Patterns of World History Text

At the other campus where I teach world civ we used Von Sivers, et al. and right now we are regretting the decision. The text does not facilitate synthesis and interpretation and students are having a difficult time understanding how to organize topics found in each chapter. The concept maps are inconsistent, some of which look like path analyses without a clear explanation or a call-out box detailing how the paths are conceptualized (not even in the instructor manual), so I had to second-guess the authors or just skip that diagram altogether because I had no clue why it was drawn in the manner chosen. Then there is their attempt to 'shoehorn' all civilizations into a fiscal-military state theme that may work for western civilizations but it is questionable for East Asian civlizations. I ended up having to consult several other texts and relied much more heavily on primary source documents to help students develop topics for essays. In all my years teaching world civ I have never found it so difficult to get students involved in class discussions.  It was clear to me their understanding of the text was minimal.  They couldn't even recall sufficient details when I probe some of their isolated comments to help them interpret the facts.  Patterns as is definitely is not appropriate for 2-year colleges.