October 2011 Volume 14 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

etween reading conditions and the reading sequence. However, the authors wanted to examine the main effect of the reading conditions only if the interaction effect was not significant, because the main effect of the reading sequence was not the focus of this experiment. The dependent variable was the score on the reading comprehension test. In addition, the authors controlled the impact of experiment material on reading comprehension. As mentioned, the six articles were developed systematically to make them similar; however, they were of different content. The authors intended for each article to be read in both reading conditions to reduce the impact of experiment material. First, three pairs of the material were randomly assigned to three experiment sessions. The participants were randomly grouped into two groups. In each experiment session, first, the participants of Group One read an article without cognitive supports and those in Group Two first read the same article with cognitive supports. Then Group One read the article with multiple representations while the Group Two read the article without multiple representations. Thus, each article was read in “cognitive supports” and “text” mode randomly. Apparatus and setting. This experiment used a laptop with a 15-inch monitor and an optical mouse to interact with the system. Chinese Character MP3 v2.0 (http://www.iqchinese.com), a text-to-speech software, was also installed. The participant was equipped with a headphone to enable participants to listen to the article. Due to various school locations and class schedules of the participants, the experiment was conducted individually. Students read the articles and took the tests on the TriAccess system in a quiet room in their own schools. Experiment procedure. The authors interviewed each participant before the experiment to gather demographic information and computer experience. The second author then read the purpose of the experiment to the participant, and demonstrated how to interact with the TriAccess system. The participants practised using the system to become familiar with the reading environment. In the training sessions, the second author also helped each participant set up his/her favorite reading environment, including font size, character spacing, row spacing, and speed of reading by the text-to-speech program. These setting parameters were stored, and they served as the individual reading profile for the following experiment, for both reading conditions. Each participant needed to pass a prerequisite computer skills test in this session. Twenty nine participants passed the first time and one passed the second time. There were three sessions in the formal experiment period. Each participant needed to read the above-mentioned six articles, three without cognitive supports and three with cognitive supports, without instruction. In a session, the participants were required to read one article with cognitive supports and the other one without cognitive supports in random sequence. When they read the text with cognitive supports, they were encouraged to use all the supports they liked and could operate the specific support as many times as they needed. Participants were also encouraged to read the article aloud when they read it without cognitive support. There was no time limit for reading the article in both reading conditions. Participants were required to take the test in which questions would be read aloud by the text-tospeech program on the TriAccess system. Their response to each question was recorded by the system. A threeminute break was given between two reading conditions. Data analysis. SPSS 12.0 for Windows was used to analyze the data. A two-way repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted to analyze the interaction of reading conditions and reading sequence on reading comprehension. The main effect of the reading conditions was examined when the interaction of reading conditions and reading sequence on reading comprehension was not significant. The main effect of reading sequence was not examined, because the effect combined the scores from two reading conditions. Results The mean of test scores and standard deviations of the reading comprehension tests appear in Table 2. For these 30 participants, there was no interaction effect (F = 0.08, p = .93) on comprehension test scores. The main effect of reading conditions (F = 92.18, df = 29, p = .00) was significant. The mean of the two reading conditions demonstrated that the participants performed better when reading with cognitive supports (M = 6.15, SD = 1.13 for cognitive-support mode; M = 4.30, SD = 1.20 for non-cognitive-support mode). The practice significance was also huge (η 2 = .76). Therefore, the main effect of reading supports was confirmed. 95
Table 2. Descriptive statistics for two reading conditions Reading sequence Reading conditions With cognitive supports Without cognitive supports Mean SD Mean SD First session 6.03 1.88 4.10 1.76 Second session 6.60 1.59 4.87 1.93 Third session 5.77 1.61 3.93 1.76 Discussion and conclusions Based on the principle of multi-representations, this paper developed an individualized and convenient e-reading system for Mandarin students with special learning needs and for curriculum professionals and teachers. The authors also examined the effectiveness of the TriAccess system on reading comprehension and explored the users’ subjective perception of interacting with the TriAccess system. In a web-based learning environment, the TriAcess system provides learners with individualized physical, sensory, and/or cognitive supports adapted to their needs. It also promises convenient and simple interfaces for material developers to prepare learning content and for the instructors to set up an individualized reading environment for their own students. The usability evaluation indicated all three interfaces were easy to use. In particular, the efficiency of the system gained the highest score. It reflected that the evaluators agreed that the TriAccess system could increase efficiency for all groups. Effectiveness-wise, this experiment result indicated better reading performance when the students employed cognitive supports. Furthermore, this paper illustrated the effects of the cognitive supports instead