Technical ReportPDF Available

Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents' Comprehension

Authors:
  • TextProject.org

Abstract

This review addresses two questions: 1. How does adolescents’ comprehension in online and print contexts compare? 2. What features of online contexts can be used to increase adolescents’ involvement in literacy and comprehension?
Online Scaffolds
That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Elfrieda H. Hiebert
University of California, Berkeley
Shailaja Menon
TextProject
Leigh Ann Martin
TextProject
Katherine E. Bach
Apex Learning Inc.
February 2009
Copyright © 2009 Apex Learning Inc. Apex Learning
®
, the Apex Learning logo, ClassTools
®
, ClassTools Achieve
®
, ClassTools
Virtual™, Literacy Advantage™, and Beyond Books
®
are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Apex Learning Inc.
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................3
Scholarship......................................................................................................... 4
Scaffold............................................................................................................. 4
Comprehension.................................................................................................... 5
Adolescents........................................................................................................ 5
How Does Adolescents’ Comprehension in Online and Print Contexts Compare?............................5
The Moran Study.................................................................................................. 5
The Murphy Study................................................................................................. 5
The Slavin Study .................................................................................................. 6
Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 6
What Features of Online Contexts Can Be Used to Increase the Involvement in Literacy and
Comprehension of Adolescents?..............................................................................................................6
Engagement.................................................................................................................................................6
Developing Expertise............................................................................................. 7
Sense of Agency and Self-efficacy............................................................................. 8
Social Interaction.................................................................................................. 9
Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 9
Access..........................................................................................................................................................9
Adaptive Scaffolds ...............................................................................................10
Strategic Scaffolds ...............................................................................................10
Conclusion ........................................................................................................11
Connectedness of Texts and Information..............................................................................................12
Connections.......................................................................................................12
Varied Modes of Information....................................................................................14
Conclusion ........................................................................................................15
Conclusions...............................................................................................................................................16
Engagement Through Online Contexts .......................................................................16
Access Through Online Contexts..............................................................................17
Connectedness of Online Contexts............................................................................18
References.................................................................................................................................................20
February 2009 Page 2 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Introduction
Vignette 1: Ya-Wen had heard teachers say that writing a
summary helps people remember what they’ve read, but she
had never been able to do that. Now she is taking an online
earth science course that periodically reminds her to write short
notes after reading the main points of the text. She
understands the information better, and she also remembers
what she reads. Ya-Wen is taking notes in her regular courses,
and for the first time in her life, she thinks that she's a good
reader. Finally, she understands how she can become a better
reader by doing things like summarizing.
Vignette 2: Julian loves adjusting and fixing the BMX and dirt
bikes that he and his friends ride. He reads information online
to understand how he can fix his bikes and make them more
competitive. When it comes to school, however, Julian doesn’t
like to read. By the time his classmates finish reading an
assignment, he is only halfway through. The only subject that
Julian likes is his online science course. He can click on a word
and get its meaning or hear it read aloud. He also likes it that
none of the other students knows how far he has progressed
with an assignment. Julian has discovered that some of the
ideas in the science course are the same ones he uses when he
works on bikes.
Vignette 3: “Boring” is the way Kareema would describe the
social studies textbooks in school. In the online course that
she's taking, though, she's read a diary of a soldier in Vietnam
and letters that he wrote to his girlfriend. She has even read
about some soldiers in Iraq, where her cousin is stationed. She
looks forward to her online course. She never realized that
things that happened in the past were like things that are
happening today.
A frequently asked question is whether students comprehend online text as well as printed
text. The answer to this question is critical, not just to determine if resources are being
used wisely, but also to establish whether students are proficient at comprehending text
online—a skill that is increasingly recognized as essential for full participation in the
communities and marketplace of the 21st century (Patrick, 2007).
Answers to a second question related to comprehension in online contexts, however, may
be even more critical because of the crisis in American schools, especially high schools:
How can the enormous potential of online technologies be used to increase the literacy
participation of adolescents? Many American adolescents are disengaged and disaffected
with school, as reflected in lackadaisical involvement in day-to-day reading events and in
international comparisons that show lackluster performances on comprehension
assessments (Kirsch, DeJong, LaFontaine, McQueen, Mendelovits, & Monseur, 2002). This
behavior in school contrasts sharply with the engagement that adolescents show in learning
February 2009 Page 3 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
in online contexts outside of school. For many adolescents, their learning in school is
becoming increasingly disconnected from the experiences they have online after school (Ito,
Horst, Bittani, Boyd, Herr-Stephenson, Lange, Pascoe, & Robinson, 2008).
One clear reason to use online contexts is to build on the interest and skills that adolescents
show in their online lives outside of school (Greenhow & Schultz, 2007). A second reason,
equally compelling, lies in the features of online contexts that have often been underused in
school settings. A growing body of scholarship points to three features of online contexts
that can involve adolescents in literacy and increase their competencies as readers. The
first vignette that introduces this paper illustrates the feature of engagement. Through
design and content, online contexts can support adolescents’ ownership and control over
their reading. Access is illustrated in the second vignette. Online contexts can be designed
so that disengaged or struggling readers get the support they need to read and interact with
texts and content that may be difficult for them to read independently. The final vignette
illustrates connectedness. The connections within and between texts as well as to various
forms of information (e.g., video clips) can be represented in online contexts in unique and
interactive ways that can help develop deep understanding of content.
This review, then, addresses two questions:
1. How does adolescents’ comprehension in online and print contexts compare?
2. What features of online contexts can be used to increase adolescents’ involvement in
literacy and comprehension?
Before addressing these questions, we define key terms used in this paper.
Scholarship
T
he scholarship we examined for this review came from numerous disciplines, including
computer sciences, cognitive psychology, information theory, reading education, learning
theory, and technology education. Terms are many and often differ from one discipline to
another; they include computer-mediated, computer-assisted, network-accessible,
hypermedia, virtual learning, technology, Web-based, multimedia, electronic learning, e-
learning, and online learning. We have chosen to use the term online because, building on
the definition of Keeler, Richter, Anderson-Inman, Horney, and Ditson (2007), we believe
that it best describes the learning context of interest. Keeler et al. define online courses as
"electronic learning environments comprising materials to read, videos to watch, activities
to do, assignments to complete, discussions to join, tests to take, and so forth" (p. 129).
Scaffold
Scaffold i
s used as a metaphor for the kind of support that is provided to learners as they
acquire a skill or strategy (Wood, Bruner, & Ross, 1976). As learners move toward
independence, scaffolds are provided to ensure that students understand the processes or
content of a domain. As students master the task, the scaffold is gradually removed.
Within online contexts, scaffolds can take a number of forms. Some scaffolds may provide
students with reminders and models of strategies to use at particular times when reading or
responding to a text or task. Other scaffolds might be the pronunciations and definitions of
challenging vocabulary. Still other scaffolds might be to uncover for students the
organization of a particular discipline and the manner in which experts in that discipline
typically organize their presentations.
February 2009 Page 4 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Comprehension
By comprehension, we are referring to students’ capacity to understand and retain their
understanding of the information in texts. Much has been written about the multiple
literacies that can occur in online contexts as students process information and share their
interpretations and constructions in various ways (Leu, 2006). Processing, interpreting, and
remembering text is a proficiency that is even more critical in the 21st century than in the
past, if individuals are to fully participate in the marketplace and community.
Adolescents
The fi
nal term in the title is adolescents. While many of the conclusions that will be made in
this paper are applicable to adolescents as a developmental group, we are most concerned
with two groups of adolescents. The first is composed of the adolescents who are
disengaged as readers and learners. These are students who can read adequately but
rarely choose to do so (National Endowment for the Arts, 2007). Struggling readers make
up the second group. These students are caught in a vicious cycle of not reading because
they do not read well (and consequently reading even less and falling even further behind).
For disengaged and struggling adolescent readers, we believe that online contexts offer a
chance to become reengaged, to gain access to texts that may otherwise be out of reach,
and to increase knowledge of critical content.
How Does Adolescents’ Comprehension in Online and Print Contexts Compare?
