Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
SlideShare a Scribd company logo

Online Reading Comprehension: Challenges and Opportunities (Brazil 2014)

•Download as PPT, PDF•
•
Julie Coiro
Julie Coiro

This presentation was given during a conference for Brazilian educators and students, sponsored by XI Encontro Virtual de Documentação em Software Livre (EVIDOSOL) e VIII Congresso Internacional de Linguagem e Tecnologia online (CILTEC-online). A companion website with links to resources included in this presentation is available at http://coiroevidosol.wikispaces.com/home

Related slideshows

Personal Digital Inquiry: Connecting Learners in Ways That Matter
Personal Digital Inquiry: Connecting Learners in Ways That MatterPersonal Digital Inquiry: Connecting Learners in Ways That Matter
Personal Digital Inquiry: Connecting Learners in Ways That Matter
 
Introduction to Personal Digital Inquiry in Grades K-8
Introduction to Personal Digital Inquiry in Grades K-8Introduction to Personal Digital Inquiry in Grades K-8
Introduction to Personal Digital Inquiry in Grades K-8
 
Power of Collaboration: Digital Literacy and Personal Inquiry
Power of Collaboration: Digital Literacy and Personal InquiryPower of Collaboration: Digital Literacy and Personal Inquiry
Power of Collaboration: Digital Literacy and Personal Inquiry
 
1 of 48
Online Reading Comprehension: Challenges and Opportunities Julie Coiro, Associate Professor, School of Education University of Rhode Island jcoiro@mail.uri.edu Academic Papers: http://uri.academia.edu/JulieCoiro/Papers
What is online reading comprehension (from a new literacies perspective)? Where are we headed? What questions are worth exploring next?
A New Literacies Perspective of Online Reading Comprehension 1. Students require additional, new skills to read and effectively comprehend information online. 2. Students are sometimes more literate than their teachers with certain aspects of using the Internet. 3. The Internet is a READING and WRITING issue (not a technology issue) for every content-area classroom teacher, reading educator, and library media specialist.
How does reading and learning on the Internet change? You begin by identifying an important question New ways of locating information New reasons for critically evaluating the information New contexts for synthesizing information to answer your questions New ways of communicating the answers to others Leu, Kinzer, Coiro, and Cammack (2004) Leu, Kinzer, Coiro, Castek, & Henry (2013)
What challenges do learners encounter when they interact with people and information online?
Challenge #1: New literacies for online research and comprehension (r=0.19, n = 89, N.S.) Leu, D. Castek, J., Hartman, D., Coiro, J., Henry, L., Kulikowich, J., Lyver, S. (2005). Offline Reading = CT State Reading Test Online Reading Comprehension= ORCA Blog
Predicting Online Reading Comprehension R2 Offline Reading Comprehension Additional R2 Prior Knowledge Additional R2 Online Reading Comprehension Total R2 .351* 35% .074 7.4% .154* 15.4% .579* 57.9% Coiro, 2011 n=120 Offline Reading Comp.= CT State Reading Test Online Reading Comprehension = ORCA Quia Qualitative evidence: (Coiro & Dobler, 2007; Afflerbach & Cho, 2009) Quantitative evidence: (Kingsley, 2010; Coiro, 2011) Theoretical examples: (Hartman, Morsink, & Zheng, 2009)
TextsTexts AuthorsAuthors ReadersReaders ContextsContexts TasksTasks Technologie s Technologie s TextsTexts AuthorsAuthors ReadersReaders ContextsContexts TasksTasks Technologie s Technologie s Other studies of online reading Major shift in our conception of reading comprehension in terms of complexity and multiplicity RAND Model (2002): Tetradic conception of four interacting elements Hartman, Morsink, & Zheng (2010): Hexadic conception of six interacting elements (each is multiple as well) TextsTexts AuthorsAuthors ReadersReaders ContextsContexts TasksTasks Technologie s Technologie s
So what skills are important to have for reading on the Internet? (Coiro, 2007) Well, I’d say - concentration…immunity to the rest of the sites once you click on one. And being a good internet searcher - meaning when you know exactly what to click on without having to think twice about it, and when you click on it, it’s reliable….I’d say it’s about 25% luck, 74% skill, and 1% wit - I really can’t understand it all myself but …they mold right into a perfect circle and it works correctly! Evaluate relevancy Evaluate reliabilityLocating & Evaluating Speed matters! A new kind of fluency!
