Reading Performance of Iranian EFL Learners in Paper and Digital texts

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor of TEFL, University of Guilan,Iran

2 Associate Professor of Linguistics, University of Guilan, Iran

3 MA of TEFL, Guilan University,Iran

Abstract

Dependence on computers and internet has given birth to digital literacy. However, research into its influences on the reading process is still in its infancy. To fill the gap, this study was designed to investigate the ways in which text presentation mode (paper vs. digital) affects reading comprehension, as well as reading attitudes. To this end, a sample of 30 male and female English major students doing their Master’s (MA) participated in this study. Their reading comprehension was investigated by reference to the mode of text presentation, and their attitude towards either text type was examined through a self-assessment checklist. Results of the statistical Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) revealed a stronger preference for the paper-based texts, and an undifferentiated application of the same traditional method to all reading tasks. In addition, higher reading comprehension scores were obtained for paper- based texts, with male participants outperforming their female counterparts. The findings, providing further support for the significance of the mediating tools in the activity theory, imply that the digitalization of texts influences not only the nature of external behavior, but also of the mental functioning of individuals.

Keywords

References

Abraham, P. (2000). Skilled reading: Top-down, bottom-up. Boston: SABES/World Education Retrieved from http://sabes.org/resources/publications/fieldnotes/vol10/f02abrah.htm#top
Ackerman R. (2009). The subjective feeling of comprehension and remembering accompanying text learning on-screen.In Y. Eshet, A. Caspi, S.  Eden, and N. Geri (Eds.). Learning in the Technological Era IV: Proceedings of the 2009 Chais Conference on Instructional Technologies.
Al- Amir, S. S. (2009). Computer-based testing vs. paper-based testing: Establishing the comparability of reading tests through the evolution of a new comparability model in a Saudi EFL context (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Essex, Colchester, England .
Alderson, J. C. (2000). Technology in Testing: the present and the Future. System, 28(4), 593-603.
Armitage, U.Wilson, S. and Sharp, H. (2004).  Navigation and ownership for learning in electronic texts: An experimental study. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 2(2), 19–29. Retrieved from http://www.ejel.org/volume-2/vol2-issue1/issue1-art17.htm
Auman, S. (2002).High School Students' Decisions to Read Print or Electronic Text: Learning Outcomes and Preferences. (Master's Thesis).University of North Carolina.
Ayersman, D. J., & Reed, W. M. (1995). Effects of learning styles, programming, and gender on computer anxiety. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(2), 148-161.Retrievedfrom http://www.scinet.cc/articles.
Baker, R., Bernard, M. & Riley, S. (2002). Reading online news: A comparison of three presentations formats, Usability News, 4(2).
Barnett, M. (1989).  More than meets the eye: Foreign language reading theory and practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: CAL & Prentice-Hall.
Boo, J. (1997). Computerized versus paper-and-pencil assessment of educational development: Score comparability and examin preferences. (Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of Iowa, USA.
Brady, L. & Phillips, C. (2003). Aesthetics and usability: A look at color and balance. Usability News, 5.1[On-Line]. Retrieved from  http:// psychology.Wichitaedu/surl/ usabilitynews/51/aesthetics.htm
Brantmeier, C. (2001). Second language reading research on passage content andgender: Challenges for the intermediate level curriculum. Foreign Language Annals, 34, 325-333.
Brantmeier, C. (2002). Second language reading strategy research at the secondary and university levels: variations, disparities, and generalizability. The Reading Matrix, 2(3). Retrieved from http://www.readindmatrix.com/articles/brantmeier/article.pdf
 Brantmeier, C. (2003). Does gender make a difference? Passage content and comprehension in second language reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 15 (1), 1-24.
Brantmeier, C. (2004). Gender, violence-oriented passage content and second language reading comprehension. The Reading Matrix, 4 (2), 1-19.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4thEd.). NY: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Brown, G. J. (2001). Beyond print: reading digitally. Library Hi Tech, 19, 399.