We attend first to the question of whether students’ comprehension of online contexts is
equal to their comprehension of printed text. Three recent meta-analysis studies have
investigated the effectiveness of different types of online experiences on the reading
achievement of middle- and high-school students (Moran, Ferdig, Pearson, Wardop, &
Blomeyer, 2008; Murphy, Penuel, Means, Krobark, Whaley, & Allen, 2002; Slavin, Cheung,
Groff, & Lake, 2008). In the majority of studies that address this question, the predominant
variable of interest has been comprehension, typically measured by performances on silent
reading tests (Moran et al., 2008).
The Moran Study
Moran et al.’s (2008
) meta-analysis examined 20 experimental and quasi-experimental
studies, published between 1988 and 2005, on the effects of technology on the reading
performance of middle-school students. The learning contexts ranged from reading a text
online or taking an online test on a book that had been read offline to performing problem-
based, interactive activities with virtual tutors. Overall, the mean weighted effect size of 89
different effects was 0.49. Of the 89 effect sizes calculated, 26% were large, 32% were
moderate, and 42% were small. Moran et al. do note that the effect sizes were greater for
interventions aimed at general populations rather than populations with specific needs, such
as struggling readers.
The Murphy Study
Murp
hy et al.’s (2002) meta-analysis consisted of 25 experimental and quasi-experimental
studies published between 1993 and 2000 investigating the effect of K-12 digital content on
reading; eight of these focused specifically on middle-school students, and one focused on
high-school students. Overall, 31 weighted effect sizes were reported for these studies,
with a mean weighted effect size of 0.42. Nearly 13% of the reported effects were large
February 2009 Page 5 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
(>0.8), 19% were moderate (0.5–0.8), and the remaining 59% were small (0.01–0.5), out
of which slightly over half (57%) could be considered small but educationally meaningful
(0.25–0.50). Similar to the work of Moran et al., this meta-analysis included a wide range
of educational technology designed to improve reading comprehension; there was no
overlap in terms of the studies analyzed. It is interesting to note that, overall, the findings
of both of these meta-analyses are quite similar and provide evidence suggesting that
technology can contribute to improved reading comprehension for secondary students.
The Slavin Study
Slavin et al. (2008),
using a best-evidence approach, reviewed research on reading
programs for secondary students. Eight studies of online instruction were analyzed,
involving almost 13,000 secondary students. The overall mean effect was +0.10, with
effects ranging from 0.03 to 0.56. Although the effect sizes reported by Slavin et al. (2008)
are smaller than those of the two meta-analyses described previously, Slavin and his
colleagues took into account sample size and methodological quality, in addition to effect
size, in rating the strength of the evidence regarding the effectiveness of the different
secondary reading programs reviewed. Both of the commercial online programs met the
criteria for moderate evidence of effectiveness.
Conclusion
All three meta-analyses sug
gest that online contexts can support the reading
comprehension of middle- and high-school students. As is typical in a meta-analysis,
however, conclusions are made about the results of projects that can have very different
features. While confirming a positive effect for online contexts, meta-analyses fail to
provide insight into the particular features of online contexts and the mechanisms whereby
these features support student learning. To identify such features and the reasons for their
efficacy requires more in-depth reviews of scholarship.
What Features of Online Contexts Can Be Used to Increase the Involvement in Literacy
and Comprehension of Adolescents?
When a new field emerges, numerous attempts are made to identify salient patterns or
categories. That is definitely the case with adolescent learning in online contexts. The
literature on learning in online contexts is vast and spans diverse fields and research
traditions. To provide the clearest answer to the question of what online scaffolds can
enhance comprehension, we have identified three primary factors: (a) engagement, (b)
access, and (c) connectedness of texts and information. We make no claims that these
categories are inclusive of all potential online scaffolds. With added attention, other
elements are likely to be identified. These three categories, however, are sufficiently
comprehensive to demonstrate the ways in which adolescents’ comprehension can be
enhanced in online contexts.
Engagement
Proficiency in reading is necessary to successfully make meaning from text. In addition, as
Guthrie (2008) has underscored, individuals who read frequently have an interest in reading
and are deeply involved when they read. All of these elements—proficiency, interest, and
involvement—make up what Guthrie has described as engagement. Measures of
engagement have been shown to predict students’ reading achievement better than
February 2009 Page 6 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
measures such as socioeconomic background or a parent’s educational level (Guthrie,
Schafer, & Huang, 2001). Engagement in readers, according to Guthrie (2008), can be
supported by five characteristics of learning contexts: mastery, interest, autonomy, self-
efficacy, and social interaction. For clarity of presentation, we have organized these
elements into three clusters: developing expertise (mastery, interest), a sense of agency
(self-efficacy, autonomy), and social interaction.
Developing Expertise
While human beings ar
e driven by the desire to be competent from infancy on (White,
1959), being competent and being judged to be competent matters particularly to
adolescents. Students engage more readily and more deeply with texts and tasks that they
see as relevant and interesting as opposed to irrelevant and uninteresting (Vansteenkiste,
Lens, & Deci, 2006). Further, they prefer learning experiences in which they can
understand a topic deeply and thoroughly to a regimen of unrelated or disjointed topics and
facts (Seifert & O’Keefe, 2001).
Online contexts have a number of features that make it possible to create experiences that
help students develop expertise. Unlike classroom contexts where assessment is usually
public and clumsy, evidence regarding students’ background knowledge and interests can
be gathered efficiently and discreetly in online contexts. Public intervention is not necessary
for adolescents to get material that recognizes their background knowledge and strategies.
A second feature of online contexts is the ease with which instructional sequences can
highlight the relevance of content. For example, through video clips, students can hear
individuals who do not have the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
The production of online courses has outpaced research that considers how particular
features affect the development of adolescents’ expertise. Consequently, it is not evident
how adolescents’ engagement is influenced by opportunities to master content or to connect
to students’ background knowledge and interests. However, several research projects have
examined how tasks that encourage competence and mastery affect learning in comparison
to tasks that emphasize competition.
Elliot and Harackiewicz (1996) found that emphasizing learning to avoid failure undermined
learning, while students who were learning for the sake of learning understood content
better, regardless of whether their performances were compared with others. These
patterns have also been reported by Moos and Azevedo (2006). In Rezabak’s (1995)
project in which the presentation of information was varied in ways thought to influence
motivation (e.g., game-like format versus a sequential listing of information), the
presentation was less important than a balance between the challenge and learners’ skills.
Students with higher prior knowledge were more competent and were reported to be more
intrinsically motivated to complete the tasks than their peers with less prior knowledge.
Further, when motivational techniques are matched with students’ prior knowledge, goals,
and ways of learning in an online context, students have higher performances and more
extended attention (Song & Keller, 2001). Even with initially disengaged students,
providing motivational techniques that adapt to students’ ways of learning results in
increased cognitive engagement, concentration, enthusiasm, and attention (Wang &
Reeves, 2006). Chan and Ahern (1999) concluded, based on their investigations, that
adaptations to motivational techniques and goal structures, as well as to preferences and
February 2009 Page 7 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
background knowledge of individuals, need to be made at different points in a course or a
lesson. As learners gain skill with the content or the context, the complexity of content
(and tasks) can be gradually increased.
Sense of Agency and Self-efficacy
A sense of
agency or ownership involves autonomy and self-efficacy. When students are
given choices of what to read or how long to spend on specific tasks, their sense of
autonomy and time spent on reading increase (Reynolds & Symons, 2001). If students are
constantly interrupted in lessons, they fail to take ownership or personal responsibility for
the reading assignment (Assor, Kaplan, Kanat-Maymon, & Roth, 2005). Too many choices,
however, can overwhelm some students, especially struggling readers. For these students,
the goal is to move them gradually to the point where they are making multiple choices
within a lesson, such as topic and text selection, partner or group selection, and decisions
about the end product.
Self-efficacy refers to students’ perceptions of their abilities and the reasons they give for
their successes or failures. Self-efficacious learners attribute success to effort, while less
self-efficacious students attribute their lack of success to luck or their lack of ability.
Students who make attributions of the former type have been found to persist longer and
learn better in online contexts (Martinez, 2003).
One of the benefits of online contexts is that courses can be designed to support students in
changing from passive attributions to attributions in which they take greater responsibility
for their learning. Middle-school students in an online context were given opportunities to
review their progress and to attribute this progress to their effort and hard work on the
task. Students in the attributional treatment were more motivated and acquired more
knowledge than students in the control condition (Dresel & Haugwitz, 2006).