Many students struggle with inquiry and online research… Generating important questions to solve a problem (McKenzie, 2005; Rothstein & Santana, 2011) Locating relevant information (Henry, 2006; Leu et al, 2005) Critically evaluating information (especially conflicting claims) (Metzger & Flanigan, 2008; Coiro & Coscarelli, 2013) Synthesizing information from multiple sources and modes/formats (Killi, 2012; Rouet, 20006) Communicating their findings/solutions clearly in writing (e.g., argumentation) and with new technologies (e.g., email, blogs, wikis) How Do Teens Do Research in a Digital World? (Pew Internet Study, 2012) Digital Fluency in the UK (Miller & Bartlett, 2012)
Challenges of Reading on the Internet Asking Questions: - What would I like to know more about? - Which search words do I use? Asking Questions: - What would I like to know more about? - Which search words do I use? Locating: - Which search tools should I use? - Where do I read first? Locating: - Which search tools should I use? - Where do I read first? Evaluating: - Which link is most useful? - How do I know it’s true? - What is the author’s purpose? Evaluating: - Which link is most useful? - How do I know it’s true? - What is the author’s purpose? Synthesizing and Communicating - How do I come up with an original idea? - How do I share it with others? Synthesizing and Communicating - How do I come up with an original idea? - How do I share it with others?
Elementary and middle students have few strategies for critically judging the quality of information on the Internet – They struggle with… Determining the author and/or sponsor of a website Evaluating an author’s level of expertise Identifying the author’s point of view and one piece of evidence that illustrates that point of view Determining the overall reliability of a website with reasoned evidence to support their decision (e.g., Barzalai & Zohar, 2012; Coiro & Coscarelli, 2013; Fabos, 2008; Forzani & Burlingame, 2012; Flanigan & Metzger, 2008; Miller & Bartlett, 2012; Walraven et al, 2009) Challenges of Evaluating Sources
Challenges of Evaluating Sources 80-88% of our large Grade 7 sample struggled with all three of these evaluation skills! Almost 20%! Coiro, Coscarelli, Leu, Kulikowich, & Sedransk (2013)
Challenge #2: Developing Digital Wisdom Are they really Digital Natives (Prensky, 2001)? The Digital Natives Debate (Bennett, Maton, & Kervin, 2008) From Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom (Prensky, 2012a; 2012b) “The human mind is extended, enhanced, amplified and liberated by technology” Find the best combination of mind and technology Move beyond purely social uses of digital media Focus on learning how to learn
Challenge #3: Meeting Demands of A Digital Participatory Culture (Jenkins, 2010) New skills for: Play/problem-solving and simulation Collective intelligence Working across multiple modalities and negotiating across multiple (conflicting) perspectives Ethical use and responsibilities Social skills for increasingly public roles as media makers and community participants Critical need for policy and pedagogical interventions
Challenge #4: Adjusting to new teaching roles (Coiro, 2009) Understand and make explicit the relationship between offline and online literacies Honor the literacies students bring to school from their daily lives Clarify & navigate new peer-peer and teacher- student collaborative relationships Weave in ways of fostering positive dispositions (attitudes and beliefs) toward learning & communicating with internet technologies Coiro, J. (2009). Promising practices for supporting adolescents’ online literacy development. In K.D. Wood and W.E. Blanton (Eds.). Literacy instruction for adolescents: Research-based practice (pp. 442-471). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Measuring Attitudes Toward Reading on the Internet Open-ended questions: (a) How approach; (b) How respond; (c): Self-efficacy • What is easiest for you about using the Internet for research? • What is hardest for you about using the Internet for research? • Can you think of a time when you had trouble finding something using the Internet? How do you feel when this happens? How long do you keep trying before you give up? • What do you know about using the Internet effectively that some kids your age might not know?
Coiro, J. (2012, April). Digital Literacies: Understanding dispositions toward reading on the Internet. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 55(7), 645-648. Impact of Attitudes Toward Reading on the Internet
What opportunities do “digitally literate” learners encounter when they interact with people and information online? • Thinking deeply • Developing voice • Working collaboratively • Making a difference
Thinking Deeply to Foster Inquiry
Solve the Puzzle – Watch A Video – Have the text read aloud
Asking questions during and after reading that prompt new discoveries with technology PLANNING: • Collect questions and strategically pick one • Over the weekend.. do a search, highlight 2-3 websites, and be prepared to model and discuss: • Keywords used • Search engines used • Your searching/locating process • Website title and website address (URL) Internet Inquiry Baskets I wonder…
Internet Inquiry Baskets (Part 1) MODELED READING AND GROUP DISCUSSION: • Think-aloud while locating, skimming, reading • Summarizing 1– The key idea is… • Summarizing 2 – Across these sites, we found that… • Evaluating: The Internet helped us to learn… • Communicating: Compiling into a classroom book (and share with the community/library, etc.)