Bugel, K., &Buunk, B. (1996). Sex differences in foreign language text comprehension: The role of interests and prior knowledge. Modern Language Journal, 80 (1), 15-31.
Bus, A. G. & Neuman, S. B. (Eds.) (2009). Multimedia literacy development. Routledge, New York.
Carrell, P.L., Devine, J. & Eskey, D. (Eds.). (1998). Interactive approaches to second language reading. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Chang, S. L. & Ley, K. (2006).Learning strategy to compensate for cognitive overload in online learner use of printed online materials. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 5(1), 104-117.
Chartier, R. (1995). Forms and meanings: Text, performances, and audiences from codex to computer. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Chavez, M. (2001). Gender in the language classroom. New York: McGraw Hill.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ Erlbaum.
Cole, M., & Engestrom, Y. (1993). A cultural historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon, (Ed.). Distributed cognitons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Connell, D., & Gunzelmann, B. (2004,  March). The next gender gap: why are so many boys floundering while so many girls are soaring? Instructor, 14-17.
Darnton, R. (2009). The case for books: Past, present, and future. New York, NY: Public Affairs.
Dillon, A. (1992). Reading from paper versus screens: A critical review of the empirical literature. Ergonomices, 35(10), 1297-1326.
Dyck, J. L., & Smither, J. A. (1994). Age differences in computer anxiety: The role of computer experience, gender, and education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 10(3), 239-248.
Evans, M. A., Charland, A. R. & Saint-Aubin, J. (2009). A new look at an old format: Eye-tracking studies of shared book reading and implications for eBook and eBook research. In G. Bus, & S. Neuman (Eds.). Multimedia and Literacy Development (pp. 89-111). Routledge: New York.
Farhady, H., Ja'farpour, A. J., & Birjandi, P. (1994). Functional testing. In M. Zohrabi (Ed.). Testing language skills: From theory to practice (p. 283). Tehran, Iran: The center for studying and compiling university books in humanities (SAMT).
Foderato, L. (2010, November 19).  In a digital age, students still cling to paper textbook. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/20/nyregion/ 20 textbooks.html.
Gay, L. R. (1996). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application.  Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 375-406.
Grabe, W. (2004). Reading in a second language. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Green, T.  & Maycock, L. (2004).  Computer- Based IELTS. Research Notes, (18), pp. 3-6. 
Grimshaw, S., Dungworth, N., McKnight, C., & Morris, A. (2007). Electronic books: children’s reading and comprehension. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38 (4), 583–599.
Hassaskhah, J. (2013). Using Conjoint Methodology to Address Textbook Needs: A Case of Iranian EFL Context. International Journal of Technology and Educational Marketing (IJTEM), 3(1), 1-14.
Higgins, J., Russell, M. & Hoffmann, T. (2005). Examining the effect of computer-based passage presentation on reading test perfprmance. The Jounral of technology, Learning, and assessment, 3 (4), pp. 5-34.
Imamikia, P.  (2009). Impact of web-based reading lessons on EFL students' reading comprehension, motivation and autonomy (Unpublished master’s thesis). Azzahra University, Tehran, Iran.
James, F. F. (2008). The electronic book and PDA: Looking beyond the physical codex. Retrieved  from http://www.scinet.cc/articles.
Joly, M. C.R. A., Capovilla, A. S.G, Bighetti, C, Neri, M. L., & Nicolau, A. F. (2009). Reading comprehension of freshmen students: Comparing printed and digital texts. International Conference on multimedia and ICT in Education. Retrieved on November 25, 2008, from http://www.formatex.org.
Kerr, M. A., & Symons, S. E. (2006). Computerized presentation of text: Effects on children’s reading of informational material. Reading and Writing, 19, 1-19.
Lee, J.F., & VanPatten, B. (2003). Directions for language learning and teaching: Making communicative language teaching happen. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Leso, T., & Peck, K. L. (1992). Computer anxiety and different types of computer courses. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8(4), 469–478.
Liu, Z. (2008). Paper to digital: Documents in the information age. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
Liu, Z., & Luo, L. (2001). A comparative study of digital library use: Factors, perceived influences, and satisfaction. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(3), 230–236.