Further evidence that online contexts can prompt changes in readers’ sense of agency
comes from O’Brien (2003), who worked with adolescents who were considered to be at risk
of dropping out of high school and had long histories of performing poorly in print literacy
tasks. These students viewed their lack of ability as readers to be beyond their control in
typical classroom settings. By contrast, in the online context, where the tasks had more
flexibility and scaffolding to support students’ understanding, students developed the sense
that ability was less stable and more dependent on specific strategies they used. As a
result, they focused more on learning and using helpful strategies to aid learning, rather
than citing lack of ability as a reason for failure to learn. This group of adolescents
consequently developed a greater sense of agency in the online context, in addition to
higher levels of engagement as readers.
Similarly, Alvermann (2006) reported that adolescents who had scored in the lowest quartile
on a standardized reading achievement test engaged in literacy practices as they searched
the Internet for song lyrics, read Japanese anime online, and produced their own articles on
fashion and favorite rap groups. Both O’Brien’s and Alvermann’s research projects were
conducted in out-of-school settings where adolescents had considerable flexibility in
determining task structure, content, pacing, products, and more. These studies of out-of-
school online learning suggest there is important potential for similar patterns with
academic content in online contexts.
February 2009 Page 8 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Social Interaction
Online contexts have been a primary testing ground for the premise of constructivist
theories that suggest social interaction supports high-level comprehension and thinking
(Engeström, 1999). Social interaction permits the generation of new perspectives and the
verification and extension of knowledge within the community, results that cannot be
achieved when individuals work alone.
Typically, such social interaction in online courses occurs through students’ sharing their
work products and commenting on the products of their peers. For example, in CoVis
(learning through collaborative visualization) (Edelson, Pea, & Gomex, 1995), students
record their observations and activities in an online notebook to which all have access,
allowing everyone in the group the opportunity to view and comment on each other’s work.
When such experiences are part of online contexts, students have shown superior abilities in
tasks such as question-asking, and higher comprehension and vocabulary performances
(Lamon, Secules, Petrosino, Hackett, Bransford, & Goldman, 1996). One project reported
an increase in the time-on-task and conceptual knowledge of low-performing students
specifically (Scardamalia, Bereiter, & Lamon, 1994).
Since the quality of social interactions matters more than the quantity, researchers have
provided collaborative teams with structured communication interfaces, such as sentence-
opener interfaces (e.g., “I disagree because . . .” or “Why do you think this might work?”).
Collaborative teams working with structured interfaces have been found to be more task-
focused than those with free chat interfaces (Baker & Lund, 1996).
Conclusion
The evidence is strong
that the presence of particular features in learning environments,
including online ones, can increase readers’ engagement and, as a result, their
comprehension proficiencies. At the same time, learner engagement cannot be taken for
granted in online contexts. Many struggling readers have difficulty monitoring and
managing their learning—a situation that can be exacerbated in online contexts where time
management and choices often need to be regulated. While mandated scaffolds may help
struggling readers to focus and manage tasks, such features can potentially counteract the
engagement that is associated with higher-order learning. This conundrum makes it
essential that online contexts be designed carefully, giving students options while at the
same time ensuring that tasks are sufficiently scaffolded so that students become
independent in applying strategies.
Access
Access refers to making the content and texts amenable to learners’ levels and proficiencies
through scaffolds such as text-to-speech support, vocabulary definitions, note-taking
functions, or links to background material. In this context, we distinguish between adaptive
scaffolds that are aimed at supporting comprehension of a particular text and strategic
scaffolds that are aimed at increasing the comprehension capacity of learners with texts in
general. Since question-asking is a strategy used by good readers (NICHD, 2000), an
adaptive scaffold would, for example, provide students with questions at critical points while
they are reading a specific online text. An example of a strategic scaffold would be to
prompt students to ask their own questions at critical points as they are reading texts
February 2009 Page 9 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
online. While the questions in this second condition might be modeled initially, this prompt
would gradually be faded out.
Adaptive Scaffolds
Several
adaptive scaffolds have become quite common in online courses because of their
efficacy in supporting struggling readers. One such scaffold is text-to-speech support.
When students get to target words for speech feedback, they typically score significantly
higher on measures of both text comprehension and word recognition (Elkind, Cohen, &
Murray, 1993; Olson, Foltz, & Wise, 1986). In one such project with a sample of
adolescents that included average and struggling readers, the group that read the text
silently as it was being read aloud had higher levels of comprehension than either the group
that read the text silently online but without audio or the group that heard the audio only
(Montali & Lewandowski, 1996). The struggling readers in the silent reading with audio
group achieved comprehension rates that were comparable to the rates for above-average
readers reading on their own. Other studies have confirmed the value of text-to-speech
aids to struggling adolescent readers (Lange, McPhillips, Mulhern, & Wylie, 2006).
Another adaptive scaffold within online contexts involves the availability of information
about unknown words, including definitions, pronunciations, illustrations, or usage in
sentences. Middle-grade students who read a text under a vocabulary assistance that was
mandatory (i.e., critical words were defined for these students) scored higher on measures
of vocabulary and text comprehension than did peers in either a dictionary or an options
condition (where students could choose whether and when to use the vocabulary
assistance) (Reinking & Rickman, 1990).
While examples of successful products from a task (e.g., a summary of what has been read)
can be provided to students in typical classroom settings, such examples can be highlighted
and brought to readers’ attention in unique ways in online contexts. For example, an online
text might provide a sample summary that highlights paraphrases of important ideas.
Providing students with examples of successful products has been shown to aid
comprehension and understanding in online contexts (Renkl, 2005).
Strategic Scaffolds
A sub
stantial research literature indicates that successful readers employ a set of four
strategies—especially when they are reading challenging texts—that their less successful
peers do not employ: making predictions, asking questions, clarifying confusing parts, and
summarizing (NICHD, 2000; Rosenshine & Meister, 1994). Successful readers also apply
these strategies when reading texts online. They also use several additional strategies that
are specific to reading texts online (Davidson-Shivers, Rasmussen, & Bratton-Jeffery,
1997).
Online contexts can provide virtual coaches or tutors that guide less proficient readers in
becoming aware of these strategies and beginning to apply them appropriately. Algorithms
can be applied in online contexts that allow for gradual release of support, ensuring that
students take ownership of the strategies.
One means whereby such guidance can be provided is through some form of virtual
instructor or tutor represented by a voice and, typically, an icon. This instructor or tutor
consistently reminds students to apply a strategy such as previewing a text or summarizing
February 2009 Page 10 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
after reading. The presence of consistent instructional scaffolding or guidance on particular
strategies has been validated to have a positive effect on comprehension.
In one such project, the virtual instructor gave students reminders to reflect on what they
were reading at critical junctures in texts (Saloman, Globerson, & Guterman, 1989).
Students who have received such scaffolding have been shown to have significantly higher
reading comprehension performances than students in a comparison group. Further,
students who received the consistent guidance through a virtual presence also produced
essays that were rated higher than comparison students.
In another project, the tutor coached students in constructing a good explanation in
response to a question, corrected misconceptions, and answered students’ questions
(Graesser, McNamara, & VanLehn, 2005). In another, animated tutors guided readers in
evaluating their comprehension, paraphrasing, inference-making, prediction, and
elaboration (McNamara, Levenstein, & Boonthum, 2004). Students who receive such
animated tutoring have been found to use strategies more and have higher comprehension
than students who are also online but are taught to self-explain without modeling or
feedback from tutors (McNamara et al., 2004).
Summarizing is another strategy that has consistently been found in the repertoire of
successful readers. Support in summarizing can be offered in a variety of ways in online
contexts, the most fundamental of which is to make it prominent in lessons and programs.
Such inclusion may support students in summarizing, but it is through the provision of
models and guidelines for summarizing that the quality of students’ summaries is affected.
Getting feedback on summaries can also aid the quality of summarizing. The development
of latent semantic analysis (LSA) has made it possible for students to receive feedback on
their summaries and other written products with rapidity and consistency that is not
possible in conventional learning contexts. In LSA, a document or set of documents is
analyzed for concepts and the relationships between concepts. This technique can be used
to compare documents for similar terms, including synonyms. This technique makes it
possible to analyze the quality of students’ writing, such as summaries and essays.
