Considering the essential differences of print vs. digital reading

I've been fascinated watching the development of digital reading habits among adults and children. Anecdotally I've noticed that adults have been much more likely to switch their regular pleasure reading of print books to pleasure reading of digital books. Children, on the other hand, seem to be less likely to make this switch. I believe there are many factors at play with this. But one aspect I'd like to consider a little more closely is the essential differences of reading print vs. reading digitally. I was fascinated to read Anne Mangen's theoretical reflections on this very topic.

The essential experience of reading digital texts differs from reading print texts, but it is often hard to describe. For many digital texts, the content is the same and yet the format and device do affect the reading experience. For other digital texts, especially those such as the multimedia book apps, the additional multimedia content itself can change the reading experience. Mangen (2008) developed an intensive theoretical examination of the difference between reading digital texts and print texts, considering the impact of the physical aspect of reading electronic books.

Unlike print texts, digital texts are physically intangible as we read them; the digital text itself is detached from the physical device. As the reader holds the physical device in his or her hands, the electronic text changes but the device remains physically the same. This detachment has implications for the reading experience. Another way to consider the impact of the physicality of our text is the memory cues the physical layout of a print book can support. Readers can often recall the physical position of a favorite passage in a book, whether it was on the top right of the page or bottom left. They can envision its physical location. This is much more difficult to do with a digital book because the text is detached from the physical device. As Mangen (2008) writes,

The digital text has no material substance ... By definition, the digital erases all traces of tangibility, and, hence, invisibility. The constancy, the temporal and spatial permanence, of a tactile object – say, a print text – has distinctively different sensory–motor affordances, then, than something intangible. (p. 408)

These theoretical aspects are important to consider when investigating the impact of digital reading on students’ actual reading comprehension. Do these differences in tangibility affect reading comprehension for the majority of readers, or perhaps especially certain visually or physically attuned individuals?

Mangen (2008) develops her theories further by considering the impact of visual links and hidden hotspots in digital texts on the reading experience, features that are absent in print books. We have psychobiologically hardwired dispositions to seek external visual stimuli, and we need continued input from this stimuli or we will become bored. Print books encourage deeper, more reflective thinking because they focus our input to one controlled text; on the other hand, many digital books offer hyperlinks and hotspots that offer the “thrill of the unknown” (Mangen, 2008, p. 412) while reading. This might heighten interest in reading, but it can also lead to increased distraction as the reader searches impatiently for these hotspots.

As Mangen writes, “The mere possibility of the click bringing about some degree and kind of visual change impacts our phenomenological immersion in a narrative fiction in a way that is simply not possible when reading print narratives.” (p. 412) 

As educators and researchers consider multimedia iPad book apps, it is essential that they consider not only the overall nature of reading digital texts, but the specific impact that interactive features have on the way readers can build meaning from the texts. Do the multimedia features help provide richer context and visual support, or do they distract readers? Are some design features more helpful to children in building their reading comprehension, while other features may delight readers but essentially entertain them without adding to their understanding of the story?

For more, take a look at this interview with Dr. Anne Mangen about reading on paper and reading on screens

Mangen, A. (2008). Hypertext fiction reading: haptics and immersion. Journal of Research in Reading, 31(4), 404-419. Abstract available at: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2008.00380.x/abstract

Exploring multimodal learning

I have long been interested in the way educators can use a variety of learning styles to augment their teaching and promote students' learning. In particular, I have advocated using audiobooks since my early teaching days. Recently, I have started exploring using iPad book apps as an integrated multimedia reading experience. So I was particularly interested in reading a research report published by Cisco, done by the Metiri Group:

Metiri Group (2008). Multimodal learning through media: What the research says. Retrieved from http://www.cisco.com/web/strategy/docs/education/Multimodal-Learning-Through-Media.pdf

As cognitive neuroscientists and education researchers have come to understand the way that the human brain processes information, it has become clear that we process visual information using different channels in the brain than linguistic information. In their review of the research on multimodal learning, the Metiri Group (2008) notes,

Recent technological advances through functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) scans confirm a dual coding system through which visuals and text/auditory input are processed in separate channels, presenting the potential for simultaneous augmentation of learning. The bottom line is that students using well-designed combinations of visuals and text learn more than students who only use text. (p. 3)

This combination of inputs through multimodal learning can be achieved in many ways. A lecture augmented by clear visuals and printed notes helps students see and hear the information. Likewise, a well-designed book app or CD-ROM storybook makes clear use of this type of multimodal input. Multimedia books like book apps can combine bright illustrations and appealing animation, narration both of the text and of the character’s dialog, written text for this narrative and dialog, and interactive features that bring the reader to touching the screen to activate dialog and movement.