• A parent volunteer or teacher’s aide works with the children who asked the question… • Reflect on what they learned • Type their answers • Add their photo • Publish their page • Share with the class Internet Inquiry Baskets (Part 2)
Young Learners Wondering and Thinking Deeply
Older Learners Thinking Deeply To Help Others
Authentic Inquiry & Deeper Thinking Larissa Pahomov: Science Leadership Academy, Philadelphia, PA
Developing Voice: Tips for Commenting on Blogs
Developing Voice: Tips for Commenting on Blogs
Reader’s Theatre to Build Decoding and Fluency Podcasting to Practice Comprehension, Collaboration & and Oral Presentation Skills Developing/Sharing Personal Voice
Over 460 entries by Grade 3 & 4 students! Generating Online Texts Developing/Sharing Personal Voice
Developing/Sharing Personal Voice Student Book Clubs and Online Writing Forums
Social Practices: Request & give information; jointly acknowledge, evaluate, & build on partner’s contributions Collaboratively Building Meaning (Coiro, Castek, Sekeres, & Guzniczak, 2013; 2014) Cognitive Strategies: Read, question, monitor, repair, infer, connect, clarify, and interpret
Grade 4: Cross-Country Collaboration with Animal Specialists Three stages 1. Local Expert Inspires Inquiry Circles 2. Students identify specific animals to study 3. Animal specialists support student discovery using Voicethread Opportunities for Extended Online Collaboration and Communication
Grade 4: Ask-An-Expert with VoiceThread Building Productive Skills in Collaboration and Communication
Working Collaboratively To Build Community Knowledge Sugata Mitra’s Hole in the Wall Project - India
The Life Of A Homeless Person (after a photo walk discovery) Discussion…Research…. Composition…Revision… 10 page Comic book Renee Hobbs (2013) Mattering: Younger Learners Collaborating To Make A Difference
Mattering: Older Learners Collaborating To Make A Difference
Mattering: Taking Action with Public Service Announcements http://studentpsa.com/psa/
Mattering: Changing the World
Opportunities… Challenges... Next Steps for Understanding Online Research and Comprehension
Next steps… Reading online to locate information Continually re-examine our thinking about which locating skills are most important (rapidly emerging new tools, features, and affordances/constraints) Reading online to critically evaluate information: Deepen our understanding of cognitive abilities and limitations (Eastin, 2008): At what age can we expect learners to be able to make credibility judgments (e.g., identify author motives and perspectives; counterbalance information with multiple and conflicting sources)? Role of students’ personal epistemologies (ways of thinking about the nature of knowledge and knowing) and its impact on student competence in website evaluation (Barzalai & Zohar, 2012)
Next steps… Reading online to synthesize information What are the underlying processes involved in how learners deconstruct, analyze, consolidate, organize, and integrate information from disparate sources (Schira-Hagerman, in process; DeSchryver, 2012)? How can collaborative partnerships and digital support tools (Coiro et al, 2012; 2013; Kiili et al. 2012, Kiili & Coiro, 2013) scaffold complex online reading processes? Reading online to communicate information Turn attention toward readers and writers as media makers and socially active citizens (Hobbs, 2010; 2011; Hobbs & Moore, 2013) – How do we document students’ ability to collaboratively collect, share, generate, and creatively produce in ways that meet social demands of a participatory culture (e.g., Jenkins, 2006)?
Reading and Learning on the Internet presents both challenges and opportunities In summary Your Comments? Questions? Concerns?
References Barzilai, S., & Zohar, A. (2012). Epistemic Thinking in Action: Evaluating and Integrating Online Sources. Cognition and Instruction, 30(1), 39–85. Bennett, S., Maton, K. & Kervin, L. (2008). The digital natives debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-786. Bilal, D. (2000). Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: I. Cognitive, physical, and affective behaviors on fact-based search tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(7), 646–665. Bilal, D. (2001). Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: II. Cognitive and physical behaviors on research tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(2), 118–136. Coiro, J. (2007). Exploring changes to reading comprehension on the Internet. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut. Storrs, CT. Coiro, J. (2009). Promising practices for supporting adolescents’ online literacy development. In K.D. Wood and W.E. Blanton (Eds.). Literacy instruction for adolescents: Research-based practice (pp. 442-471). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Coiro, J. (2011). Predicting reading comprehension on the Internet: Contributions of offline reading skills, online reading skills, and prior knowledge. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(4) 352-392. Coiro, J. (2012, April). Digital Literacies: Understanding dispositions toward reading on the Internet. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 55(7), 645-648. Coiro, J. & Coscarelli, C. (2013, December). Investigating criteria seventh-graders use to evaluate the quality of online information. Symposium presented at the 63rd annual meeting of the Literacy Research Association, Dallas, TX. Coiro, J., Castek, J., Sekeres, D., & Guzniczak, L. (2014). Comparing third, fourth, and fifth graders’ collaborative interactions while engaged in online inquiry. Journal of Education.