LSA has been used to give students feedback on the adequacy of their summaries (Franzke,
Kintsch, Caccamise, Johnson, & Dooley, 2005). Students can revise and resubmit their
summaries until each summary adequately represents the main points of the text. Young
adolescents have been found to spend twice as much time on these summaries as do peers
who are writing their summaries on word processors. Raters have scored the summaries of
the former group as superior to those of students in the word-processor group. Further, the
comprehension of students who have received strategic scaffolding in summarizing online
has been found to be significantly higher. What is particularly notable is that low- and
average-performing students have made the greatest gains (Franzke et al., 2005).
Conclusion
A f
airly robust literature has been amassed on the effects of adaptive scaffolds in online
contexts, especially for struggling readers. When provided with adaptive scaffolds such as
text-to-speech support and support with vocabulary, struggling readers perform at higher
levels, even levels similar to those of grade-level readers. However, as it is widely known
that adolescents who are struggling readers often fail to use adaptive scaffolds (Farmer,
Klein, & Bryson, 1992), it is important that implementation encourage or mandate their use.
February 2009 Page 11 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Research is also fairly clear that struggling adolescent readers do not use productive
strategies such as predicting, questioning, clarifying, and summarizing to facilitate their
comprehension. Strategic scaffolds in online contexts can guide struggling adolescent
readers in using such strategies more consistently—particularly questioning and
summarizing—with benefits to their comprehension.
Connectedness of Texts and Information
No book or learning environment in human history has had the capacity of an online context
to make such a volume of information available to users, to present so many forms of
information, or to make connections within and across information (Cavanaugh &
Bolometer, 2007). In just a handful of minutes, students can be introduced to a complex
concept, such as representational government, through graphic media; watch the transition
of elected officials on a video clip of a swearing-in ceremony; view an image of the original
U.S. Constitution; and listen or watch an interview with a political scientist explaining the
text structures that are typical in articles about government.
Two aspects of the design of online contexts can be used to increase the breadth and depth
of learning experiences for adolescents: (a) connections within and across texts and
information and (b) varied modes of information.
Connections
Simi
lar to texts in online contexts, printed texts can be read in parts and can include
ancillary information, such as advance organizers that describe the purposes or the
organization of the text, or highlighted or boldfaced words that indicate vocabulary that is
central to the topic. These connections in printed texts, such as cross-references to prior
examples or a glossary, can be unwieldy and cumbersome, leading many adolescents to
choose not to use them. In online contexts, however, students can be guided in making
these connections. Further, experiences within online contexts, more so than within print-
only contexts, can be organized in a manner that gives readers many more opportunities to
see how ideas connect and information is organized.
The linking between texts and multimedia resources that characterizes online contexts is
typically described as hypertext. Hypertext makes it possible to design lessons and courses
so that learners have access to related information about content, including additional texts,
definitions or pronunciations of words within texts, or resources such as video clips through
links (also called hyperlinks or hot links). While the links within a CD-ROM are internal to
the lesson or the course, the locations that learners may be accessing by clicking a link can
be external to the course or lesson in an online context.
The possibilities that hypertexts offer for extending learners’ experiences with content are
immense. One of the critical tasks that confronts the developer of educational content is
the manner in which a hypertext should be organized and the number of links that should
be made available to learners. Researchers have considered the effects of the most
common ways of making links within hypertexts. The most basic ways of connecting are
either a listing of all units (i.e., texts or chunks of information) that the reader can access,
similar to a table of contents listing the chapters in a book, or a simple linear listing with
each unit linked to the one before and after it, allowing readers to move forward or
backward as they would in turning the pages of a printed text. Hierarchical linking systems
allow for information to be presented in more sophisticated ways, with a unit that
February 2009 Page 12 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
represents an overall idea linked to other units that are subordinate points or elaborations.
Within a networked form of links, relationships are associatively linked, as when news
stories on natural disasters around the globe are linked. Program designers can also choose
how to convey the relationships among links to users. For example, the navigation system
can indicate which links are available to users within a particular unit. While these
hyperlinks enforce navigational patterns, they do not explicitly display the structure of how
units are connected. In contrast, interactive overviews allow users to view the overall
structure of the hypertext or a portion of it, and they provide the navigation system.
Several studies have found no significant differences between print and equivalent online
versions (where the entire text is contained within one scrollable text unit) on students’
reading comprehension (e.g., Naumann, Richter, Flender, & Christmann, 2007; Reinking &
Schreiner, 1985). However, when the structures are more complex, the organization of the
online content and its associated navigation system influence comprehension.
One aspect of the structure that makes a difference to comprehension is the number of links
and the size of text units within an online text. When Dee-Lucas and Larkin (1999) varied
the number of links and the size of text units in online texts, college students in the “fewer
but longer text units” condition had a broader understanding of the text, while those in the
“more but shorter text units” condition had a narrower but more detail-oriented
understanding of the content. Whereas the size of each text unit was not significant, Zhu
(1999) found that texts with fewer links (3 to 7 links per main topic) were better
comprehended than texts containing more links (8 to 14 per main topic).
Extending this work, Shapiro (1999) created four online texts with the same content but
with different numbers and types of links: a linear hypertext that contained only links to
the previous and next text units, an unstructured but linked hypertext in which all text units
contained links to all text units, a clustered online text in which nonhierarchical clusters
corresponded to each of the main topics, and a hierarchical hypertext. While all conditions
had similar knowledge of facts (since all groups had the same content), those who read
hypertexts with multiple links between text units (hierarchical, clustered, and unstructured
but linked) made significantly more associations between topics than those who read the
linear text. In a problem-solving task that required information from two linked text units,
only the students who read the clustered hypertext had significantly superior performances.
Based on these results, Shapiro suggested that grouping related items together and
signifying these semantic relationships through highly visible links may be what aids
comprehension, not the structure of the online text per se.
Paolucci (1998) presented the same content in three versions that differed in structure—
hierarchical, networked, and combined hierarchical and networked—and in number of
links—from 37 in the hierarchical version to 173 in the networked version. Students who
read the text in the hierarchical and mixed formats scored significantly higher on questions
pertaining to higher-order concepts (although not on factual content) than those who read
the networked version. Similarly, studies with adults indicate that hierarchical or simple
networked structures, but not complex networked structures, positively affect
comprehension, particularly for those with low prior knowledge about the topic (Calisir,
Eryazici, & Lehto, 2008).
February 2009 Page 13 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Concept maps, graphic organizers, and other forms of overviews that make explicit the
structure of a text or a content area have been known to support comprehension. In online
contexts, such overviews can be presented in ways that are not possible in conventional
learning environments. For example, as students progress through a unit, animation can be
used to show how a concept map for a topic is expanding. Overviews can be interactive,
allowing students to choose among potential content that might be part of a unit.
Research confirms the efficacy of content overviews as scaffolds in online contexts. Middle-
school students who used a structured overview had better comprehension at a conceptual
level than students using an unstructured overview that listed topics, although recall at a
factual level was the same (Puntambekar & Goldstein, 2007). Adults have also shown
improved comprehension at a deeper level when using interactive overviews that display
the relationships between text units as hierarchies or simple networks, particularly when the
adults possess little background knowledge (de Jong & van der Hulst, 2002; DeStefano &
LeFevre, 2007; Naumann et al., 2007).
Varied Modes of Information
Wh
ile information can be presented through visuals or words in both printed and online
contexts, online contexts allow for the dynamic presentation of information. Unlike printed
texts, where visuals are always static, the visuals of online contexts can be video clips,
animations, or simulations. When static images are presented in online contexts, they can
be made more dynamic by being placed in a series that moves through rapid succession.
Information can be presented dynamically through audio recordings, such as poets reading
their work or a Shakespearean actor reading a soliloquy.
As has already been explored, these multiple forms of information can be a source for
increasing the engagement of struggling and disengaged adolescent readers. The varied
media can also ensure access for students who have difficulties in processing particular
forms of information. At the same time, however, when information is presented in
multiple, simultaneous ways online, the processing demands for learners, especially for
those who are learning-disabled, increase.
The factors that influence learners’ processing of single or multiple sources of information
can be many. Numerous research literatures address the influence of particular factors on
learning as well as how the efficacy of particular factors is influenced by individual
differences. We cannot review all of these literatures. But we will focus on two areas where
a substantial body of research is available in online contexts: (a) visuals, particularly
animation, and (b) the amount and cohesion of information.
