An analysis of e-book learning platforms: Affordances, architecture, functionality and analytics

Abstract E-book learning platforms are increasingly used as curriculum resources for independent reading at school and home, although benefits for students’ reading motivation and skill are unclear. Using a set of analytic tools, this study describes two e-book learning platforms in terms of platform affordances, digital architecture of e-books, functionality of screen pages and dashboard analytics. Qualitative analyses reveal patterns of strength and weakness along each dimension. Affordances rated highest in content and administration characteristics, but largely unmet in accessibility and communication. Architecture tends to maximize text access, but minimize text/media integration and active reader engagement. Functionality suggests a word-focused pattern that favors word learning over text comprehension. Analytics tend to inform skill building over self-awareness and progress. Analytic tools were designed and/or refined to develop and improve technical adequacy. Findings lay the groundwork for more controlled studies of the effectiveness of e-book platforms as literacy curriculum resources and more active collaboration among publishers, IT developers and educators to improve e-book platform quality.

[1]  R. Atkinson.  Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents. , 2002 .

[2]  Irene Picton,et al.  The Impact of eBooks on the Reading Motivation and Reading Skills of Children and Young People: A Rapid Literature Review. , 2014 .

[3]  Eileen Wood,et al.  Assessing the Content and Quality of Commercially Available Reading Software Programs: Do They Have the Fundamental Structures to Promote the Development of Early Reading Skills in Children? , 2012 .

[4]  Adriana G. Bus,et al.  Brief computer interventions enhance emergent academic skills in susceptible children: A gene-by-environment experiment , 2016 .

[5]  A. Bus,et al.  How Well Suited are Electronic Books to Supporting Literacy? , 2003 .

[6]  Kathleen A. Roskos,et al.  A Formative Study of an E-book Instructional Model in Early Literacy , 2011 .

[7]  Clifford Nass,et al.  Wired for Speech: How Voice Activates and Advances the Human-Computer Relationship , 2005 .

[8]  Adriana G. Bus,et al.  Enriched School Libraries , 2015 .

[9]  Grant Wiggins,et al.  Educative Assessment: Designing Assessments to Inform and Improve Student Performance , 1998 .

[10]  Alan Hs Chan,et al.  What Makes an Icon Effective , 2009 .

[11]  Natalie Rathvon,et al.  Early Reading Assessment: A Practitioner's Handbook , 2004 .

[12]  Mohamed Sarrab,et al.  SYSTEM QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS FOR SELECTING MOBILE LEARNING APPLICATIONS , 2015 .

[13]  Adriana G. Bus,et al.  Affordances and limitations of electronic storybooks for young children's emergent literacy , 2015 .

[14]  Johnny Saldaña,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. Third Edition. , 2014 .

[15]  Michael C. McKenna,et al.  The Effects of Electronic Books on Pre-Kindergarten-to-Grade 5 Students' Literacy and Language Outcomes: A Research Synthesis , 2009 .

[16]  Anne Mangen,et al.  Hypertext fiction reading: haptics and immersion , 2008 .

[17]  Natalie Conrad Barnyak,et al.  The Literacy Skills and Motivation to Read of Children Enrolled in Title I: A Comparison of Electronic and Print Nonfiction Books , 2016 .

[18]  A. Huberman,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook , 1994 .

[19]  Eileen Wood,et al.  Software to Promote Young Children’s Growth in Literacy: A Comparison of Online and Offline Formats , 2017 .

[20]  Don Passey,et al.  Learning platforms and learning outcomes – insights from research , 2011 .

[21]  C. Dweck.  Mindset: The New Psychology of Success , 2006 .

[22]  R. Mayer,et al.  Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning , 2003 .

[23]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning: Principles for Reducing Extraneous Processing in Multimedia Learning : Coherence, Signaling, Redundancy, Spatial Contiguity, and Temporal Contiguity Principles , 2005 .

[24]  Adriana G. Bus,et al.  Benefits and Pitfalls of Multimedia and Interactive Features in Technology-Enhanced Storybooks , 2015, Review of educational research.

[25]  Kathy Hirsh-Pasek,et al.  Putting Education in “Educational” Apps , 2015, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[26]  Melanie Swan,et al.  The Quantified Self: Fundamental Disruption in Big Data Science and Biological Discovery , 2013, Big Data.

[27]  Cristina Pop.  Evaluation of E-learning Platforms: a Case Study , 2012 .

[28]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  e-Learning and the Science of Instruction: Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning , 2002 .

[29]  Dale S. Niederhauser,et al.  The Influence of Cognitive Load on Learning from Hypertext , 2000 .

[30]  Daniel Neagu,et al.  Assessing information quality of e-learning systems: a web mining approach , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[31]  M. Lecompte,et al.  Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Educational Research , 1984 .

[32]  Dc Washington.  National Governors Association and Chief Council of State School Officers. , 2010 .

[33]  T. Jones,et al.  Reading Engagement: A Comparison between E-Books and Traditional Print Books in an Elementary Classroom. , 2011 .

[34]  Sandra L. Calvert,et al.  Control as an Engagement Feature for Young Children’s Attention to and Learning of Computer Content , 2005 .

[35]  Zsofia Katalin Takacs,et al.  On-screen children's stories : the good, the bad and the ugly , 2015 .

[36]  James C. Lester,et al.  The Case for Social Agency in Computer-Based Teaching: Do Students Learn More Deeply When They Interact With Animated Pedagogical Agents? , 2001 .