Castek, J., Coiro, J., Guzniczak, L., & Bradshaw, C. (2012). Examining peer collaboration in online inquiry. The Educational Forum, 76(4), 479-496. Eagleton, M. B., & Guinee, K. (2002). Strategies for supporting student Internet inquiry. New England Reading Association Journal, 38, 39–47. Fabos, B. (2008). The price of information: Critical literacy education and today’s Internet. . In J.Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 839-870). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Flanagin, A.J., and Metzger, M. (2008) Digital Media and Youth: Unparalleled Opportunity and Unprecedented Responsibility. In M.J. Metzger & A. J. Flanagin (Eds.) Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility: The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. (pp. 5–28). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Forzani, E. & Burlingame, C. (2012). Evaluating seventh grade students’ ability to critically evaluate online information. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Literacy Research Association, San Diego, CA. Hagerman, M.S. (in progress). The impact of Online Synthesis Instruction (OSI) on adolescents’ ability to construct an integrated understanding of science topics from multiple Internet texts. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Michigan State University: East Lansing, MI. Hartman, D. K., Morsink, P. M., & Zheng, J. (2010). From print to pixels: The evolution of cognitive conceptions of reading comprehension. In E. A. Baker (Ed.). The new literacies: Multiple perspectives on research and practice (pp. 131-164). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Henry, L. A. (2006). SEARCHing for an Answer: The Critical Role of New Literacies While Reading on the Internet. The Reading Teacher, 59(7), 614–627. Jenkins, H. (2010). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media Education for the 21st References
Kuiper, E. & Volman, M. (2008). The web as a source of information for students in K-12 education. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 241-266) New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., & Cammack, D. W. (2004). Donald J. Leu, Jr., Charles K. Kinzer, Julie L. Coiro, and Dana W. Cammack. Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 1570 –1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Leu, D. J, Castek, J., Hartman, D., Coiro, J., Henry, L., Kulikowich, J., Lyver, S. (2005). Evaluating the development of scientific knowledge and new forms of reading comprehension during online learning. Final report presented to the North Central Regional Educational Laboratory/Learning Point Associates. Available online at http://www.newliteracies.uconn.edu/ncrel.html. Leu, D. J., Coiro, J., Castek, J., Hartman, D., Henry, L.A., & Reinking, D. (2008). Research on instruction and assessment in the new literacies of online reading comprehension. In Cathy Collins Block, Sherri Parris, & Peter Afflerbach (Eds.). Comprehension instruction: Research- based best practices. New York: Guilford Press. Leu, D. J., Jr., Kinzer, C.K., Coiro, J., Castek, J. & Henry, L. A. (2013). New literacies: A dual-level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. In R.B. Ruddell & D. Alvermann (Eds.), Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Sixth Edition, Newark, DE: International Reading Association. McKenzie, J. (2005). Learning to question to wonder to learn. Bellingham, WA: FNO Press. Miller, C. & Bartlett, J. (2012). ‘Digital fluency’: Toward young people’s critical use of the Internet. Journal of Information Literacy, 6(2), 35-55. References
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon: MCB University Press. 9(5). 1-6. Prensky, M. (2012a). Brain gain: Technology and the quest for digital wisdom. New York, NY: Palgrave McMillan. Prensky, M. (2012b). From digital natives to digital wisdom: Hopeful essays on education. Corwin Press. Rothstein D. & Santana. L. (2011). Make just one change: Teach students to ask their own questions. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Rouet, J.-F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sevensma, K. (2013). Negotiating new literacies in science: An examination of at-risk and average- achieving ninth-grade readers’ online reading comprehension strategies. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Michigan State University: East Lansing, MI. Sutherland-Smith, W. (2002). Weaving the literacy web: Changes in reading from page to screen. The Reading Teacher, 55, 662-669. Walraven, A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P. (2009). How students evaluate information and sources when searching the World Wide Web for information. Computers & Education, 52(1), 234–246. Zhang, S., & Duke, N. K. (2008). Strategies for Internet reading with different reading purposes: A descriptive study of twelve good Internet readers. Journal of Literacy Research, 40, 128–162. References

More Related Content

Online Reading Comprehension: Challenges and Opportunities (Brazil 2014)

  • 1. Online Reading Comprehension: Challenges and Opportunities Julie Coiro, Associate Professor, School of Education University of Rhode Island jcoiro@mail.uri.edu Academic Papers: http://uri.academia.edu/JulieCoiro/Papers
  • 2. What is online reading comprehension (from a new literacies perspective)? Where are we headed? What questions are worth exploring next?
