TEACHING ONLINE READING STRATEGIES USING THE THINK ALOUD TECHNIQUE Evidence from an experimental study

Main Article Content

STEFANIA CARIOLI
ANDREA PERU

Abstract

The present study aimed to investigate the value of the teacher Think Aloud (TA) instructional technique in providing young readers with effective strategies to enhance the comprehension of online texts. Eighty-nine participants from 10 to 14 years of age were sorted into two groups based on the type of training they had received: the experimental group (n = 47) had been taught with the TA strategies, while the control group (n = 42) had not received any specific training. Both the experimental and control groups were examined twice, before and after the period of training. Pupils had to find the correct answer to a specific question (Access) and to critically analyze online texts, expressing different opinions on a topic (Analysis). The findings indicate a positive effect of the TA technique, mainly in the transferal of strategies aimed at a more correct evaluation of the websites’ reliability. Indeed, while for the control group only a marginal, if any, improvement was recorded from pre-test to post-test, an outstanding amelioration was observed in the experimental group (from 19.1% to 48.9%) when requested to evaluate the reliability of a web site.

Article Details

Section
Articles - General topics
Author Biography

ANDREA PERU, University of Florence

Dipartimento di Neuroscienze, Area del Farmaco e Salute del Bambino (NEUROFARBA)

References

Afflerbach, P., & Cho, B. Y. (2009). Identifying and describing constructively responsive comprehension strategies in new and traditional forms of reading. In S. E. Israel & G. G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Reading Comprehension. New York, NY, USA: Routledge.

Agosto, D. (2002). A model of young people’s decision-making in using the web. Library & Information Science Research, 24(4), 311–341. doi: 10.1016/S0740-8188(02)00131-7

Azevedo, R. (2005). Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? The role of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 199–209. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4004_2

Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J. G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 523–535. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.523

Azevedo, R., Guthrie, J. T., & Seibert, D. (2004). The role of self-regulated learning in fostering students’ conceptual understanding of complex systems with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(1), 87–111. doi: 10.2190/DVWX-GM1T-6THQ-5WC7

Block, C. C., & Israel, S. E. (2004). The ABCs of performing highly effective Think Alouds. The Reading Teacher, 58(2), 154–167. doi: 10.1598/RT.58.2.4

Buckingham, D. (2007). Media education goes digital: an introduction. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(2), 111-119. doi: 10.1080/17439880701343006

Carioli, S., & Peru, A. (2016). The Think Aloud approach: a promising tool for online reading comprehension. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 8(1), 49–61. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/jmle/vol8/iss1/4

Cho, B. Y. (2014). Competent adolescent readers’ use of internet reading strategies: a Think Aloud study. Cognition and Instruction, 32(3), 253–289. doi: 10.1080/07370008.2014.918133

Chou, C., Condron, L., Belland, J. C. (2005). A review of the research on internet addiction. Educational Psychological Review, 17, 363–388.

Coiro, J. (2011a). Talking about reading as thinking: modeling the hidden complexities of online reading comprehension. Theory Into Practice, 50(2), 107–115. doi: 10.1080/00405841.2011.558435

Coiro, J. (2011b). 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. doi: 10.1177/1086296X11421979

Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(2), 214–257. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.42.2.2

Coiro, J., Coscarelli, C., Maykel, C., & Forzani, E. (2015). Investigating criteria that seventh graders use to evaluate the quality of online information. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 59(1), 1–11. doi: doi:10.1002/jaal.448

Colaric, S., & Jonassen, D. (2001). Information equals knowledge, searching equals learning and hyperlinking is good instruction: myths about learning from the world wide web. Computers in the Schools, 17(3–4), 159–169. doi: 10.1300/J025v17n03_10

Dalton, B., & Proctor, C. P. (2008). The changing landscape of text and comprehension in the age of New Literacies. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D.J. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of Research on New Literacies (pp. 297–324). New York, NY, USA: Routledge.

Davey, B. (1983). Think Aloud: modeling the cognitive processes of reading comprehension. Journal of Reading, 27(1), 44–47.

Egnatoff, W. J. (1999). Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital. The rise of the net generation. Education and Information Technologies, 4(2), 203–205. doi: 10.1023/A:1009656102475

EU High Level Group. (2012). European Union high level group of experts on literacy [Final Report]. doi: 10.2766/34382

Felini, D. (2014). Quality media literacy education. a tool for teachers and teacher educators of Italian elementary schools. JMLE 6(1), 28–43. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/jmle/vol6/iss1/

Goldman, S. R., Braasch, J. L. G., Wiley, J., Graesser, A. C., & Brodowinska, K. (2012). Comprehending and learning from internet sources: processing patterns of better and poorer learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 74(4), 356–381. Retrieved from https://ila.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/RRQ.027#reference

Goldman, S. R., Lawless, K. A., Gomez, K. W., Braasch, J. L. G., MacLeod, S., & Manning, F. (2010). Literacy in the digital world: comprehending and learning from multiple sources. In M. G. McKeown & L. Kucan (Eds.), Bringing Reading Researchers to Life (pp. 257–284). New York, NY, USA: Guilford Press.