of the effects of using TriAccess system on displaying digital material. In both reading conditions, the articles were displayed based on the participants’ specific preferences of font size, color, and row space of the text with TriAccess system. The results demonstrated the real effectiveness of cognitive supports. However, though the study observed that the use of cognitive supports varied among participants, it didn’t explore the effect of specific cognitive supports on specific individuals. Future study should further examine this aspect. The participants’ subjective attitudes also revealed a preference for the TriAccess system. Participants regarded it as a user-friendly, supportive, and interesting reading environment compared to traditional textbooks. It was observed that the TriAccess system seemed to motivate them better and, as they became more actively engaged in the learning activities, they gained better reading comprehension. However, the affective issue was not explored in this study. In conclusion, although the result of this experiment discloses greater reading comprehension when the participants read with the supportive multiple representations, some related questions have not yet been investigated. Future studies should continue exploring the issues that have not been addressed in this paper. First, which supports will benefit the particular reader with specific disabilities needs to be explored. Teachers would like to know what specific kinds of supports might be useful for readers with certain limitations so that they can help their students to select supports accordingly. Likewise, this knowledge will help learners with disabilities identify appropriate or preferred supports and environments with less trial and error. Second, the affective issue in reading activities should be investigated. The reasons behind their high motivation in using e-reading systems were not explored. Future study should investigate whether the reading media, selecting supports autonomously, or providing specific supports improve individuals’ motivation in reading activities. Third, the effect of integrating the teaching reading strategy with e-reading systems on reading comprehension merits further exploration. Though this paper demonstrated the effectiveness of the cognitive supports on reading comprehension, the mean score of students with disabilities on the comprehension tests was 6.15, which was not as high as the scores of the students without disabilities. The result revealed that the participants with learning disabilities still could not learn effectively by themselves through reading with cognitive supports. These learners usually lack useful reading comprehension strategies. They can’t organize what they read, even though the system provides bottom-up and top-down assistance. Thus, some instruction in reading strategies may be necessary to help these students with their organization ability. For example, students may need to learn to read the concept map or to 96
Page 1 and 2:
October 2011 Volume 14 Number 4
Page 3 and 4:
Supporting Organizations Centre for
Page 5 and 6:
Time-Quality Tradeoff of Waiting St
Page 7 and 8:
Ibáñez, M. B., García, J. J., Ga
Page 9 and 10:
Situated learning. It states that k
Page 11 and 12:
executed in the client, the server
Page 13 and 14:
The participants were twelve non-na
Page 15 and 16:
Huang, H. M., Rauch, U., & Liaw, S.
Page 17 and 18:
Theoretical background Feedback, is
Page 19 and 20:
There are already a number of tools
Page 21 and 22:
output used were blogs, written by
Page 23 and 24:
Question Table 2: Perceived Relevan
Page 25 and 26:
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Dev
Page 27 and 28:
detection, and analysis of affectiv
Page 29 and 30:
experience is a suitable method of
Page 31 and 32:
Collins, 1998). The appraisal theor
Page 33 and 34:
encompasses the finer shades of an
Page 35 and 36:
and can also track faces with glass
Page 37 and 38:
Acknowledgements This research was
Page 39 and 40:
Merill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Traft
Page 41 and 42:
to the above-discussed issues of th
Page 43 and 44:
The annotation part of the SDM onto
Page 45 and 46:
that enables the office users to ac
Page 47 and 48:
Figure 4. Semantic document browser
Page 49 and 50: to the group’s shared semantic do
Page 51 and 52: participants performed less mouse c
Page 53 and 54: Bastili, V.R., Gianluigi, C., & Rom
Page 55 and 56: esource contribution, enabling conv
Page 57 and 58: Semantic Search In contrast to the
Page 59 and 60: Participation: P i i i NiVadd Vde
Page 61 and 62: and comment on each page as well. T
Page 63 and 64: Table 1. Questionnaire results (N=2
Page 65 and 66: propose for him, as well as calenda
Page 67 and 68: Discussion and Conclusion Collabora
Page 69 and 70: Sampson, D. G., & Zervas, P. (2011)
Page 71 and 72: Obtaining: the first step of the li
Page 73 and 74: process (Palmer & Richardson, 2004)
Page 75 and 76: and ratings (the use of star rating
Page 77 and 78: (K1) is the number of non-reusable
Page 79 and 80: Case 3: The process of reusing a se
Page 81 and 82: Washizaki, H., Yamamoto, Y. & Fukaz
Page 83 and 84: to examine determinants for pre-ser
Page 85 and 86: Overview of the model The first res
Page 87 and 88: significance of relationships. All
Page 89 and 90: Discussion This study represents a
Page 91 and 92: Davis, F., Bagozzi, R., & Warshaw,
Page 93 and 94: Ko, C.-C., Chiang, C.-H., Lin, Y.-L
Page 95 and 96: Interestingly, the Universal Design
Page 97 and 98: Figure 1. Framework of the TriAcces
Page 99: Experiment This experiment aimed to
Page 103 and 104: Foulds, R., & Camacho, C. (2003). T
Page 105 and 106: answer. However, students can choos
Page 107 and 108: Hartley & Collins-Brown, 1999; Morl
Page 109 and 110: Subjects Figure 4. Partial misconce
Page 111 and 112: correct for a four-option MC item i
Page 113 and 114: from −3 to 3 for any four-option
Page 115 and 116: Kansup, W. (1973). A comparison of
Page 117 and 118: The theory of mental models explain
Page 119 and 120: computer-mediated counter-arguments
Page 121 and 122: Learning in this study refers to, w
Page 123 and 124: the experiment process was anonymou
Page 125 and 126: supported. However, significant dif
Page 127 and 128: Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Salas, E., &
Page 129 and 130: Lee, Y.-H., Hsieh, Y.-C., & Hsu, C.