Machovec, G. S. (1996). Books on the World Wide Web: Issues and trends. Information Intelligence, 16(6-7), 1-6.
McKenna, M.C., Kear, D.J., & Ellsworth, R. A. (1995). Children’s attitudes toward reading: A national survey. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 934–956.
Mangen, A.  (2008). Hypertext fiction reading: Haptics and immersion. Journal of Research in Reading, 31(4): 404–419.
Mayes, D. K., Sims, V. K., & Koonce, J. M. (2001). Comprehension and workload differences for VDT and paper-based reading. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 28, 367–378.
Noam, E. M. (1999). Will books become the dumb medium? Educom Review, 33(2). Retrieved from http://192.52.179.128/web/pubs/review.
Noyes, J. M., & Garland, K. J. (2003). VDT versus paper-based text: Reply to Mayes, Sims and Koonce. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 31(6(, 411-423.
O'Hara, K., & Sellen, A. (1997). A comparison of reading paper and on-line documents.  Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing system (pp. 22-27). New York: ACM.
Oxford, R. L., Felkins, R. Z., Hollaway, G., & Saleh, A. (1996). Telling their stories: language learners use diaries and  re-collective studies. In R. Oxford (Ed.). Language learning strategies around the world: cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 19-34). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. 
Oxford, R. L., Park-Oh, Y., Ito, I., Sumrall, M. (1993). Learning a language by satellite: What influences achievement. System, 21, 31-48.
Ozuru, Y., Dempsey, K & McNamara, D. S. (2009).Prior knowledge, reading skill, and text cohesion in the comprehension of science texts. Learning and Instruction, 19, 228-242.
Pae, T. (2004). Gender effect on reading comprehension with korean EFL learners. System, 32(3), 265-281.
Perfetti, C.A. (1985). Reading ability. New York: Oxford University Press.
Reinking, D. (2005). Multimedia learning of reading. In R.E. Mayer (Ed.). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 355-373). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rice, G. (1994). Examining constructs in reading comprehension using two presentation modes: Paper vs. computer. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 11, 153–178.
Roebuck, R. (1998). Reading and recall in L1 and L2: A sociocultural approach. Stamford. Connecticut: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Rosén, M. (2001). Gender differences in reading performance on documents across countries. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 14(1), 1-38.
Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic (Ed.). Attention and performance IV. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Sellen, A. J., & Harper, R. H. R. (2001). The myth of the paperless office. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Shen, L. B. (2006). Computer technology and college students’ reading habits .Chian-Nan Annual Bulletin, 32, 559-572.
Smith, N. B. (2002). American reading instruction (Special ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Stanovich, K. (1990). Concepts of developmental theories of reading skill: Cognitive  resources, automaticity, and modularity. Developmental Review, 10, 72-100.
Terry, A. A. (1999, November).  Demystifying the e-Book -- What is it, where will it lead us, and who's in the game? Against the Grain, 11, 18-21. Retrieved from http://www.against-the grain.com/ATG_AnaEbook.html.
Tierney, J. E. (2005). Reading strategies and practices (Sixth Ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
Van Den Broek, P., Kendeou, P. & White, M. J. (2009). Cognitive processes during reading: Implications for the use of multimedia to foster reading comprehension. In G. Bus & S. Neuman (Eds.). Multimedia and Literacy Development (pp 57-74). Routledge: New York.
Wastlund, E., Reinikka, H., Norlander, T., & Archer, T. (2005). Effects of VDT and paper presentation on consumption and production of information: Psychological and physiological factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 21,377-394.
Wayne, J. C. (2003). Relationship between text display method and college student short-term Knowledge Retention during Self-Study (Doctoral dissertation). East Tennesse State University.
Young, D. J., & Oxford, R. (1997). A gender-related analysis of strategies used to process input in the native language and in a foreign language. Applied Language Learning, 8, 43-73.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 23 December 2012
  • Revise Date: 03 May 2014
  • Accept Date: 05 May 2014

Share

How to cite

Statistics