbook had on students. A typical comment:

Students do not find the text inspiring. It is rather dry and dull.

An inappropriate level of reading difficulty was identified as a motivation problem by a number of teachers.

Reading age is far too difficult and layout poor. It 'puts off' the lower ability student and does not give enough down-to-earth examples.

The concept of 'appropriateness' of content (Anderson & Armbruster, 1984) was a clear consideration amongst the Queensland science teachers in the survey. They also saw the need for a textbook that is pitched at the right reading level. An inappropriate level of reading difficulty was identified as a motivation problem by a number of teachers. This could mean that a gap exists between the expectations about reading skills of some writers and publishers and the level of these skills in students perceived by teachers.

Despite the similarity in response of teachers in all three studies, inspection of Table 3 also revealed differences in preferences. For instance the teachers in the Spiegel and Wright study seem to have had greater concerns of a pragmatic nature. The 'newness' of the book was of importance to them. They rated recent copyright and recent research findings highly. In contrast 'recent research findings' (ranked 25th) and recent copyright (37th) were not regarded as very important by Queensland science teachers. The high rating accorded to inclusion of figures, diagrams, charts, tables, graphs, bold face type, photographs and colour in photographs also would seem to indicate that the visual appearance of the book was also important to the American teachers. Could this be because 'textbook publishers have gone to extremes to provide many colored pictures to lure (American) teachers into adopting their textbooks'? (Ruis, 1988).

98

The teachers in both the Yore and Denning study and the present study seemed to want features that they could use to support their teaching. This need (exemplified by preferences for 'end of section questions', 'laboratory activities' and 'exercises for the classroom and for homework')underpins the comments made by the Queensland teacher who wrote:

A most suitable text. Good experiments, well set out. Plenty of work. More chapters than needed. Plenty of homework questions.

Inspection of Tables 1 and 3 indicates that teachers place less importance in certain features. For instance, in the American studies, there was a dearth of references to competencies other than cognition, whereas the Queensland study included laboratory activities.

Nor, it would seem, are social issues of high priority for science teachers in considering the features of a textbook. No items that had strong social connotations were in the top 10 of any of the three lists. Indeed, in the current study, features that relate to social issues (items ranked 31, 32, 35 and 39 ) were rated amongst the lowest in importance. Given the prominence of equity issues in all levels of education over the past 10 years, it would seem surprising that messages about equity carried in science textbooks would be rated so lowly. If teachers believe in equity, one would imagine that a textbook featuring a balance of males and females in photographs and illustrations, a balance of male and female scientists as examples and the inclusion of multicultural subjects in photographs would be considered important.

There was considerable difference in the way that males and females rated these items with females significantly more in favour of gender messages (see Table 2). There was, however, little difference between the way the sexes rated the importance of multicultural photographs. In the free response section of the questionnaire there were relatively few comments about equity:

It (the textbook) is not very sexist which is good and still, unfortunately, rare.

One of the best texts 1 have used but still remotely presented. Is this a turn-off for girls especially? Perhaps diagrams, photos, etc. could be more people-centred.

Research indicates the way that males and females are represented in textbooks can be influential (Walford, 1980). As Warren (1988) puts it:

They can support traditional sex stereotypes or, by representing women as active participants in science, they can encourage female students to participate equally with their male peers.

Some American publishers, at least, are aware of and have taken positive steps to address the problem of equity (Britton & Lumpkin, 1977). The current study would seem to suggest that such emphases however, would have little effect on the textbook choices of many male teachers in Queensland.

99

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that teachers of junior high school in Queensland look for features in textbooks that they see as being of immediate use to them in their classroom practice. They also look for textbooks that foster student cognition, especially the nurturing of higher cognitive processes. They look for features that promote a positive attitude towards science and which motivate students. Many of these big ideas are shared with American teachers. Yet, although the three studies compared in this paper show similarities in findings, there are sufficient differences to warrant surveys being directed to teachers in local regions. One could also infer, from the study, that a textbook imported from one region into another may not be entirely suitable for the new market. Clearly, too, there is great diversity of opinion even within a region. Teachers will value various texts in different ways. The use of multiple texts, as suggested by Memory and Uhlhorn (1991), would seem to be a viable solution to the problem of diversity.