  • 3. A New Literacies Perspective of Online Reading Comprehension 1. Students require additional, new skills to read and effectively comprehend information online. 2. Students are sometimes more literate than their teachers with certain aspects of using the Internet. 3. The Internet is a READING and WRITING issue (not a technology issue) for every content-area classroom teacher, reading educator, and library media specialist.
  • 4. How does reading and learning on the Internet change? You begin by identifying an important question New ways of locating information New reasons for critically evaluating the information New contexts for synthesizing information to answer your questions New ways of communicating the answers to others Leu, Kinzer, Coiro, and Cammack (2004) Leu, Kinzer, Coiro, Castek, & Henry (2013)
  • 5. What challenges do learners encounter when they interact with people and information online?
  • 6. Challenge #1: New literacies for online research and comprehension (r=0.19, n = 89, N.S.) Leu, D. Castek, J., Hartman, D., Coiro, J., Henry, L., Kulikowich, J., Lyver, S. (2005). Offline Reading = CT State Reading Test Online Reading Comprehension= ORCA Blog
  • 7. Predicting Online Reading Comprehension R2 Offline Reading Comprehension Additional R2 Prior Knowledge Additional R2 Online Reading Comprehension Total R2 .351* 35% .074 7.4% .154* 15.4% .579* 57.9% Coiro, 2011 n=120 Offline Reading Comp.= CT State Reading Test Online Reading Comprehension = ORCA Quia Qualitative evidence: (Coiro & Dobler, 2007; Afflerbach & Cho, 2009) Quantitative evidence: (Kingsley, 2010; Coiro, 2011) Theoretical examples: (Hartman, Morsink, & Zheng, 2009)
  • 8. TextsTexts AuthorsAuthors ReadersReaders ContextsContexts TasksTasks Technologie s Technologie s TextsTexts AuthorsAuthors ReadersReaders ContextsContexts TasksTasks Technologie s Technologie s Other studies of online reading Major shift in our conception of reading comprehension in terms of complexity and multiplicity RAND Model (2002): Tetradic conception of four interacting elements Hartman, Morsink, & Zheng (2010): Hexadic conception of six interacting elements (each is multiple as well) TextsTexts AuthorsAuthors ReadersReaders ContextsContexts TasksTasks Technologie s Technologie s
  • 9. So what skills are important to have for reading on the Internet? (Coiro, 2007) Well, I’d say - concentration…immunity to the rest of the sites once you click on one. And being a good internet searcher - meaning when you know exactly what to click on without having to think twice about it, and when you click on it, it’s reliable….I’d say it’s about 25% luck, 74% skill, and 1% wit - I really can’t understand it all myself but …they mold right into a perfect circle and it works correctly! Evaluate relevancy Evaluate reliabilityLocating & Evaluating Speed matters! A new kind of fluency!
  • 10. Many students struggle with inquiry and online research… Generating important questions to solve a problem (McKenzie, 2005; Rothstein & Santana, 2011) Locating relevant information (Henry, 2006; Leu et al, 2005) Critically evaluating information (especially conflicting claims) (Metzger & Flanigan, 2008; Coiro & Coscarelli, 2013) Synthesizing information from multiple sources and modes/formats (Killi, 2012; Rouet, 20006) Communicating their findings/solutions clearly in writing (e.g., argumentation) and with new technologies (e.g., email, blogs, wikis) How Do Teens Do Research in a Digital World? (Pew Internet Study, 2012) Digital Fluency in the UK (Miller & Bartlett, 2012)
  • 11. Challenges of Reading on the Internet Asking Questions: - What would I like to know more about? - Which search words do I use? Asking Questions: - What would I like to know more about? - Which search words do I use? Locating: - Which search tools should I use? - Where do I read first? Locating: - Which search tools should I use? - Where do I read first? Evaluating: - Which link is most useful? - How do I know it’s true? - What is the author’s purpose? Evaluating: - Which link is most useful? - How do I know it’s true? - What is the author’s purpose? Synthesizing and Communicating - How do I come up with an original idea? - How do I share it with others? Synthesizing and Communicating - How do I come up with an original idea? - How do I share it with others?
