From: Mel Dubnick
Date: 4/21/99
Time: 6:37:07 PM
Remote Name: 165.230.21.8
David Weiden's comment on his research struck a familiar chord with
me.
While my co-authors and publisher don't like hearing it, I have been
arguing for several years that the textbook will eventually become a
supplement to the Internet-based American government course, and we
need to rework the traditional textbook format with that in mind.
In my attempts to design a course with that in forecast mind, I designed
two "web-heavy" courses -- and both received pretty high evaluations
from students for enhancing both their knowledge of government/politics
and their Internet navigating skills. While that feedback thrilled me, I was
very disappointed that these very same students performed VERY poorly
on the course exams. It was as if they weren't reading the textbook
(which I knew they were, because they had weekly quizzes) or listening
to my presentations (which were well received because they integrated
the Web into a lecture presentation).
My rationalization for these conflicting outcomes is that my
textbook-focused exams were made irrelevant by the web-based content
of the course. Luckily for them, almost all the students scored well
enough on "web assignments" to offset the exam grades, but I still wonder
whether I somehow "cheated" them of a solid grounding in American
government and politics by shifting the focus away from textbook
content.
I should note that a question on the course evaluation regarding the value
of the Gitelson/Dudley/Dubnick textbook received high positive
responses -- students found the book useful and readable (maybe they
were just trying to make me feel good), but I still have the impression that
they were not approaching it in the traditional way. The experience has
reinformced my view that the textbook is going to become supplemental
rather than central to the basic American govement course.
If this is the case, then the issue is how textbooks should be redesigned to
fulfill that different role.
Mel Dubnick