1 / 12

The Impact E-Readers vs. Printed Text Have on Reading Motivation and Comprehension

The Impact E-Readers vs. Printed Text Have on Reading Motivation and Comprehension. Sheri Gentile Patty Tansey Kristin Tittrington Deborah Coyle. Problem Statement. In the 21st century, important and radical changes are occurring in the area of literacy

kare
Download Presentation

The Impact E-Readers vs. Printed Text Have on Reading Motivation and Comprehension

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Impact E-Readers vs. Printed Text Have on Reading Motivation and Comprehension Sheri Gentile Patty Tansey Kristin Tittrington Deborah Coyle

  2. Problem Statement • In the 21st century, important and radical changes are occurring in the area of literacy • digital technology is altering the nature of literacy (Reinking, McKenna, Labbo, & Kieffer, 1999) • The use of technology in the classroom can impact student achievement by making learning more interesting and meaningful, motivating students and connecting them with the real world • “engagement impacts motivation and reading achievement.” (Marinak & Gambrell, 2008) Marinak, B. A. & Gambell, L.B. (2008). Intrinsic motivation and rewards: What sustains young children’s engagement with text? Literacy Research and Instruction, 47(1), 9-26. McKenna, M. C., Reinking, D., Labbo, L. D., & Kieffer, R. D. (1999). The electronic transformation of literacy and its implications for the struggling reader. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 15(2), 111-126.

  3. Hypothesis/Null Hypothesis Hypothesis #1: Students who use technology-based reading devices will display higher levels in reading comprehension than students who use printed text Null Hypothesis #1: Students who use technology-based reading devices will display equal or lower levels in reading comprehension than students who use printed text.

  4. The Impact E-Readers have on Students’ Reading Comprehension and Motivation to Read By: Deborah Coyle Sheri Gentile Patricia Tansey Kristin Tittrington

  5. Hypothesis/Null Hypothesis Hypothesis #2: Students who use technology-based reading devices will display higher levels in motivation than students who use printed text Null Hypothesis #2: Students who use technology-based reading devices will display equal or lower levels in motivation students who use printed text.

  6. Sample • 11 graduate students participated in the survey process • Participants are enrolled in EDU 738: Research Across the Curriculum at Salem State University • 100% of the participants were female • The majority of participants were between the ages of 31-40 years of age, with the full range being 18-50 years of age • 73% of the participants have obtained a 4-year bachelors degree, and 27% of the participants have obtained a masters degree

  7. Design • This is an experimental study • Independent Variable: use or non-use of electronic devices • Dependent Variables: motivation and comprehension

  8. Instruments • We utilized a survey format for our study found at: • http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2J5VCJ2. • Part 1: General Information Questions • Part 2: Group 1 Questions (online reading of the article) • Part 3: Group 2 Questions (printed reading of the article) • Both groups were asked to read the same article, one reading online and the other reading a printed version. After reading the article and answering general questions, groups were asked comprehension questions as well as reading preference questions.

  9. Results • Comprehension Questions: Literal Questions • Group 1 (online) • 100% answered question 1 correctly • 100% answered question 2 correctly • 83% did not choose to click on additional links for clarification • Group 2 (printed) • 80% answered question 1 correctly • 80% answered question 2 correctly • 60% did not choose to use a highlighter while reading

  10. Results • Reading Preference Questions • Preference for Method of Reading • An average of 60% had a preference for using an e-reader • An average of 40% had a preference for using a printed version • Usage of E-reader Devices • 45% reported that they use an e-reader device • 54% reported that they do not use an e-reader device

  11. Results • Additional Online Links: • “I did not click on the links for this assignment. But if I were to click on other links, I would definitely get a better understanding of what I am reading.” • It helped me gain a better understanding of how teacher turnover effects student's achievement and why it may. • Preference of Reading Method • “This was a short article, therefore I didn't mind reading it on my iPad. If an article is longer than two pages I loose concentration.” • “Not really sure why, but reading things in print (as opposed to on a screen) typically helps me focus on the content much more. I find that when I read articles on my computer I tend to skim/scan more.” • “It's a short article and easy to read while relaxing and sitting on a sofa or as part of my daily routine of checking my e-mails, FB, and other info on line.”

  12. Analysis • Comprehension: • 100% of the participants reading the online article answered the literal questions correctly • 80% of the participants reading the printed article answered the literal questions correctly • Motivation: • More than half the participants from both groups noted that they would have preferred to read the article using some version of e-reader as opposed to the printed text.

More Related