Perceptions and Preferences of Digital and Printed Text and Their Role in Predicting Digital Literacy

This study explored the relationships between the reading of digital versus printed text among 1,206 South Korean high school students in grades 9 through 12. The Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency (2 nd ed.), the Digital Propensity Index , and the Reading Observation Scale were among the instruments used to measure reading proficiency and digital propensity. Statistical analysis was comprised of a paired sample t test to compare students’ reading perceptions of digital and printed text; independent sample t tests were used to explore reading preferences and the relationships between digital and printed text; and a multiple linear regression was used to explore digital propensity based on reading behaviors. Among the results, students were found to have higher positive perceptions of the reading of printed text; reading preference depended on the purpose for reading (e.g., learning versus entertainment); and significant mean differences were found among students’ reading scores and digital propensity regarding preferences between the reading of digital and printed text. Although much more research is needed before any definitive conclusions can be drawn, the findings suggest several ways to achieve student literacy competency in the use of digital and printed text, while also pointing to additional factors that influence perceptions and behaviors among these two formats.

[1]  Colleen Sheehy.  The Impact Of A Media Literacy Education Plan On The Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (fcat) Reading Scores Of 9th And 10th Grade Students , 2007 .

[2]  Julie Coiro,et al.  Teaching Students to Self-Regulate During Online Inquiry , 2014 .

[3]  A. Taylor,et al.  Students Learn Equally Well From Digital as From Paperbound Texts , 2011 .

[4]  Matthew J. Koehler,et al.  Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge , 2006, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[5]  Wu-Yuin Hwang,et al.  Users’ familiar situational contexts facilitate the practice of EFL in elementary schools with mobile devices , 2013 .

[6]  Taylor Francis,et al.  Literacy, literacies, and the digital in higher education , 2011 .

[7]  Angelique NasahBoaventura.  The digital literacy debate: an investigation of digital propensity and information and communication technology , 2010 .

[8]  Boaventura DaCosta,et al.  Spelling Practice Intervention: A Comparison of Tablet PC and Picture Cards as Spelling Practice Methods for Students with Developmental Disabilities , 2015 .

[9]  Educating the World: Teachers and Their Work as Defined by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). , 2009 .

[10]  Gwo-Jen Hwang,et al.  A Progressive Prompting Approach to Conducting Context-Aware Learning Activities for Natural Science Courses , 2014, Interact. Comput..

[11]  Julie Coiro,et al.  Handbook of Research on New Literacies , 2014 .

[12]  Rakefet Ackerman,et al.  Metacognitive regulation of text learning: on screen versus on paper. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[13]  Stevan Harnad,et al.  Post-Gutenberg Galaxy: The Fourth Revolution in the Means of Production of Knowledge , 1991 .

[14]  James Johnson.  A comparison study of the use of paper versus digital textbooks by undergraduate students , 2013 .

[15]  Cathy Burnett,et al.  Investigating pupils’ interactions around digital texts: a spatial perspective on the “classroom-ness” of digital literacy practices in schools , 2014 .

[16]  Hannah Thinyane,et al.  Are digital natives a world-wide phenomenon? An investigation into South African first year students' use and experience with technology , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[17]  H. Cooper,et al.  The Relation Between Self-Beliefs and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analytic Review , 2004 .

[18]  Liwei Hsu,et al.  English as a foreign language learners’ perception of mobile assisted language learning: a cross-national study , 2013 .

[19]  Daphne Williams Ntiri,et al.  Toward a Functional and Culturally Salient Definition of Literacy. , 2009 .

[20]  Allan Wigfield,et al.  Risk Taking: Theoretical, Empirical, and Educational Considerations , 1991 .

[21]  Tara Goldstein.  Educating World Teachers for Cosmopolitan Classrooms and Schools , 2007 .

[22]  Sigal Eden,et al.  The effect of format on performance: Editing text in print versus digital formats , 2013, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[23]  Yining Chen,et al.  Student Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness: An assessment of student perception and motivation , 2003 .

[24]  W. M. Sherman,et al.  Does Choice of College Textbook Make a Difference in Students' Comprehension? , 2008 .

[25]  Kristen L. Beach.  The effect of media, text length, and reading rates on college student reading comprehension levels , 2008 .

[26]  William A. Henk,et al.  The Reader Self-Perception Scale (RSPS): A New Tool for Measuring How Children Feel about Themselves as Readers. , 1995 .

[27]  John O. Willis,et al.  Test of Silent Contextual Reading Fluency (TOSCRF) , 2014 .

[28]  M. Warschauer,et al.  New Technology and Digital Worlds: Analyzing Evidence of Equity in Access, Use, and Outcomes , 2010 .

[29]  Bong Gee Jang,et al.  Reading Attitudes of Middle School Students: Results of a U.S. Survey , 2012 .

[30]  Thomas W. Bean,et al.  Cosmopolitanism, Globalization and The Field of Adolescent Literacy , 2010 .

[31]  Mimi Bong,et al.  Academic Self-Concept and Self-Efficacy: How Different Are They Really? , 2003 .

[32]  Jason T. Hilton,et al.  Male and female perceptions of an iPad-based digital literacy curriculum , 2015 .

[33]  Yanghee Kim,et al.  Digital Peers to Help Children's Text Comprehension and Perceptions , 2013, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[34]  D. Reinking,et al.  Teachers' Perceptions of Integrating Information and Communication Technologies into Literacy Instruction: A National Survey in the United States , 2011 .

[35]  Yifat Ben-David Kolikant,et al.  Digital natives, better learners? Students' beliefs about how the Internet influenced their ability to learn , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[36]  C. Tienken.  Common Core State Standards: I Wonder? , 2010 .

[37]  C. Cornoldi,et al.  Improving reading comprehension in reading and listening settings: the effect of two training programmes focusing on metacognition and working memory. , 2014, The British journal of educational psychology.

[38]  David C. Caverly,et al.  Digital Literacies in Multiuser Virtual Environments among College-Level Developmental Readers , 2012 .

[39]  K. Mills.  A Review of the “Digital Turn” in the New Literacy Studies , 2010 .

[40]  Christina Clark.  Children's and Young People's Reading in 2013: Findings from the 2013 National Literacy Trust's Annual Survey. , 2014 .

[41]  Charoula Angeli,et al.  Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[42]  P. Mihailidis,et al.  Media Literacy as a Core Competency for Engaged Citizenship in Participatory Democracy , 2013 .

[43]  Brian J. Foley,et al.  Write for Your Life: Developing Digital Literacies and Writing Pedagogy in Teacher Education , 2013 .

[44]  Hui-Chun Chu,et al.  Potential Negative Effects of Mobile Learning on Students' Learning Achievement and Cognitive Load - A Format Assessment Perspective , 2014, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[45]  J. Rouet,et al.  The Impact of Presentation Format, Task Assignment, and Prior Knowledge on Students' Comprehension of Multiple Online Documents , 2007 .