Research on the manner in which visuals—static ones such as photographs as well as
dynamic ones such as video clips—influence comprehension has a long history (Anglin,
Towers, & Levie, 1996; Levie & Lentz, 1982). The general conclusion is that visuals can
facilitate the acquisition of knowledge in texts. However, their facilitative effects are
influenced by the task, the closeness of the information to the text, the degree of realism in
the illustrations, their simplicity, and cultural compatibility (Anglin et al., 1996). The
general rules of thumb from this research are that simplicity is better than complexity and
that the content of the visual needs to be closely aligned to the content of the text.
February 2009 Page 14 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Animations, in particular, have been of interest to researchers because of the cost in time
and money required for this feature of online instruction. The conclusion from a fairly
robust body of studies is that, especially for learners who are novices within a domain,
animations can produce superior learning outcomes when concepts or phenomena depict
changes, steps, or processes that readers may not be able to infer from static
representations (Betrancourt, 2005; Rieber, 1996). When these conditions are not met,
however, static presentations may support learning outcomes as well as animations (Zhu &
Grabowski, 2006).
Second, the degree to which information within a text has a unifying theme and structure—
that is, how coherent and cohesive a text is—can be a powerful determinant of
comprehension. While analyses that compare the lengths of texts in online and
conventional courses have not been conducted, the addition of a page or two of text in an
online course is not necessarily as costly in terms of delivery as it is in a printed text. There
could arise the temptation to err in the direction of including interesting or related
information in online courses, as ancillary or supplementary material in links if not in the
primary online text. The association of online contexts with entertainment could also
prompt a second temptation in creating or selecting texts for online contexts—the inclusion
of interesting or provocative ideas that are viewed as motivational in nature. For example,
a text on weather patterns might begin with a provocative anecdote about an individual
chasing a tornado. The use of extraneous information, or what Garner, Gillingham, and
White (1989) termed “seductive details,” does not necessarily support comprehension in
print or in online contexts (Mayer, 2005). It should be noted, however, that researchers
have not considered whether the seductive details served their purpose—getting disengaged
or struggling readers to read the text (which they might not have done without the
anecdote).
McNamara and Shapiro (2005) also caution that cohesive, concise texts appear to benefit
low-knowledge readers more than high-knowledge readers. They describe a potential
reverse cohesion effect where the active processing of information by high-knowledge
readers can even be impeded by a highly cohesive text. Overviews and structures of texts
may need to be adapted for students of different levels, McNamara and Shapiro suggest.
More experienced learners in a domain can manage texts that are less organized and
structured.
Conclusion
The evi
dence to date indicates that the structure of information and texts in online contexts
matters. Especially for struggling readers, hierarchical or simple networked texts appear to
positively affect reading comprehension. Furthermore, interactive overviews are useful in
making the structure of a text and information visible. Showing the location of the current
text unit within the online text and which links have been visited also appears to be useful.
Aids such as concept maps that give information about the relationship between text units
are useful, as are previews that provide information about main points contained in the
linked text unit. The number of links also requires consideration: when learners are new to
a domain, too many links can detract from understanding.
It’s challenging to make generalizations about how the types and structure of information
influence struggling and disengaged readers’ comprehension of online texts. The
components of online contexts are many, and the interaction between factors and individual
February 2009 Page 15 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
differences are many. Readers bring diverse learning styles and preferences to each
interaction with digital content. Animations can make a more profound difference with
certain content and learners but have less impact on other content and other learners.
Audio that accompanies text can be useful but can lose its efficiency when the information is
redundant. The amount of information and the means of presenting this information in
online contexts can, if not monitored, far exceed the capacities of learners, especially
struggling adolescent readers. Content developers need to continually return to the
question: What about this added feature or additional information can be expected to
support higher levels of engagement and comprehension among struggling and disengaged
adolescent readers?
Conclusions
In discussions about the efficacy of online contexts in schools, the first question that often
arises is whether students do as well in the online context as they do in conventional school
learning contexts. The existing research indicates that the answer is yes. Middle- and high-
school students comprehend texts in online contexts significantly better than they do in
printed texts. The effect is not as large for struggling readers as it is for their more
proficient peers. However, the technique of meta-analysis that is used to draw this
conclusion does not evaluate the presence or quality of particular features of projects
included in these reviews (Moran et al., 2008; Murphy et al., 2002; Slavin et al., 2008).
Answers to the second focus of this review—regarding which features of online contexts can
be used to increase adolescents’ involvement in and comprehension of literacy—indicate
that particular components of online contexts cannot be ignored in either design or research
if the enormous potential of these contexts is to be realized for struggling and disengaged
readers. Many aspects of online contexts have yet to be thoroughly investigated,
particularly with respect to these readers. Nonetheless, our immersion in the scholarship
leaves us with no qualms in stating that there is a sufficient foundation to offer a number of
conclusions as to how the comprehension of struggling and disengaged adolescent readers
can be facilitated in online contexts. All online contexts are by no means equivalent. To
capture the potential that online contexts offer for facilitating the engagement and
proficiencies of struggling and disengaged adolescent readers, particular constructs require
thoughtful design and execution.
Engagement through Online Contexts
En
gagement is the first of these constructs. Adolescents are frequently described as lacking
motivation for school learning. The construct of engagement, as outlined by Guthrie
(2008), moves motivation away from being an entity that is either present or absent in
adolescents to being a feature of learning contexts and the characteristics of those learning
tasks. Engagement directs the attention of those responsible for designing and delivering
educational experiences to the design of tasks and how their features fit with what interests
and energizes adolescents.
Developing expertise is one motivation that drives adolescents. Online contexts have the
benefit of representing something in which adolescents are interested and with which they
want to develop expertise (Ito et al., 2007). The disconnect between adolescents’ online
lives outside of school and in school has been described as a digital divide (Lenhart,
February 2009 Page 16 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Madden, & Hitlin, 2007). What are the characteristics of online contexts that might narrow
this digital divide and build on the interest that adolescents have in online contexts?
Online contexts should provide tasks that allow for students to be successful and that relate
to a purpose or topic that they see as relevant and interesting. Tasks should be integrated
in design, and the connections between different components of tasks should be evident to
the learner. Many small, unrelated tasks lessen a sense of mastery and agency. The use of
online assessments can ensure that students have texts and tasks at the appropriate level.
Having sections of text reread, or getting to change the pace at which text is presented, can
support students’ learning and contribute to expertise and interest.
Adolescents are also motivated by feeling that they have some say in the tasks they do.
Adolescents who believe that successful reading is something that comes from their effort
and work, not from an innate ability or the vagaries of the task, are also motivated to
sustain involvement in a task, even when it gets difficult.
Online contexts can be designed to allow adolescents the choice of particular tasks or texts
to pursue. Self-efficacy can be directly scaffolded through explanations by virtual tutors as
well as through self-assessments. Opportunities to view progress, accompanied by
reflections on the learning process, can also help struggling readers understand how effort
contributes to proficiency.
Another motivator for adolescents is to interact with peers and to feel they are not working
in isolation. Seeing, hearing, and responding to others who are talking about their
interpretations of the same text or task can lead to deeper understanding.
Online contexts can give students occasions to interact with one another through such
features as chat rooms, discussion boards, and reflections on sample work. At least
initially, struggling readers need models on how to comment on another student’s work.
These models can be provided through sample questions or reflection sheets.
Access through Online Contexts
Access i
s a second construct that can potentially be exploited in online contexts to the
benefit of struggling and disengaged adolescent readers. Access means making the content
and texts amenable to learners’ levels and proficiencies. These features can take the form
of an adaptation that gives struggling readers additional information about unfamiliar words,
or they can be instructional sequences in which critical strategies are made explicit. The
aim of the former is to ensure comprehension of a particular text; the aim of the latter is to
ensure that students have strategies that will work for texts in general.
Some of the features that contribute to access have already been described as part of the
conclusions related to engagement. When students have access to content and texts, their
engagement will be positively influenced. Despite the overlap, we believe that the features
of online contexts that ensure struggling readers can participate with grade-level content
are sufficiently unique to merit repetition.
When struggling readers use adaptive features such as text-to-speech support and
vocabulary definitions or descriptions, they can participate with content that is considerably
above their independent reading level. Because struggling readers are often not strategic,
they may not use these resources unless required to do so. Providing examples of
February 2009 Page 17 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
successful outcomes or processes is one adaptive feature that is especially easy to provide
and that supports higher levels of performance.
