Hi David
Thank you very much - most interesting with several lines to follow up.

I'm interested in the comments on on-line testing. 
I've used on-line tests both unsupervised and supervised. In my
experience the unsupervised works well as part of the learning process.
I set the system to allow three goes at a randomised set of 20 questions
from a bank of 50 odd, in a limited time. It was fixed to 'force' a
balance of question types - simple multiple choice, more complex drag &
drop on diagrams etc. There was nothing to stop student working
together, but their ability to look up answers would have been limited
by the time control. I told the them I would take the best mark they
achieved as the end (summative) outcome.
The results showed that in most cases there was a big improvement
between the three tries, although the third was not always the best
score. 

Angela 


Dr A Phelps
School of Arts & Humanities
NTU


-----Original Message-----
From: Dr David Hardman [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: 15 June 2009 13:51
To: Phelps, Angela
Cc: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Text books


Hi Angela

I didn't have time to finish my response to you the other day, but here 
it is...

As far as I've been able to ascertain from talking to publisher's reps, 
and from my own textbook writing experience, there are various features 
that publishers like to have in textbooks but there doesn't seem to be 
much evidence for/against their efficacy. Publishers do conduct focus 
groups asking students what they like and don't like about textbooks, 
and lecturers occasionally get online surveys sent to them (as well as 
the feedback forms with inspection copies that we all ignore); but this 
isn't the same as testing what works best for learning.

The things publishers like are the things you've probably already seen 
in many textbooks:

At the start of each chapter, publishers like at least one of the
following:
- List of subtopics
- Brief questions
- Learning outcomes

In the main text they like:
- use of bold (or maybe italicised) text for the first mention of key
terms
- boxed sections describing some matter of interest. For instance, in 
cognitive psychology (one of the topics I teach) authors often have a 
boxed section that talks about the work of a particular researcher, 
maybe focusing on some cutting-edge stuff that person is doing. Another 
use of boxed sections is "practical applications"; again, in psychology 
the main text may tend to focus on experiments and rather abstract 
theory, so the boxed sections can try and show how these apply to the 
real world. Another boxed section that I've seen looks at "psychology in

the media"; for instance, comparing the kind of offender profiling that 
happens in a TV program like Criminal Minds, with what actually goes on.

  Lastly, a psychology text may invite a reader to engage in some kind 
of simple task, such as trying to think about what mental processes are 
happening when you try to tie your shoelaces.

At the end of a chapter, publishers like any or all of the following:
- a summary, either in continuous text or addressing specific questions 
that you may have asked at the start of the chapter.
- further questions for students to think about, including exam-type 
questions
- a list of key terms
- a list of interesting further readings
- a list of relevant websites that students might consult

You may also find that your publisher asks you to write powerpoint 
slides to go on a website. My advice, based on current experience (!) is

say 'no' and let them do it themselves. By the time you've finished the 
book, you'll be so exhausted or sick of it that the last thing you want 
to do is start a new task.

As regards what actually works, you may find the following of interest:

Gurung, R.A.R. and Daniel, D. (2006). Evidence-based pedagogy: Do 
text-based pedagogical features enhance student learning? In D.S. Dunn 
and S.L. Chew (Eds.), Best practices for teaching introduction to 
psychology. pp41-55. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

These authors found that self-reported use of pedagogical aids did not 
correspond with better (or worse) performance in an exam, with the 
exception of using key terms -- where use of key terms in texts was 
reported by students, this was associated with *worse* exam performance.

Use of online quizzes in unsupervised settings was associated with 
*worse* final test performance, but this relationship was positive for 
supervised quizzes - follow-up research found that unsupervised students

often simply looked up the answers before responding to revision 
questions, rather than thinking about it for themselves. [note: with my 
own students, I have told them about this finding before I ask them to 
do online quizzes, and have got positive results between revision 
testing and final test performance]

Despite these results, the authors don't claim that pedagogical aids are

a bad thing, but that students may need some guidance as to how to use 
them in the best way.

My own advice, for what it's worth, is that nothing beats a good style 
of writing. Avoid being dull, at all costs!

Hope this helps,
David



Phelps, Angela wrote:

> Hi
> As a new subscriber to this list I'd be interested in any comments on
> text book design for first year undergraduate students. The students I

> work with are reluctant to buy a text book, or even take one out of
the 
> library. They read slowly and prefer short articles, especially if 
> delivered to them on-line. I'd be interested in any research into text

> book use, or examples of good practice in text book design and style.
> 
> Angela Phelps
> School of Arts & Humanities
> NTU
> 
> DISCLAIMER:
> This email is intended solely for the addressee. It may contain 
> private
> and confidential information. If you are not the intended addressee, 
> please take no action based on it nor show a copy to anyone. In this 
> case, please reply to this email to highlight the error. Opinions and 
> information in this email that do not relate to the official business
of 
> Nottingham Trent University shall be understood as neither given nor 
> endorsed by the University.
> 
> Nottingham Trent University has taken steps to ensure that this email
> and any attachments are virus-free, but we do advise that the
recipient 
> should check that the email and its attachments are actually virus
free. 
> This is in keeping with good computing practice.
> 

-- 
===============================
Dr David Hardman
Principal Lecturer in Learning Development
Phone: 020 7320 1256

Associate Editor, Journal of Economic Psychology

Twitter: http://twitter.com/davidkhardman
Teaching Learning Assessment: http://tla.wikidot.com
Science, Education, and Technology: http://www.davidkhardman.com
Judgment and Decision Making textbook blog: 
http://judgmentanddecisionmaking.blogspot.com
Risk-and-Decision mailing list: 
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/RISK-AND-DECISION.html
Other shared stuff: http://www.google.com/profiles/davidkhardman

===============================




Companies Act 2006 : http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/companyinfo



This email is intended solely for the addressee.  It may contain private and confidential information.  If you are not the intended addressee, please take no action based on it nor show a copy to anyone.  In this case, please reply to this email to highlight the error.  Opinions and information in this email that do not relate to the official business of Nottingham Trent University shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by the University.
Nottingham Trent University has taken steps to ensure that this email and any attachments are virus-free, but we do advise that the recipient should check that the email and its attachments are actually virus free.  This is in keeping with good computing practice.