Several principles of multimedia learning and design can be applied to the understanding of effective book apps. The Metiri Group (2008) summarizes several principles of multimedia design that affect learning. Students learn better when words and pictures are combined near each other and simultaneously - not several pages later. They learn better when content is focused and concise; input from different channels should be related but not redundant or duplicated. Individuals will benefit from design effects in different ways, with particular effect being noticed by low-knowledge or high-spatial learners. And finally, narration combined with animation supports understanding better than animation and text only, without narration.

It is of particular interest that much of the research examined by the Metiri Group (2008) focused on older students and higher order thinking, but it applies equally well to multimedia digital books for beginning readers. These readers need multiple inputs to support their efforts at making meaning from books. As Grimshaw, Dungworth and McKnight (2007) note, multimodal features such as narration, word pronunciation, sound effects and animation can help remove the effort from decoding individual words and help children focus on making meaning from texts. The question at hand is whether these these multimedia elements can really enhance understanding of stories or nonfiction, or whether they are essentially entertainment. How does reading these multimedia texts differ at its essence from reading traditional print books?

Thinking about my research question

I am wrestling with my research topic for my literature review and research proposal for my Research Methodologies class at SJSU. I'm fascinated by the way that iPad book apps combine many types of reading and learning. I would like to delve into understanding how children respond to digital reading, especially multimedia, multimodal types of reading. But this research is just beginning to emerge. So for my initial literature review, I've had to broaden the scope of my topic to investigating digital reading more broadly.

I'd like to keep in mind the key questions that Dr. Josepch Stetar (2009), of Seton Hall University, posed in his Slideshare "Developing Research Questions".

Criteria for identifying research problem:

1. Must be interesting enough to hold my interest 
2. Must be within my range of competence. 
3. Must be a manageable size 
4. Must have some basis in theory—ie, topics found in the lit review 
5. Must have the potential to make an original contribution—can’t be a duplicate of something that’s already been done. 
6. Must be based on obtainable data—research plan must be viable and practical. 
7. Must permit me to demonstrate my independent mastery of both subject and research method

Clearly, I have a long way to go. At the moment, I am interested in seeing how I would extend on the research started by the Cooney Foundation (Chiong, et al., 2012), but extending it to school-aged children. The Cooney Foundation research focuses on children ages 3-6 and how they read book apps with their parents. I'm interested in how children ages 6-10 read book apps, the ways that they absorb information, interact with the digital elements, and comprehend the story/information. I really want to know whether book apps appeal to children because they seem so much like games and movies, or if they are drawing children into a book-like experience.

I wonder if Slater would argue that my topic is still too broad, that I need to focus it down more to just one or two variables. I suppose the Cooney research from 2012 (Chiong, et al., 2012) did this by comparing comprehension from a print, ebook and enhanced book app for similar books. I can see doing this with the Magic School Bus: Oceans book, which has a print and excellent iPad book app - perfect for a 6 to 9 year old.

The dilemma that I'm facing is that there is very little research out there right now on this specific topic. So to meet the literature review element of my assignment (15 or more scholarly articles), I need to look more broadly at digital reading. One of the aspects I will examine is how other researchers have structured their investigations into students digital reading, say with Kindles.

I'm curious if theoretical articles that define and identify issues within this area are a part of the literature survey. They are not other studies, per se, but they lay an important foundation, especially in this developing field.

Ahh, much to ponder. But it's certainly holding my interest!

Chiong, C., Ree, J., Takeuchi, L. and Erickson, I. (2012). Comparing parent-child co-reading on print, basic and enhanced e-book platforms. The Joan Ganz Cooney Center. Spring 2012. Retrieved from http://joanganzcooneycenter.org/Reports-35.html.

Stetar, J. (2009). Developing Research Questions. Slideshare. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/mikeparent/developing-research-question.

Toontastic: a pilot study examining creative play with an iPad app

My kids have loved playing with Toontastic, an iPad app that kids use to create their own animated stories. We only played with it in the early days of the app, and it's grown by leaps and bounds. I was very interested to read a new pilot study by Launchpad Learning, the company behind Toontastic. Andy Russell, one of the co-founders of Launchpad, and Alicia Chang, a Cognitive and Developmental Psychologist working with Launchpad Toys to research how kids are learning through cartoon creation, wrote about their study on the Joan Gantz Cooney Center Blog.

It's interesting to see the nonprofit Cooney Research Center is writing about a company's research, but I think it shows how seriously Launchpad Learning takes its focus on educational creative play in the digital age. Launchpad Learning developed a two-pronged study, both examining over two million cartoon created on Toontastic by over 600,000 kids, and examining semi-structured play sessions in a fourth grade classroom.