The technologies that are currently available, such as virtual tutors, make it possible to
move struggling readers from mandatory use of scaffolds such as text-to-speech support to
independent use of these scaffolds—in offline and online contexts. Success with virtual
tutors has also been established with sophisticated comprehension processes such as
summarizing, questioning, and predicting.
Connectedness of Online Contexts
C
onnectedness of texts and information is the third feature of online contexts that offers
promise for enhancing adolescents' engagement and comprehension. The organization of
and connections between content can be made explicit to readers in ways that are difficult
and unwieldy in printed texts. The forms of information can be varied, and readers can be
presented with these forms (i.e., visual, auditory, textual) simultaneously or in quick
succession. The factors that can be manipulated in online contexts are many, and particular
factors can have differential effects on readers, depending on the individual. However,
several generalizations are possible about the effects of connections across texts and of
varied forms of information.
Hierarchical or simple networked texts appear to be most effective in supporting the
comprehension of struggling readers. Interactive overviews and aids such as concept maps
that make the structure of and connections between information visible are also useful.
When students are new to a domain, the number of links and units of information can
influence their learning. A general guideline is that more is not necessarily better.
Animations appear to be most effective when they accomplish something that cannot be
done with static images, such as illustrating processes or strategies that are new or difficult
for readers to visualize. Audio that accompanies text can be useful but can lose its
efficiency when the information is redundant. Struggling readers benefit from information
that is coherently and clearly presented.
We underscore the conclusion that many factors influence learning from texts and that the
interaction between factors and learners’ capabilities can create a multitude of effects. One
critical point to be considered—and which research has not sufficiently considered—is the
nature of adjustments necessary to accommodate learners’ increasing experience and
expertise. When online contexts are successful in increasing the capacity of struggling and
disengaged adolescents, courses need to acknowledge and accommodate these changes at
different points in the learning cycle.
While there is evidence backing each of the identified scaffolds, not all the evidence is
equally strong or well researched. Educators are probably asking what forthcoming
evidence will show regarding the efficacy of online scaffolds on adolescent readers’
comprehension. We believe that data from the randomized trials that have been claimed as
the gold standard in educational research over the past decade (Shavelson & Towne, 2002)
are unreasonable in this field. The speed with which new technologies are entering the
marketplace, the amount and variety of forms of knowledge that can be accessed digitally,
and the myriad of features that are part of online contexts all make quixotic the idea that
numerous randomized experiments can be amassed. At the same time, we agree with the
necessity for more documentation of the effectiveness of online contexts, including the
February 2009 Page 18 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
three constructs of focus in this review. This documentation begins with scholarship that is
embedded in the design, implementation, and evaluation of online educational products.
Evaluations that follow the theoretically grounded models in reading education (e.g., Dole &
Osborn, 2003) can be used to establish how the constructs of engagement, access, and
knowledge organization are represented in current online products. Collaborations are
needed among the various stakeholders in the educational system—developers and
publishers, state and district assessment and curriculum specialists, and researchers—to
evaluate implementations of online programs currently in place.
The disengagement of many American adolescents in school learning is a source of national
concern. Online contexts offer an antidote to this learning crisis. Through the capacity to
engage students, increase access, and organize content, online contexts offer a means for
supporting adolescents in acquiring the literacy proficiencies they need to participate fully in
the global community.
February 2009 Page 19 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
References
Alvermann, D. E. (2006). Struggling adolescent readers: A cultural construction. In A. McKeough, L. M. Phillips, V.
Timmons, & J .L. Lupart (Eds.), Understanding literacy development: A global view (pp. 95-111). Mahway,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Anglin, G., Towers, R., & Levie, H. (1996). Visual message design and learning: The role of static and dynamic
illustrations. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and
Technology. New York: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.
Assor, A., Kaplan, H., Kanat-Maymon, Y., & Roth, G. (2005). Directly controlling teacher behaviors as predictors of
poor motivation and engagement in girls and boys: The role of anger and anxiety. Learning and Instruction,
15, 397-413.
Baker, M., & Lund, K. (1996). Flexibly structuring the interaction in a CSCL environment. Proceedings of the
European Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (EuroAIED ’96), 401-407.
Betrancourt, M. (2005). The animation and interactivity principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The
Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 287-296). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Calisir, F., Eryazici, M., & Lehto, M. R. (2008). The effects of text structure and prior knowledge of the learner on
computer-based learning. Cognition and Instruction, 24, 439-450.
Cavanaugh, C., & Blomeyer, R. (Eds.), (2007). What works in K-12 online learning. Washington, DC: International
Society for Technology in Education.
Chan, T. S., & Ahern, T. C. (1999). Targeting motivation—adapting flow theory to instructional design. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 21(2), 151-163.
Davidson-Shivers, G. V., Rasmussen, K. L., & Bratton-Jeffery, M. F. (1997). Investigating learning strategies
generation in a hypermedia environment using qualitative methods. Journal of Computing in Childhood
Education, 8, 247-261.
de Jong, T., & van der Hulst, A. (2002). The effects of graphical overviews on knowledge acquisition in hypertext.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 219-231.
Dee-Lucas, D., & Larkin, J. H. (1999). Hypertext segmentation and goal compatibility: Effects on study strategies
and learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 8(3), 279-313.
DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J. A. (2007). Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review. Computers in Human
Behavior, 23, 1616-1641.
Dole, J. A., & Osborn, J. (2003). Elementary language arts textbooks: A decade of change. In J. Flood, D. Lapp, &
J. R. Squire (Eds.), Handbook for research on teaching the English language arts (pp. 631-639). New York:
Macmillan.
February 2009 Page 20 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Dresel, M., & Haugwitz, M. (2006). Effectiveness of a computer based training approach to foster motivation and
self-regulated learning during regular classroom instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association. San Francisco, California.
Edelson, D. C., Pea, R. D., & Gomez, L. (1995). Constructivism in the collaborator. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.),
Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational
Technology Publications.
Elkind, J., Cohen, K., & Murray, C. (1993). Using computer-based readers to improve reading comprehension of
students with dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia, 43, 238-259.
Elliot, A., & Harackiewicz, J. (1996). Approach and avoidance achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: A
mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 461-475.
Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: Analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In Y.
Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 377-404). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Farmer, M. E., Klein, R., & Bryson, S. E. (1992). Computer-assisted reading: Effects of whole-word feedback on
fluency and comprehension in readers with severe disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 131(2), 50-
60.
Franzke, M., Kintsch, E., Caccamise, D., Johnson, N., & Dooley, S. (2005). Summary Street: Computer support for
comprehension and writing. Journal of Educational Computing, 33(1), 53-80.
Garner, R., Gillingham, M. G., & White, C. S. (1989). Effects of ‘seductive details’ on macroprocessing and
microprocessing in adults and children. Cognition and Instruction, 6(1), 41-57.
Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., & VanLehn, K. (2005). Scaffolding deep comprehension strategies through Point
& Query, AutoTutor, and iSTART. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 225-234.
Greenhow, C., & Schultz, K. (2007). Using online social networks in an elective learning environment to support
underrepresented students’ engagement in education. In C. A. Chinn, G. Erkens, S. Puntambekar (Eds.),
CSCL 2007: Proceedings of the International Society of the Learning Sciences Computer-supported
Collaborative Learning Conference, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Guthrie, J. T. (Ed.). (2008). Engaging adolescents in reading. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Guthrie, J. T., Schafer, W. D., & Huang, C. W. (2001). Benefits of opportunity to read and balanced instruction on the
NAEP. Journal of Educational Research, 94(3), 145-162.
Ito, M., Horst, H., Bittanti, M., Boyd, D., Herr-Stephenson, B., Lange, P. G., Pascoe, C. J., & Robinson, L. (2008).
Living and learning with new media: Summary of findings from the digital youth project. Chicago, IL: The
John D. & Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved on March 9, 2009, from
http://digitalyouth.ischool.berkeley.edu/report.
February 2009 Page 21 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Keeler, C. G., Richter, J., Anderson-Inman, L., Horney, M. A., & Ditson, M. (2007). Exceptional learners:
Differentiated instruction online. In C. Cavanaugh & R. Blomeyer (Eds.), What works in K-12 online learning
(pp. 125-142). Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.