  • 12. Elementary and middle students have few strategies for critically judging the quality of information on the Internet – They struggle with… Determining the author and/or sponsor of a website Evaluating an author’s level of expertise Identifying the author’s point of view and one piece of evidence that illustrates that point of view Determining the overall reliability of a website with reasoned evidence to support their decision (e.g., Barzalai & Zohar, 2012; Coiro & Coscarelli, 2013; Fabos, 2008; Forzani & Burlingame, 2012; Flanigan & Metzger, 2008; Miller & Bartlett, 2012; Walraven et al, 2009) Challenges of Evaluating Sources
  • 13. Challenges of Evaluating Sources 80-88% of our large Grade 7 sample struggled with all three of these evaluation skills! Almost 20%! Coiro, Coscarelli, Leu, Kulikowich, & Sedransk (2013)
  • 14. Challenge #2: Developing Digital Wisdom Are they really Digital Natives (Prensky, 2001)? The Digital Natives Debate (Bennett, Maton, & Kervin, 2008) From Digital Natives to Digital Wisdom (Prensky, 2012a; 2012b) “The human mind is extended, enhanced, amplified and liberated by technology” Find the best combination of mind and technology Move beyond purely social uses of digital media Focus on learning how to learn
  • 15. Challenge #3: Meeting Demands of A Digital Participatory Culture (Jenkins, 2010) New skills for: Play/problem-solving and simulation Collective intelligence Working across multiple modalities and negotiating across multiple (conflicting) perspectives Ethical use and responsibilities Social skills for increasingly public roles as media makers and community participants Critical need for policy and pedagogical interventions
  • 16. Challenge #4: Adjusting to new teaching roles (Coiro, 2009) Understand and make explicit the relationship between offline and online literacies Honor the literacies students bring to school from their daily lives Clarify & navigate new peer-peer and teacher- student collaborative relationships Weave in ways of fostering positive dispositions (attitudes and beliefs) toward learning & communicating with internet technologies Coiro, J. (2009). Promising practices for supporting adolescents’ online literacy development. In K.D. Wood and W.E. Blanton (Eds.). Literacy instruction for adolescents: Research-based practice (pp. 442-471). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • 17. Measuring Attitudes Toward Reading on the Internet Open-ended questions: (a) How approach; (b) How respond; (c): Self-efficacy • What is easiest for you about using the Internet for research? • What is hardest for you about using the Internet for research? • Can you think of a time when you had trouble finding something using the Internet? How do you feel when this happens? How long do you keep trying before you give up? • What do you know about using the Internet effectively that some kids your age might not know?
  • 18. Coiro, J. (2012, April). Digital Literacies: Understanding dispositions toward reading on the Internet. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 55(7), 645-648. Impact of Attitudes Toward Reading on the Internet
  • 19. What opportunities do “digitally literate” learners encounter when they interact with people and information online? • Thinking deeply • Developing voice • Working collaboratively • Making a difference
  • 20. Thinking Deeply to Foster Inquiry
  • 21. Solve the Puzzle – Watch A Video – Have the text read aloud
  • 22. Asking questions during and after reading that prompt new discoveries with technology PLANNING: • Collect questions and strategically pick one • Over the weekend.. do a search, highlight 2-3 websites, and be prepared to model and discuss: • Keywords used • Search engines used • Your searching/locating process • Website title and website address (URL) Internet Inquiry Baskets I wonder…
  • 23. Internet Inquiry Baskets (Part 1) MODELED READING AND GROUP DISCUSSION: • Think-aloud while locating, skimming, reading • Summarizing 1– The key idea is… • Summarizing 2 – Across these sites, we found that… • Evaluating: The Internet helped us to learn… • Communicating: Compiling into a classroom book (and share with the community/library, etc.)