Griffith, P. L., & Ruan, J. (2008). What is metacognition and what should be its role in literacy instruction? In S. E. Israel, C. Collins Block, K. Bauserman, & K. Welsch-Kinnucan (Eds.), Metacognition in Literacy Learning Theory, Assessment, Instruction and Professional Development (pp. 3–18). Mahwah, NJ, USA: Taylor & Francis.

Guan, S.A., & Subrahmanyam, K. (2009). Youth Internet use: risks and opportunities. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 22(4), 351–356. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e32832bd7e0

Hahnel, C., Goldhammer, F., Kröhne, U., & Naumann, J. (2018). The role of reading skills in the evaluation of online information gathered from search engine environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 223–234. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.004

Harris, T.L., & Hodges, R.E. (1995). The literacy dictionary: the vocabulary of reading and writing. Newark, DE, USA: International Reading Association.

Helsper, E., & Eynon, R. (2010). Digital natives: where is the evidence?. British Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 503-520. doi: 10.1080/01411920902989227

Hobbs, R. (2010). Digital and media literacy. a plan of action. Washington, D.C. The Aspen Institute. Retrieved from http://www.aspeninstitute.org/events/2010/11/10/digitalmedia-literacy-plan-action

Hobbs, R., & Moore, D. C. (2013). Discovering media literacy: teaching digital media and popular culture in elementary school. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Corwin Press. doi: 10.4135/9781506335445

Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: a social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53, 1017–1031.

Kuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J. (2005). The web as an information resource in k–12 education: strategies for supporting students in searching and processing information. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 285–328. doi: 10.3102/00346543075003285

Kuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J. (2008). Integrating critical web skills and content knowledge: Development and evaluation of a 5th grade educational program. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 666–692. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.022

Kymes, A. (2005). Teaching online comprehension strategies using Think Alouds. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 48(6), 492–500. doi: 10.1598/JAAL.48.6.4

Lapp, D., Fisher, D., & Grant, M. (2008). “You can read this text - I’ll show you how”: interactive comprehension instruction. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(5), 372–383. doi: 10.1598/JAAL.51.5.1

Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., & Cammack, D. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the internet and other information and communication technologies. Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading, 5(1), 1570-1613.

Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., Castek, J., & Henry, L. A. (2017). New literacies: a dual-level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. Journal of Education, 197(2), 1-18. doi: 10.1177/002205741719700202

Marchionini, G. (1989). Information‐seeking strategies of novices using a full‐text electronic encyclopedia. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 40(1), 54–66.

Minguela, M., Solé, I., & Pieschl, S. (2015). Flexible self-regulated reading as a cue for deep comprehension: evidence from online and offline measures. Reading and Writing: an Interdisciplinary Journal, 28(5), 721–744. doi: 10.1007/s11145-015-9547-2

Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Drucker, K. T. (2012). PIRLS 2011 international results in reading. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). doi: 10.1007/s11145-015-9547-2

Mullis, I. V., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Hooper, M. (2017). ePIRLS 2016: international results in online informational reading. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. Retrieved from https:/eric.ed.gov/?id=ED580351

Naumann, J., & Salmerón, L. (2016). Does navigation always predict performance? Effects of navigation on digital reading are moderated by comprehension skills. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(1), 42–59. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2113/3586

OECD. Directorate for Education and Skills. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project/contact/

Paris, S. G., & Stahl, S. A. (Eds.). (2005). Children’s reading comprehension and assessment. Mahwah, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Pressley, M. (2002). Metacognition and self-regulated comprehension. In A. Farstrup & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (pp. 291–309). Newark, DE, USA: International Reading Association. Retrieved from https://www.oelp.org/reports/metacognition-and-self-regulated-comprehension-pressley/

Salmerón, L., & García, V. (2011). Reading skills and children’s navigation strategies in hypertext. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1143–1151. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.12.008

Salmerón, L., Cañas, J. J., Kintsch, W., & Fajardo, I. (2005). Reading strategies and hypertext comprehension. Discourse Processes, 40(3), 171–191. doi: 10.1207/s15326950dp4003_1

Sönmez, Y., & Erkam Sulak, S. (2018). The effect of the thinking-aloud strategy on the reading comprehension skills of 4th grade primary school students. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 6(1), 168–172. doi: 10.13189/ujer.2018.060116

Terry, J. (2018). The rise and fall (?) of the digital natives. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(5), 99-119. doi: 10.14742/ajet.3821

White, A. (2016). Using digital Think Alouds to build comprehension of online informational texts. The Reading Teacher, 69(4), 421–425. doi: 10.1002/trtr.1438

Zhang, M. (2013). Supporting middle school students’ online reading of scientific resources: moving beyond cursory, fragmented, and opportunistic reading. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(2), 138–152. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00478.x