Table 3

Evaluation results of non-text factors using the SAM-C instrument

DomainsItemsDistribution of rated points*, n (%)Score of a domain (Embedded Image ±s)Inter-rater reliability (kappa)†
012N/A‡
Content
5 (25)15 (75)0 (0)0 (0)53.13±10.630.69
Purpose is evident1 (5)0 (0)19 (95)0 (0)1
Content about behaviours6 (30)13 (65)1 (5)0 (0)0.82
Scope is limited1 (5)6 (30)13 (65)0 (0)0.90
Summary or review included20 (100)0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)1
Literacy demand9 (45)10 (50)1 (5)0 (0)42.5±16.420.92
Writing style2 (10)14 (70)4 (20)0 (0)0.67
Vocabulary6 (30)3 (15)11 (55)0 (0)0.94
Context is given first18 (90)2 (10)0 (0)0 (0)0.77
Advance organisers3 (15)15 (75)2 (10)0 (0)1
Graphics13 (65)4 (20)0 (0)3 (15)23.58±18.070.86
Cover graphic shows purpose10 (50)1 (5)0 (0)9 (45)1
Type of graphic8 (40)8 (40)1 (5)3 (15)0.95
Relevance of illustrations9 (45)7 (35)1 (5)3 (15)0.74
Lists and tables explained1 (5)1 (5)2 (10)16 (80)0.80
Captions used for graphics7 (35)4 (20)0 (0)9 (45)0.95
Layout and typography6 (30)14 (70)0 (0)0 (0)43.34±16.580.78
Layout factors2 (10)13 (65)5 (25)0 (0)0.82
Typography3 (15)15 (75)2 (10)0 (0)0.90
Subheadings used11 (55)9 (45)0 (0)0 (0)1
Learning stimulation and motivation3 (15)15 (75)2 (10)0 (0)54.17±20.140.90
Interaction used9 (45)7 (35)4 (20)0 (0)1
Behaviours are modelled and specific8 (40)8 (40)4 (20)0 (0)0.94
Motivation0 (0)4 (20)16 (80)0 (0)1
Cultural appropriateness3 (15)7 (35)10 (50)0 (0)63.75±33.910.93
Match in logic, language, experience3 (15)6 (30)11 (55)0 (0)1
Cultural images and examples0 (0)9 (45)2 (10)9 (45)0.95
Overall8 (40)12 (60)0 (0)0 (0)45.62±9.510.78
  • *Superior (2 points), adequate (1 point), not suitable (0 points).

  • †Agreement was deemed poor (0), slight (0.01–0.20), fair (0.21–0.40), moderate (0.41–0.60), substantial (0.61–0.80) or almost perfect (0.81–1.0).40

  • ‡N/A=not applicable; items that do not apply to the materials.

  • SAM-C, Suitability Assessment of Materials.