Kirsch, I., DeJong, J., LaFontaine, D., McQueen, J., Mendelovits, J., & Monseur, C. (2002). Reading for change:
Performance and engagement across countries: Results from PISA 2000 (Publication No. ED474915).
Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.
Lamon, M., Secules, T., Petrosino, A. J., Hackett, R., Bransford, J. D., & Goldman, S. R. (1996). Schools for thought:
Overview of the international project and lessons learned from one of the sites. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser
(Eds.), Contributions of instructional innovation to understanding learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lange, A. A., McPhillips, M., Mulhern, G., & Wylie, J. (2006). Assistive software tools for secondary-level students
with literacy difficulties. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(3), 13-22.
Lenhart, A., Madden, M., & Hitlin, P. (2007). Teens and technology. Pew Internet & American Life Project.
Retrieved January 22, 2009, from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/162/report_display.asp.
Leu, D. J. (2006). New literacies, reading research, and the challenges of change: A deictic perspective. In J.
Hoffman, D. Schallert, C. M. Fairbanks, J. Worthy, & B. Maloch (Eds.), The 55
th
Yearbook of the National
Reading Conference (pp. 1-20). Milwaukee, WI: National Reading Conference.
Levie, W. H., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. Educational Communications and
Technology Journal, 30(4), 195-232.
Martinez, M. (2003). High attrition rates in e-learning: Challenges, predictors and solutions. The eLearning
Developers Journal, July. Retrieved on October 6, 2008, from www.elearningguild.com/pdf/2/071403MGT-
L.pdf.
Mayer, R. E. (2005). Principles for reducing extraneous processing in multimedia learning: Coherence, signaling,
redundancy, spatial contiguity, and temporal contiguity principles. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge
Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 183-200). NY: Cambridge University Press.
McNamara, D. S., & Shapiro, A. (2005). Multimedia and hypermedia solutions for promoting metacognitive
engagement, coherence and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 33(1), 1-29.
McNamara, D. S., Levenstein, I. B., & Boonthum, C. (2004). iSTART: Interactive Strategy Trainer for Active Reading
and Thinking. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 222-233.
Montali, J., & Lewandowski, L. (1996). Bimodal reading: Benefits of a talking computer for average and less skilled
readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(3), 271-279.
Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2006). The role of goal structure in undergraduates' use of self-regulatory processes in
two hypermedia learning tasks. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(1), 49-86
February 2009 Page 22 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Moran, J., Ferdig, R. E., Pearson, P. D., Wardop, J., & Blomeyer, R. L., Jr. (2008). Technology and reading
performance in the middle-school grades: A meta-analysis with recommendations for policy and practice.
Journal of Literacy Research, 40, 6-58.
Murphy, R. F., Penuel, W. R., Means, B., Krobark, C., Whaley, A., & Allen, J. E. (April 2002). E-DESK: A review of
recent evidence on the effectiveness of discrete educational software (No. SRI Project No. 11063). Menlo
Park, CA: SRI International.
National Endowment for the Arts (2007). To Read or Not to Read: A Question of National Consequence (Research
Report #47). Washington, DC: NEA. Retrieved on March 9, 2009, from
http://www.nea.gov/news/news07/TRNR.html.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel.
Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and
its implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
Naumann, J., Richter, T., Flender, J., & Christmann, U. (2007). Signaling in expository hypertexts compensates for
deficits in reading skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(4), 791-807.
O’Brien, D.G. (2003). Juxtaposing traditional and intermedial literacies to redefine the competence of struggling
adolescents. Reading Online, 6(7). Retrieved September 18, 2008, from
http://www.readingonline.org/newliteracies/lit_index.asp?HREF=obrien2/index.html.
Olson, R., Foltz, G., & Wise, B. (1986). Reading instruction and remediation with the aid of computer speech.
Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 18(2), 93-99.
Paolucci, R. (1998). The effects of cognitive style and knowledge structure on performance using a hypermedia
learning system. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7, 123-150.
Patrick, S. (2007). Foreword. In C. Cavanaugh & R. Blomeyer (Eds.), What works in K-12 online learning (pp. 1-2).
Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.
Puntambekar, S., & Goldstein, J. (2007). Effect of visual representation of the conceptual structure of the domain on
science learning and navigation in a hypertext environment. Journal of Educational Multimedia and
Hypermedia, 16, 429-459.
Reinking, D., & Rickman, S. S. (1990). The effects of computer-mediated texts on the vocabulary learning and
comprehension of intermediate-grade readers. Journal of Reading Behavior, 22, 395-411.
Reinking, D., & Schreiner, R. (1985). The effects of computer-mediated text on measures of reading comprehension
and reading behavior. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 536-552.
Renkl, A. (2005). The worked-out examples principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge
Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 229-246). NY: Cambridge University Press.
February 2009 Page 23 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
Reynolds, P. L., & Symons, S. (2001). Motivational variables and children’s text search. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 93, 14-23.
Rezabek, R. (1995). The Relationships Among Measures of Intrinsic Motivation, Instructional Design, and Learning in
Computer-Based Instruction. Retrieved on September 14, 2008, from
http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED383332.
Rieber, L. P. (1996). Animation as feedback in a computer-based simulation: Representation matters. Educational
Technology Research and Development, 44(1), 5-22.
Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review of the research. Review of Educational
Research, 64(4), 479-530.
Salomon, G., Globerson, T., & Guterman, E. (1989). The computer as a zone of proximal development: Internalizing
reading-related metacognitions from a reading partner. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 620-627.
Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Lamon, M. (1994). The CSILE project: Trying to bring the classroom into world 3.
In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice, 201-228.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Seifert, T. L., & O’Keefe, B. A. (2001). The relationship of work avoidance and learning goals to perceived
competence, externality and meaning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 81-92.
Shapiro, A. M. (1999). The relevance of hierarchies to learning biology from hypertext. The Journal of the Learning
Sciences, 8(2), 215-243.
Shavelson, R. J., & Towne, L. (Eds.) (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy
Press.
Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Groff, C., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective reading programs for middle and high schools: A
best-evidence synthesis. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(3), 290-322.
Song, S. H., & Keller, J. M. (2001). Effectiveness of motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction on the
dynamic aspects of motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(2), 5-22.
Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Intrinsic versus extrinsic goal contents in self-determination
theory: Another look at the quality of academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 41, 19-31.
Wang, S. K., & Reeves, T. C. (2006). The effects of a web-based learning environment on student motivation in a
high school earth science course. Education Technology Research and Development, 54(6), 597-621.
White, R. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, 297-333.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Psychology and
Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.
February 2009 Page 24 of 25
Online Scaffolds That Support Adolescents’ Comprehension
February 2009 Page 25 of 25
Zhu, E. (1999). Hypermedia interface design: The effects of number of links and granularity of nodes. Journal of
Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 8(3), 331-358.
Zhu, L., & Grabowski, B. L. (2006). Web-based animation of static graphics: Is the extra cost of animation worth it?
Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia. Retrieved January 21, 2009, from
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/ .
... Literacy Advantage social studies courses provide both adaptive and strategic scaffolding to support students' literacy development and social studies learning. Adaptive scaffolding is support provided in the design of the course that makes the text and content more accessible (Hiebert, Menon, Martin, & Bach, 2009). All Literacy Advantage social studies courses are written using controlled vocabulary. ...
... In addition, Literacy Advantage social studies courses provide strategic scaffolding to help students become more active learners in their social studies courses. Strategic scaffolding is support in learning the mental processes, or strategies, of active readers and learners (Hiebert, Menon, Martin, & Bach, 2009). As students learn reading strategies, they become more thoughtful, adept readers who can learn independently in any context. ...
... Literacy Advantage English courses provide both adaptive and strategic scaffolding to support students' ability to take an active approach to reading and writing. Adaptive scaffolding is support provided in the course that makes the text and content more accessible to students based on their needs (Hiebert, Menon, Martin, & Bach, 2009). While the literature itself is the same literature read in all Apex Learning English courses and in many traditional English classrooms, all of the instructional text is made accessible through carefully controlled vocabulary. ...
