29
Dizon, Mayo, Mendoza, Muli, and Parra The Effects of Reading Mode and Reading Material Format on Comprehension and Recall

Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza, Muli , and Parra

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

The Effects of Reading Mode and Reading Material Format on Comprehension and Recall. Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza, Muli , and Parra. Definition of Terms. Reading – process of interpreting and understanding a written language Oral reading – reading a material aloud - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Dizon, Mayo, Mendoza, Muli, and Parra

The Effects of Reading Mode and Reading Material Format on Comprehension and Recall

Page 2: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Definition of Terms

•Reading – process of interpreting and understanding a written language

•Oral reading – reading a material aloud

•Silent reading – reading “in the head”

Page 3: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Definition of Terms

• Comprehension – process of understanding what was read

• Recall - process of remembering what was read

• Hard Copy – any printed reading material

• Electronic Copy – any reading material which can be read using a computer

Page 4: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Review of Related Literature

•No significant difference between oral reading and silent reading. (Bell et al., 2004; Fujinaga, 2010)

•Oral reading is better than silent reading. (Al-Abri, n.d.; Swalm, 1972; Elgart, 1978; Dizer et al., 2007)

Page 5: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Review of Related Literature

•Silent reading leads to greater comprehension and recall. (Armbruster & Wilkinson, 1991; Hopkins, 1997; Bell et al., 2004)

Page 6: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Review of Related Literature

•No significant difference between hard copy and electronic copy (Denton et al., 2005; Dungworth et al., 2007; Erickson et al., 2008; Dance et al., 2010)

Page 7: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Review of Related Literature

•Hard copy is better than electronic copy. (Ziefle, 1998; Garlandb & Noyesa, 2008)

•Electronic copy leads to greater comprehension and recall. (Moore & Zabrucky, 1995; Anderson-Inman & Horney, 1999)

Page 8: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Hypothesis

•Oral reading leads to greater performance on comprehension and recall.

•Hard copy results to better performance on comprehension and recall.

•Significantly greater performance would result from reading from hard copy orally.

Page 9: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Methodology: Design

•2 x 2 (reading mode x reading material format) mixed factorial design

•IVs: Reading mode (oral, silent)Reading material format(hard copy, electronic copy)•DVs: Comprehension, Recall

Page 10: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Methodology: Participants

•40 undergraduate students of FEU

•15 to 20 years old•Convenience (FM09203, MC0922, AT09116, & MC0929)

•Purposive (Scored 17 and below in the English proficiency test)

Page 11: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Methodology: Participants

•Simple random (10 from each block)

•Simple random (2 blocks in oral reading, 2 blocks in silent reading)

•All participants in hard copy and electronic copy group

Page 12: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Methodology: Materials

•25-item English proficiency test for sampling (www.transparent.com)

•2 English passages from Rinsky and Wassman’s Effective Reading In A Changing World (3rd ed.)

Page 13: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Methodology: Materials

•Hard copy: “Double Talk” by William Lutz; 707-word passage single-spaced point 12 black Times New Roman on a white short bond paper with 1” x 1” margins on all sides

Page 14: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Methodology: Materials

•Electronic copy: “No Ordinary Nut” by William Lutz; single-spaced point 12 black Times New Roman on white paper with 1” x 1” margins; read using the Adobe Acrobat Reader from a 14” or 14.1” laptop

Page 15: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Methodology: Materials

•15-item questionnaire after each passage (items on comprehension and recall from the passages)

•Comprehension: Multiple choice•Recall: Identification

Page 16: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Methodology: Procedures

•“Start reading.”•5 minutes reading time•“Stop reading.”

•“Start answering.”•5 minute-test•“Stop answering.”

Page 17: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Methodology: Procedures

•Part 1: 5 in hard copy, 5 in electronic copy

•Part 2: 5 in electronic copy, 5 in hard copy

Page 18: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Methodology: Data Analysis

•Mixed Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)

Page 19: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Results: Descriptives

Comprehension Recall

M SD M SD

Oral Reading 6.95 1.88 4.40 2.64

Hard Copy 3.90 1.33 2.25 1.74

Electronic Copy 3.05 1.19 2.15 1.57

Silent Reading 6.30 2.27 4.25 2.90

Hard Copy 2.85 1.31 2.35 1.87

Electronic Copy 3.45 1.57 1.90 1.97

Page 20: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Results: Inferentials

df F p

Comprehension

Reading Mode 1 0.972 0.33

Reading Material Format 1 0.206 0.653

Reading Mode * Reading Material Format 38 6.926 0.012

39

Recall

Reading Mode 1 0.029 0.865

Reading Material Format 1 0.584 0.449

Reading Mode * Reading Material Format 38 0.237 0.629

39

Page 21: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Results

• No significant main effects of reading mode on comprehension and recall

• No significant main effects of reading material format on comprehension and recall

Page 22: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Results

• No significant main effects of reading mode and reading material format on recall

• Significant interaction effects of reading mode and reading material format on comprehension

Page 23: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Discussion

• Reading either orally or silently leads to more or less the same comprehension and recall performance.

• Reading material format did not increase the performance of the students both in comprehension and recall.

Page 24: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Discussion

• Reading from either hard or electronic copy either in oral and silent mode does not necessarily improve performance on recall.

• Comprehension is significantly affected by which reading material format is read in which reading mode

Page 25: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Discussion

• Reading a material orally from a hard copy would result to significantly greater comprehension than reading orally from an electronic copy, silently from a hard copy and silently from an electronic copy.

Page 26: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Discussion: Limitations

• Control of the reading mode used

• Too small sample size• Inconsistencies in laptops• Testing condition• Attention of participants• Participants not poor readers

Page 27: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Conclusion

• Reading mode does not affect performance on comprehension and recall. Reading format does not affect performance on comprehension on recall. People may have their own preferences when it comes to how they read and from what they read. Essentially, however, there is no difference between these preferences.

Page 28: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Recommendations

• Increase sample size• Individual supervision to

participants• Young and poor readers as

participants

Page 29: Dizon , Mayo, Mendoza,  Muli , and Parra

Recommendations

• Educators need not focus on only one mode of reading in class.

• Try using both electronic copy and hard copy in classroom instructions.