Page 131 and 132: Many researchers have conducted emp
Page 133 and 134: Trialability Some studies have empi
Page 135 and 136: Results Instrument validation Two c
Page 137 and 138: In this study, Amos 6.0 was employe
Page 139 and 140: Our results strongly supported the
Page 141 and 142: Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981
Page 143 and 144: Kimmerle, J., Moskaliuk, J., & Cres
Page 145 and 146: What becomes clear from this short
Page 147 and 148: Figure 1. Distribution of informati
Page 149 and 150: Results In order to test the hypoth
Page 151 and 152:
esults of the present study with th
Page 153 and 154:
Kolbitsch, J., & Maurer, H. (2006).
Page 155 and 156:
A conceptual framework of this stud
Page 157 and 158:
eveal positive effects on students
Page 159 and 160:
learning resources; and able to acc
Page 161 and 162:
Discussion This study suggests that
Page 163 and 164:
146). Also, role of constructivist
Page 165 and 166:
eform strategy, namely, the MOE-Int
Page 167 and 168:
McNaughton, S. (2002). Meeting of m
Page 169 and 170:
Wu, T.-T., Sung, T.-W., Huang, Y.-M
Page 171 and 172:
Ubiquitous English-Reading Learning
Page 173 and 174:
include the number of times and ran
Page 175 and 176:
initial value for the predetermined
Page 177 and 178:
The following Eq. (18) expresses th
Page 179 and 180:
Limitations This experiment adopted
Page 181 and 182:
Table 3 shows the analysis of the p
Page 183 and 184:
enhance learning outcomes, it impor
Page 185 and 186:
Ogata, H., & Yano, Y. (2004a). Cont
Page 187 and 188:
Communication seems to be more effe
Page 189 and 190:
the audience only listened, one whe
Page 191 and 192:
Step 5) Writing the story On the ba
Page 193 and 194:
As indicated in Table 2, the differ
Page 195 and 196:
References Armstrong, S. (2003). Th
Page 197 and 198:
Goh, T.-T. (2011). Exploring Gender
Page 199 and 200:
OPAC has been transformed into AirP
Page 201 and 202:
Perceived Self-Efficacy Figure 3. H
Page 203 and 204:
were asked to rate their confidence
Page 205 and 206:
(2001). The correlation table begin
Page 207 and 208:
Discussion and Implications Note. S
Page 209 and 210:
will become important to identify i
Page 211 and 212:
Parker, A. (2007). SMS - Its use in
Page 213 and 214:
Find the perimeter of the rectangle
Page 215 and 216:
Wait Time Management Issues related
Page 217 and 218:
Precision Reduced_Precision ( T T0
Page 219 and 220:
learning concept. If the Specialty
Page 221 and 222:
Two criteria have been adopted to e
Page 223 and 224:
Reduced Recall 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04
Page 225 and 226:
In this work, both recall-oriented
Page 227 and 228:
Tsai, C.-C., Chuang, S.-C., Liang,
Page 229 and 230:
confidence and self-belief in their
Page 231 and 232:
Peng et al. (2006) To explore ISE &
Page 233 and 234:
Torkzadeh, Chang, and Demirhan (200
Page 235 and 236:
educational level, locus of control
Page 237 and 238:
Internet-based learning self-effica
Page 239 and 240:
Though Lee and Lee (2008) did not d
Page 241 and 242:
Regarding the category of ISE resea
Page 243 and 244:
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy:
Page 245 and 246:
Pintrich, P. R., & de Groot, E. V.
Page 247 and 248:
In formal learning, Safran, Helic,
Page 249 and 250:
that culture is essential when user
Page 251 and 252:
Table 3. Analysis of usage frequenc
Page 253 and 254:
7 1.16 137.73 0.25 0.29 0.25 Social
Page 255 and 256:
discussions freely. So Korean stude
Page 257 and 258:
Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R
Page 259 and 260:
Figure 1. The UE Faculty Web Portal
Page 261 and 262:
2006), and consistency (Sindhuja &
Page 263 and 264:
Independent Variables Dependent Var
Page 265 and 266:
Meanwhile, as shown in Table 4, Ava
Page 267 and 268:
design methods in the development o
Page 269 and 270:
Pearson, J. M., & Pearson, A. (2008
Page 271 and 272:
Clewley, N., Chen, S. Y., & Liu, X.
Page 273 and 274:
As shown in this Table, Holists wil
Page 275 and 276:
satisfaction or dissatisfaction wit
Page 277 and 278:
8 I would prefer to learn from huma
Page 279 and 280:
the examples need to be more practi
Page 281 and 282:
Brotherton, J. A,. & Abowd, G. D. (
Page 283 and 284:
Cobos, D. L. (2011). Book review: T
show all

October 2011 Volume 14 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?