Print versus digital reading comprehension tests: does the congruency of study and test medium matter?

Ben-Yehudah, Gal; Eshet-Alkalai, Yoram

doi:10.1111/bjet.13014

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Experimental studies of digital reading often suggest an inferiority when compared to print (Delgado et al, 2018;Clinton, 2019;Ben-Yehudah and Eshet-Alkalai, 2021); however, our students described practices specific to digital texts that played an important role in researching for assignments. The digital medium enabled students to efficiently navigate a range of varied and complex texts and make quick decisions about the relevance and importance of a text or section of a text for a specific purpose, drawing connections as they toggled between them.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Student perceptions of reading digital texts for university study

Hargreaves

Robin

Caldwell

2022

jldhe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An increasingly important aspect of undergraduate study is the ability to deal with reading academic texts digitally. Whilst the literature suggests that students prefer reading print texts (Foasberg, 2014; Mizrachi, 2015) and often have a deeper level of engagement with texts in this medium (Mangen et al., 2013; Delgado et al., 2018), the reality is that, for most students, digital texts are the norm. Study guides often focus on reading strategies that are considered broadly applicable to both digital and print formats. However, the differences between the two mediums are likely to impact on the strategies used, with students developing their own approaches as they gain more experience. In this paper, we present findings from a study exploring students’ perspectives and practices in relation to digital reading. We carried out focus group interviews with 20 students in their second or final year of undergraduate degree programmes. Our analysis reveals that reading texts digitally does indeed form the bulk of students’ reading activity, with ease and speed of accessibility, cost, and environmental considerations influencing this choice, and in some cases, precluding reading in print. However, despite the prominence of digital reading, some aspects of print reading – in particular the scope for more sustained focus, detailed reading and enjoyment of the experience – were highly valued by the students. Students’ approaches to reading digital texts varied depending on reading purpose, but, in general, students had developed a range of techniques to help them navigate digital reading.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Student perceptions of reading digital texts for university study

Hargreaves

Robin

Caldwell

2022

jldhe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the difficulty to read on digital screens is a constrain not limited to OER. Reading from digital devices can disturb the emotional feelings of users as well [ 58 ]. Therefore, teachers and administrators need to consider these constraints when proposing the use of OER to students (Table 3 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student usage of open educational resources and social media at a Sri Lanka Medical School

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The use of Open Educational Resources (OER) and Social Media (SM) for academic information seeking is common among undergraduates nowadays. There is limited data on OER and SM use for education in Sri Lanka. This study was aimed at evaluating the OER and SM use for education among the medical students at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya. Stratified random sampling was used to select students from the first year to the final year. A self-administrated questionnaire was used to collect data. Results The study included 257 responses (response rate: 89.5%), of which 185 (72.0%) were females. The OER and SM use for educational purposes at least once a month among students was 96.1% (95%CI: 93.7–98.5%) and 88.3% (95%CI: 84.4–92.3%) respectively. There was no gender difference in OER and SM use. The main reasons for accessing OER were the availability of information at any time (36.1%) and ease of information access (31.5%). Wiki sites (84.4%) and Facebook (79.8%) were the highest accessed OER and SM platforms. The majority of students were in view that the information on wiki sites (51.4%) and results of general non-specific web searches (56.0%) were reliable. Only 33.9% of students searched information from educational and government-related sources and 18.7% had accessed e-journals. Through SM, 79.0% joined educational groups and 77.0% followed the medical-related sites, pages and people. More than one-third of students (35.8%) could not find academic information from SM due to the information overload and 31.1% mentioned that SM distracted their education. Conclusion The majority of the students used OER and SM for education; however, only a minority accessed reliable information. Students accepted information available in wiki sites and general non-specific web searchers without considering the credibility of sources. The majority of the students did not refer to e-journals. Distractions to academic work and the difficulty to access accurate information were major concerns of using SM. This study highlights the importance of improving information literacy among medical students.

show abstract

“…Surprisingly, in fact, some studies also reported that there were no significant differences in terms of reading performance between reading on screen and paper (for instance, Ben-Yehudah, & Eshet-Alkalai [43], Eden & Eshet-Alkalai [44], Fesel et al [45], Sheen, & Luximon [46], and Young [47]). They were surprised for their findings were in contrast to many previous research studies.…”

Section: Reading On Screen and Texts In English Language Learningmentioning

confidence: 97%

To read on-screen or printed texts? A quantitative study into EFL students’ reading achievement

Rifiyani,

Widowati,

Ni'mah

et al. 2022

IJELE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare the EFL students’ reading achievement between reading on screen and printed text. This study used a quantitative research design. The participants of this study were 60 students from two classes who took an English education major. The students were randomized into two groups. The experimental group read on screen and the control group read on printed text. The instrument of this study was a news article with 10 multiple choice questions and 10 true-false statements adopted from Breaking News English with the title “Dietary Supplements” by Sean Banville. To analyze the data, the researchers used Independent Sample T-test. The findings revealed a significant difference in students’ reading achievement based on the mean score of both groups. The mean score of the experimental group was 85.33 while the mean score of the control group was 75.00. Then, the result of Sig. (2-tailed) value showed that p value, 0.008, was lower than α 0.05, (0.008 0.05). Hence, it can be concluded that the EFL students who read on screen scored higher in reading achievement than the EFL students who read printed text. The overview of this current study on reading theory, media used, the material given, and reading screen versus paper research, may enable to help teachers and lecturers to make a consideration for their teaching reading in the classroom.

show abstract

Print versus digital reading comprehension tests: does the congruency of study and test medium matter?

Cited by 14 publications

References 46 publications

Student perceptions of reading digital texts for university study

Student perceptions of reading digital texts for university study

Student usage of open educational resources and social media at a Sri Lanka Medical School

To read on-screen or printed texts? A quantitative study into EFL students’ reading achievement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About