Reading on the Internet

Abstract

Successful Internet reading requires making strategic decisions about what texts to read and a sequence for reading them, all in accordance with readers’ goals. In this paper, we describe the process of realizing and constructing potential texts as an important and critical part of successful Internet reading and use verbal report data to examine such strategic actions by readers in the complex environments of the Internet. We focus on Amalie (pseudonym), a participant in a study of adolescents’ Internet reading strategy use. Amalie's verbal reports describe representative cognitive and metacognitive processes that strategic high‐school readers use as they negotiate the Internet to locate, choose, and use multiple sources. We conclude with a consideration of classroom implications in the era of Common Core State Standards for helping students become accomplished Internet readers.

Literacy skills and online research and comprehension: struggling readers face difficulties online

“…However, students are still required to build an understanding of the given task (Britt, Rouet, & Durik, 2018) that helps students to locate relevant information to solve the problem. Locating information requires the ability to form adequate search queries for search engines (Cho & Afflerbach, 2015) and to analyze search engine results (Rouet, Ros, Goumi, Macedo-Rouet, & Dinet, 2011). Without these skills, students are unable to use online information efficiently for their learning (Leu, Forzani, Burlingame, Kulikowich, Sedransk, Coiro, & Kennedy, 2013a).…”

“…The fourth component skill-synthesizing information-refers to collecting ideas across resources and integrating these ideas into a versatile and coherent representation (Bråten, Britt, Strømsø, & Rouet, 2011;Cho & Afflerbach, 2017). A high quality synthesis also requires readers to compare and contrast information and different perspectives presented in multiple online resources (Cho & Afflerbach, 2015;Rouet, 2006). Finally, communicating information that one has learned requires good argumentation skills and the ability to address a specific audience.…”

“…We believe that struggling readers would benefit from instruction that is relevant to both traditional reading and ORC. Online readers need effective comprehension strategies that they can apply in the context of both single and multiple texts (Cho & Afflerbach, 2015;Britt et al, 2018). As comprehension of multiple online resources goes beyond comprehension of a single online resource, students need instruction on accessing, selecting, evaluating, and using online resources that vary in their perspectives, interpretations, and genres (Britt et al, 2018).…”

The Effects of Internet Reciprocal Teaching on EFL Students'''' New Literacies of Online Comprehension and Self-Efficacy

“…The final stage is the individual performance that contributes to the efforts of other peers to create collaborative projects (Palincsar & Brown, 1984). In addition, both models call for the use of metacognitive strategies and self-regulated reading strategies to search online texts (Coiro, et al, 2007;Cho & Afflerbach, 2015). While RT can be applied with small groups of students, IRT can be used with larger number of students.…”

How Good Is This Page? Benefits and Limits of Prompting on Adolescents’ Evaluation of Web Information Quality

“…Research has examined adolescents' evaluation behavior using methods ranging from surveys, interviews, or focus groups (e.g., Connaway, Dickey, & Radford, 2011;Flanagin & Metzger, 2010;Hargittai, 2010;Hargittai & Hinnant, 2008;Paul, Macedo-Rouet, Rouet, & Stadtler, 2017) to direct observation (e.g., Barzilai & Zohar, 2012;Brand-Gruwel, Wopereis, & Walraven, 2009;Cho, 2014;Cho & Afflerbach, 2015;Watson, 2014). Only a few experimental studies have precisely investigated how adolescents implement evaluation criteria after receiving prompts to do so (Coiro, Coscarelli, Maykel, & Forzani, 2015;Goldman, Braasch, Wiley, Graesser, & Brodowinska, 2012;Kammerer, Meier, & Stahl, 2016;Mason, Junyent, & Tornatora, 2014;Mason, Scrimin, Tornatora, Suitner, & Moè, 2018;Stadtler, & Bromme, 2007;Stanford History Education Group, 2016;Wiley et al, 2009).…”