REFERENCES

Anderson, T.H., & Armbruster, B.B. (1984). Content area textbooks. In R.C. Anderson & R.J. Tierney (eds) Lcorning to read in American sehQQI~: B~al reaclerz and content texl;~ Hillsdale N.J. Erlbaum.

Brattin, J., Compton, A., Dukes, R., Hetzel, R., LaBrecque, R., Lehrman, R.L., Little, R., Ramsay, W. & Wilhite, L. (1982). Physics texts: An evaluative review. The Phvsics Teacher. 20 (8), 508-518.

Brittin, G. & Lumpkin, M. (1977). For sale: Subliminal bias in textbooks. Report prepared for U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. (ERIC Clearinghouse ED 140279)

Chiappetta, E.L., Sethna, G.H. & Fillman, D.A. (1991). A quantitative analysis of high school chemistry textbooks for scientific literacy themes and expository learning aids. Journal of Research in Science Teoching. 28 (10), 939-951.

Elfick, J. (1984). Survey of science texts used in Queensland secondary schools. Thr Oueensland Science Teacher. 4, 36-47.

Exline, J.D. (1984). National survey: science textbook adoption process. The Science Teacher, 51 (1), 92-93.

Harms, N.C. (1981). Project Synthesis: Summary and implications for teachers. In N.C. Harms & R.E. Yager (eds.) Wh~t Research Says to the Science Teacher, 3, 113-127 Washington D.C.:National Science Teachers Association.

Holliday, W.G. (1984). Selecting and using science textbooks. Research Matters...To The Science Teacher, 1, 5 National Association for Research in Science Teaching (ERIC Clearinghouse ED 273489).

Holliday, W.G. (1990). Textbook illustrations: Fact or filler? The Science Teacher, 57 (9), 27-29.

Knutton, S. (1983). Chemistry textbooks: are they readable? Education in Chemistry, 20, (3), 100-105.

Kozma, R.B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 6_!1 (2), 179-211.

Memory, D.M. & Uhlhorn, K.W. (1991). Multiple textbooks at different readability levels in the science classroom. School Science and Mathematics. 9__! (2), 64-72.

Merzyn, G. (1987). The language of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 9 (4), 483-489.

100

Ruis, S.P. (1988). Something's wrong with chemistry textbooks. Journal of Ghemical Edvcation, 65, 720-721.

Spiegel, D.L. & Wright, J.D.(1984). Biology teachers' preferences in textbook characteristics. Journal of Reading. 27 (7), 624-628.

Tamir, P. (1985). Content analysis focussing on inquiry. Journal of Curriculum Studie~, 17 (1), 87-94.

Vachon, M.K. & Haney, R.E. (1983). Analysis of concepts in an eighth grade science textbook. School Science and Mathr 83. 236-245.

Walford, G. (1980). Sex bias in physics textbooks. School Science Review. 62, 220-227. Warren, C.R. (1988). The use of ordinary least-squares regression in the development of

an instrument to measure sexism in biology textbooks. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-West educational research association, Chicago, Illinois. (ERIC Clearinghouse ED 300235).

Yager, R.E. (1983). The importance of terminology in teaching K-12 science. J0urn01 of Research in Science Teaching. 20, 577-588.

v

Yore, L.D. & Denning, D. (1989). Implementing change in secondary science reading and textbook usage: A desired image, a current profile, and a plan for change. Paper presented at the 62nd annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco. (ERIC Clearinghouse ED 305270).

Yore, L.D. (1986). What research says about science textbooks, science reading and science reading instruction: a research agenda. Resources in Education Paper presented at the 59th annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco. (ERIC Clearinghouse ED 269243).

Yore, L.D. (1991). Secondary science teachers' attitudes towards and beliefs about science reading and science textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2_.8_8 (1), 55-72.

AUTHORS

DR. ALAN COOK, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Education, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Qld. 4059. Specializations: communication and cognition in science.

MR. DAVID TULIP, Lecturer, Faculty of Education, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Qld. 4059. Specializations: science education.