  • 24. • A parent volunteer or teacher’s aide works with the children who asked the question… • Reflect on what they learned • Type their answers • Add their photo • Publish their page • Share with the class Internet Inquiry Baskets (Part 2)
  • 25. Young Learners Wondering and Thinking Deeply
  • 26. Older Learners Thinking Deeply To Help Others
  • 27. Authentic Inquiry & Deeper Thinking Larissa Pahomov: Science Leadership Academy, Philadelphia, PA
  • 28. Developing Voice: Tips for Commenting on Blogs
  • 29. Developing Voice: Tips for Commenting on Blogs
  • 30. Reader’s Theatre to Build Decoding and Fluency Podcasting to Practice Comprehension, Collaboration & and Oral Presentation Skills Developing/Sharing Personal Voice
  • 31. Over 460 entries by Grade 3 & 4 students! Generating Online Texts Developing/Sharing Personal Voice
  • 32. Developing/Sharing Personal Voice Student Book Clubs and Online Writing Forums
  • 33. Social Practices: Request & give information; jointly acknowledge, evaluate, & build on partner’s contributions Collaboratively Building Meaning (Coiro, Castek, Sekeres, & Guzniczak, 2013; 2014) Cognitive Strategies: Read, question, monitor, repair, infer, connect, clarify, and interpret
  • 34. Grade 4: Cross-Country Collaboration with Animal Specialists Three stages 1. Local Expert Inspires Inquiry Circles 2. Students identify specific animals to study 3. Animal specialists support student discovery using Voicethread Opportunities for Extended Online Collaboration and Communication
  • 35. Grade 4: Ask-An-Expert with VoiceThread Building Productive Skills in Collaboration and Communication
  • 36. Working Collaboratively To Build Community Knowledge Sugata Mitra’s Hole in the Wall Project - India
  • 37. The Life Of A Homeless Person (after a photo walk discovery) Discussion…Research…. Composition…Revision… 10 page Comic book Renee Hobbs (2013) Mattering: Younger Learners Collaborating To Make A Difference
  • 39. Mattering: Taking Action with Public Service Announcements http://studentpsa.com/psa/
  • 41. Opportunities… Challenges... Next Steps for Understanding Online Research and Comprehension
  • 42. Next steps… Reading online to locate information Continually re-examine our thinking about which locating skills are most important (rapidly emerging new tools, features, and affordances/constraints) Reading online to critically evaluate information: Deepen our understanding of cognitive abilities and limitations (Eastin, 2008): At what age can we expect learners to be able to make credibility judgments (e.g., identify author motives and perspectives; counterbalance information with multiple and conflicting sources)? Role of students’ personal epistemologies (ways of thinking about the nature of knowledge and knowing) and its impact on student competence in website evaluation (Barzalai & Zohar, 2012)
  • 43. Next steps… Reading online to synthesize information What are the underlying processes involved in how learners deconstruct, analyze, consolidate, organize, and integrate information from disparate sources (Schira-Hagerman, in process; DeSchryver, 2012)? How can collaborative partnerships and digital support tools (Coiro et al, 2012; 2013; Kiili et al. 2012, Kiili & Coiro, 2013) scaffold complex online reading processes? Reading online to communicate information Turn attention toward readers and writers as media makers and socially active citizens (Hobbs, 2010; 2011; Hobbs & Moore, 2013) – How do we document students’ ability to collaboratively collect, share, generate, and creatively produce in ways that meet social demands of a participatory culture (e.g., Jenkins, 2006)?
  • 44. Reading and Learning on the Internet presents both challenges and opportunities In summary Your Comments? Questions? Concerns?
  • 45. References Barzilai, S., & Zohar, A. (2012). Epistemic Thinking in Action: Evaluating and Integrating Online Sources. Cognition and Instruction, 30(1), 39–85. Bennett, S., Maton, K. & Kervin, L. (2008). The digital natives debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-786. Bilal, D. (2000). Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: I. Cognitive, physical, and affective behaviors on fact-based search tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(7), 646–665. Bilal, D. (2001). Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine: II. Cognitive and physical behaviors on research tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(2), 118–136. Coiro, J. (2007). Exploring changes to reading comprehension on the Internet. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut. Storrs, CT. Coiro, J. (2009). Promising practices for supporting adolescents’ online literacy development. In K.D. Wood and W.E. Blanton (Eds.). Literacy instruction for adolescents: Research-based practice (pp. 442-471). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Coiro, J. (2011). Predicting reading comprehension on the Internet: Contributions of offline reading skills, online reading skills, and prior knowledge. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(4) 352-392. Coiro, J. (2012, April). Digital Literacies: Understanding dispositions toward reading on the Internet. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 55(7), 645-648. Coiro, J. & Coscarelli, C. (2013, December). Investigating criteria seventh-graders use to evaluate the quality of online information. Symposium presented at the 63rd annual meeting of the Literacy Research Association, Dallas, TX. Coiro, J., Castek, J., Sekeres, D., & Guzniczak, L. (2014). Comparing third, fourth, and fifth graders’ collaborative interactions while engaged in online inquiry. Journal of Education.