In the semi-structured play session, the fourth graders were divided into small groups of two or three students and asked to create a story about peer relationships over the course of one week. The study resulted in several observations, notably:

• Students used recurring characters more as the week progressed, suggesting that they developed a sense of cohesive story arcs and character development over time.
• As the students spent more time on their stories, they explored more emotional highs and lows, adding more depth and color to their stories.
• Students used more descriptive language and distinct character voices as time progressed.

All of these results reflect what I've observed with this app. It is not a quick and dirty app, but one that works best if kids have more time to develop their stories. If kids just have 30 or 40 minutes to work with it, they'll certainly have fun manipulating the puppets and recording their voices. But it's hard work making a cohesive story! It takes time, experimenting, and creative thinking.

Russell and Chang conclude by connecting the key components they've studied to the standards set out in the Common Core State Standards Initiative. I completely agree with that. I'd love to figure out a way to have our students be able to use this app. But a huge barrier in my experience is having the time for students to plan their stories, experiment with the app, and then craft their final products. Time is precious in a classroom, and there is never enough of it.

Russell, A. and Chang, A. (October 4, 2012). "Pilot study: Creative play with Toontastic." The Joan Gantz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop, Blog. Retrieved from http://joanganzcooneycenter.org/Cooney-Center-Blog-272.html

For more information, see:

http://launchpadtoys.com/blog/2012/09/creative-learning-with-toontastic-at-home-and-in-the-classroom/
http://launchpadtoys.com/content/launchpad-leaders/

Print books vs. e-books - a look at the Joan Ganz Cooney Center research

I'm fascinated by the developing research from the Joan Ganz Cooney Center on the way children interact with digital reading. The Cooney Center has been a leader in the field examining digital literacy, and so I was very excited that they've started to investigate the impact of enhanced e-books on children's reading experiences.

The released the results of their first QuickStudy in May, 2012 and got a lot of press covering their findings. Below I've summarized their study:

Chiong, C., Ree, J., Takeuchi, L. and Erickson, I. Comparing parent-child co-reading on print, basic and enhanced e-book platforms. The Joan Ganz Cooney Center. Spring 2012.

This report summarizes the findings of a QuickStudy examining the nature of parent-child and child-book interactions reading print, basic e-books and enhanced ebooks with young children (ages 3-6). The study specifically sought to understand how parent-child co-reading, overall engagement and children’s comprehension were affected by digital formats, specifically examining the difference between basic and enhanced e-books. Basic e-books are simple digitized versions of print books, while enhanced e-books include highly interactive, multimedia features, such as those on iPad book apps. The study employed a within- and between-subject design, asking 32 parent-child pairs to read an e-book and a print book together. The designers chose two books that were available in both print and digital formats, and randomly varied the order of reading, to offset possible order effects. The study found that the enhanced e-book on the iPad drew fewer content related actions from parents and children than the print version of the same story, while the basic e-books led to very similar content-related actions. The enhanced e-books led to much higher levels of non-content related actions, such as behavior or device-focused talk, from both parents and children. In addition, children recalled fewer narrative details after reading the enhanced e-books than after reading the print books. Researchers conclude that the parents and children focused their attention more on the non-content related issues when reading enhanced e-books. On the other hand, researchers did find that children were more engaged reading the enhanced e-books, physically interacting with the books more. The researchers recommend several next steps, including running this study with a larger and more representative sample, examining what types of e-book features affect engagement and comprehension, and how different populations use these different e-books.

My concerns are that it is difficult for me, as a practitioner in the field, to know exactly what type of enhanced e-book they used in the study. I have found in my work with book apps that there is an enormous variety in levels of interactive experiences. Their study has raised a number of questions for me:

My biggest question is whether older readers, who have more self-control, will be able to navigate the intersection between content and interactive material. Will a 7 year old be able to derive more content comprehension from the interactive dialog bubbles in Nosy Crow's Cinderella than a 4 year old? I would posit that an older child would be able to handle the multiple functions better.

I am curious how children's comprehension with book apps is affected by multiple readings. As the Cooney Center noted, children's engagement with book apps is much higher than with the similar print books. I find that children are drawn to book apps for repeated viewings. I would posit that a young child would focus at first on the interactive experiences - especially if they are new to that child - and more on the narrative content with repeated readings.

Finally, I wonder about the coding the study used. For example, the study noted that children and parents talking about book features was markedly increased with enhanced book apps. The researchers coded this as non-content related. And yet, this type of conversation is actually very important to understanding the broader reading process, for both child and parent. Were these conversations productive, exploring what features were in the book? Or were they distracting conversations?

I am certainly looking forward to more studies like this one. I do hope that the Cooney Center extends its analysis to include older children. I firmly believe that children ages 6-9 find enormous pleasure and fulfillment in reading enhanced e-books.