... In addition, Literacy Advantage English courses provide strategic scaffolding, explicit instruction, and support that help students learn the mental processes, or strategies, of active readers (Hiebert, Menon, Martin, & Bach, 2009). As students use strategic scaffolding to learn strategies, they become more thoughtful, adept readers who can independently read and interpret a variety of literary texts. ...
... It is also possible to realize adaptive test situations, whereby the item selection in the concrete test situation is dependent on the ability of the child, in order to enable more precise measurements at the ability level. In this context, the use of digital media appears to be particularly useful [35,70]. In addition, the time taken to process the items can be measured with the aid of a computer. ...
Article
Full-text available
Given the high proportion of struggling readers in school and the long-term negative consequences of underachievement for those affected, the question of prevention options arises. The early identification of central indicators for reading literacy is a noteworthy starting point. In this context, curriculum-based measurements have established themselves as reliable and valid instruments for monitoring the progress of learning processes. This article is dedicated to the assessment of word recognition in silent reading as an indicator of adequate reading fluency. The process of developing an item pool is described, from which instruments for learning process diagnostics can be derived. A sample of 4268 students from grades 1-4 processed a subset of items. Each student template included anchor items, which all students processed. Using Item Response Theory, item statistics were estimated for the entire sample and all items. After eliminating unsuitable items (N = 206), a one-dimensional, homogeneous pool of items remained. In addition, there are high correlations with another established reading test. This provides the first evidence that the recording of word recognition skills for silent reading can be seen as an economic indicator for reading skills. Although the item pool forms an important basis for the extraction of curriculum-based measurements, further investigations to assess the diagnostic suitability (e.g., the measurement invariance over different test times) are still pending.
... This skill could be taught through scaffolding. According to Hiebert et al. (2009), scaffolding makes texts more accessible. Less difficult texts such as newspapers or blogs could be used for synthesising to enable the students to acquire this skill before journal articles and complex texts are introduced. ...
Article
Full-text available
There have been a number of studies on reading interventions to improve students’ reading proficiency, yet the majority of these interventions are undertaken with the assumption that students’ reading challenges are obvious and generic in nature. The interventions do not take into consideration the diversity in students’ reading backgrounds and the specific nature of the challenges. Thus interventions may not address students’ specific reading needs. This paper reports on a study that explored students’ reading profiles as a needs analysis for an intervention programme to improve the reading proficiency of first-year Sociology students. The aim was to investigate the students’ reading backgrounds to determine their specific reading needs. A Likert scale questionnaire with an open-ended section was used to explore the students’ reading profiles. The Likert scale questions were analysed quantitatively, while the open-ended questions were analysed qualitatively. In addition, a regression analysis was conducted to determine the correlation between students’ use of strategies and their self-efficacy levels. The findings show that a number of students have little reading experience, use inappropriate reading strategies, and have low self-efficacy and poor reading habits. In addition, students identified comprehension, language, vocabulary, length and density of Sociology texts as factors compounding their reading challenges. This paper discusses the implications of these findings in designing an appropriate reading intervention programme for this cohort.
... There are likely limits to what teachers can do-especially in classrooms where large groups of students have such behaviors. Hiebert, Menon, Martin, and Bach (2009), in considering the research on silent reading, suggest that digital contexts may be one means whereby support can be provided for struggling readers. In a computer context, the text can be fine tuned. ...
Chapter
Full-text available
This chapter provides a summary of results from a study investigating the comprehension-based silent reading rates (CBSRR) of fourth graders reading informational texts. Specifically, we examine: (1) How do students of different quartiles vary in their CBSRR? (2) How well do students sustain their CBSRR across an extended text? (3) How consistent is the CBSRR of students in a digital context relative to a paper-and-pencil context? Before describing the design and findings of this study, we provide an overview of what is and is not known about CBSRR.
... In addition, the text fragmentation and the resulting decrease in the text's coherence (Albrecht and O'Brien, 1993;Ozuru, Dempsey and McNamara, 2009), which are associated with the nonlinear nature of the hypertext, harm text comprehension (Chang and Ley, 2006;Rouet, 2000;Van den Broek et al, 2009) and present readers with a high cognitive load (Ackerman and Goldsmith, 2011;Rouet, 2000) and a feeling of disorientation (Armitage, Wilson and Sharp, 2004). The previously cited usability problems related to digital reading have led to extensive research efforts in order to characterize the nature of digital reading and learning, in comparison with reading from print (eg, Brown, 2001;Eshet-Alkalai and Chajut, 2007;Eshet-Alkalai and Geri, 2007;Evans et al, 2009;Garland and Noyes, 2004;Gulbrandsen, Scroeder, Milerad and Nylenna, 2002;Hartley, 2002;Hiebert, Menon, Martin and Bach, 2009;Quinn and Stark-Adam, 2007;Reinking, 2005), and to establish standards for effective digital text design. Many recent studies reported that reading from print and reading from digital displays differ significantly in a wide range of aspects. ...
Article
In light of the present-day proliferation of digital texts and the increase in situations that require active digital text reading in learning, it is becoming increasingly important to shed light on the comparison between print and digital reading under active reading conditions. In this study, the active reading abilities of 93 university students (83% females) were examined. Participants were asked to read, edit, recognize errors and improve the quality of short papers (600 words each) on the topic of environmental awareness, in both print and in digital formats. Surprisingly, and in contrast to many recent reports about print versus digital reading, no significant differences were found between the performances of participants in the two formats. Similarly, no significant differences were found for all categories of text errors as well as for gender. It was found that the digital readers completed their tasks faster than the print readers but their performance was not lower. Results of this study have important implications for the current debate in higher education concerning the use of digital text for learning and for designing, reviewing and editing academic works.
Article
Full-text available
I consider myself incredibly privileged; my work has allowed me to develop far more questions than answers. This, of course, is a result of what some might call the First Principle of Reading Research: The more we study something, the more we realize how little we understand. Today, I want to share some of my questions with you and a few of the possible answers. Of course, it is a little unsettling to be so incredibly privileged, having so many questions, as one begins a presidential address at NRC. I take comfort, however, in what might be called the corollary to the First Principle of Reading Research; it may apply to some of us here: If you have not yet experienced the First Principle of Reading Research, you are in far greater trouble than I am! COLLEAGUES TO WHOM I AM INDEBTED First, though, I want to acknowledge those individuals in my life who have encouraged me to ask important questions, not trivial ones, and those who have helped to shape the questions that I explore today. I do not have time to mention all of these significant, Bakhtinian, others but they include: my mother and father, my wife Debbie and our daughters Caity and Sarah, Jeanne Chall (who started me on this journey), Herb Simons and Bob Ruddell (who prepared me), Chuck Kinzer, Lee Gunderson, Sandy Murphy, my former Syracuse family, my new family at the University of Connecticut, especially the members of the New Literacies Research Team (Kulikowich, and most especially each and every member of NRC, a research community that has taught me the most important lesson of my professional life: Ask important questions.
Article
Full-text available
The results of a meta-analysis of 20 research articles containing 89 effect sizes related to the use of digital tools and learning environments to enhance literacy acquisition for middle school students demonstrate that technology can have a positive effect on reading comprehension (weighted effect size of 0.489). Very little research has focused on the effect of technology on other important aspects of reading, such as metacognitive, affective, and dispositional outcomes. The evidence permits the conclusion that there is reason to be optimistic about using technology in middle-school literacy programs, but there is even greater reason to encourage the research community to redouble its efforts to investigate and understand the impact of digital learning environments on students in this age range and to broaden the scope of the interventions and outcomes studied.
Article
Flow theory identifies several structural variables that can be manipulated by an instructional designer. Modifying these variables may cause an increase in the likelihood that a learner will be motivated to continue with the lesson. While some researchers suggest activity contents, such as challenge and goal and induce flow experience [1], others hypothesize flow is enhanced by vividness and interactivity of the presentation [2]. This study investigates the effect of activity content, its presentation, and the interactions between the two on flow experience (intrinsic motivation) in instructional activity. The results suggested that the activity content has major influences on motivation, but presentation is a double-edge sword. Hypermedia presentation adds appeals to instructions that motivate students if they are used appropriately. When the content relevance is complicated, complex presentations can be distracting. Consequently, hypermedia elements should be used sparingly at the beginning of a lesson when challenges are high and students are unfamiliar with the material. As the lesson progresses it could be used gradually as the content challenges are reduced.