  • 46. Castek, J., Coiro, J., Guzniczak, L., & Bradshaw, C. (2012). Examining peer collaboration in online inquiry. The Educational Forum, 76(4), 479-496. Eagleton, M. B., & Guinee, K. (2002). Strategies for supporting student Internet inquiry. New England Reading Association Journal, 38, 39–47. Fabos, B. (2008). The price of information: Critical literacy education and today’s Internet. . In J.Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 839-870). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Flanagin, A.J., and Metzger, M. (2008) Digital Media and Youth: Unparalleled Opportunity and Unprecedented Responsibility. In M.J. Metzger & A. J. Flanagin (Eds.) Digital Media, Youth, and Credibility: The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. (pp. 5–28). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Forzani, E. & Burlingame, C. (2012). Evaluating seventh grade students’ ability to critically evaluate online information. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Literacy Research Association, San Diego, CA. Hagerman, M.S. (in progress). The impact of Online Synthesis Instruction (OSI) on adolescents’ ability to construct an integrated understanding of science topics from multiple Internet texts. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Michigan State University: East Lansing, MI. Hartman, D. K., Morsink, P. M., & Zheng, J. (2010). From print to pixels: The evolution of cognitive conceptions of reading comprehension. In E. A. Baker (Ed.). The new literacies: Multiple perspectives on research and practice (pp. 131-164). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Henry, L. A. (2006). SEARCHing for an Answer: The Critical Role of New Literacies While Reading on the Internet. The Reading Teacher, 59(7), 614–627. Jenkins, H. (2010). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media Education for the 21st References
  • 47. Kuiper, E. & Volman, M. (2008). The web as a source of information for students in K-12 education. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 241-266) New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., & Cammack, D. W. (2004). Donald J. Leu, Jr., Charles K. Kinzer, Julie L. Coiro, and Dana W. Cammack. Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 1570 –1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Leu, D. J, Castek, J., Hartman, D., Coiro, J., Henry, L., Kulikowich, J., Lyver, S. (2005). Evaluating the development of scientific knowledge and new forms of reading comprehension during online learning. Final report presented to the North Central Regional Educational Laboratory/Learning Point Associates. Available online at http://www.newliteracies.uconn.edu/ncrel.html. Leu, D. J., Coiro, J., Castek, J., Hartman, D., Henry, L.A., & Reinking, D. (2008). Research on instruction and assessment in the new literacies of online reading comprehension. In Cathy Collins Block, Sherri Parris, & Peter Afflerbach (Eds.). Comprehension instruction: Research- based best practices. New York: Guilford Press. Leu, D. J., Jr., Kinzer, C.K., Coiro, J., Castek, J. & Henry, L. A. (2013). New literacies: A dual-level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. In R.B. Ruddell & D. Alvermann (Eds.), Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, Sixth Edition, Newark, DE: International Reading Association. McKenzie, J. (2005). Learning to question to wonder to learn. Bellingham, WA: FNO Press. Miller, C. & Bartlett, J. (2012). ‘Digital fluency’: Toward young people’s critical use of the Internet. Journal of Information Literacy, 6(2), 35-55. References
  • 48. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon: MCB University Press. 9(5). 1-6. Prensky, M. (2012a). Brain gain: Technology and the quest for digital wisdom. New York, NY: Palgrave McMillan. Prensky, M. (2012b). From digital natives to digital wisdom: Hopeful essays on education. Corwin Press. Rothstein D. & Santana. L. (2011). Make just one change: Teach students to ask their own questions. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Rouet, J.-F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sevensma, K. (2013). Negotiating new literacies in science: An examination of at-risk and average- achieving ninth-grade readers’ online reading comprehension strategies. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Michigan State University: East Lansing, MI. Sutherland-Smith, W. (2002). Weaving the literacy web: Changes in reading from page to screen. The Reading Teacher, 55, 662-669. Walraven, A., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P. (2009). How students evaluate information and sources when searching the World Wide Web for information. Computers & Education, 52(1), 234–246. Zhang, S., & Duke, N. K. (2008). Strategies for Internet reading with different reading purposes: A descriptive study of twelve good Internet readers. Journal of Literacy Research, 40, 128–162. References

Editor's Notes

  1. Reader’s Theatre about 2 minutes, Radio Willow Web about 2 minutes
  2. Use the narrative
  3. Diane Use the narrative
  4. Diane Use the narrative