Return-Path: <nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id h4F3J6C06014; Wed, 14 May 2003 23:19:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 23:19:06 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <046b01c31a7b$6c974b60$9865fea9@TommyCompaq> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Tommy B. McDonell" <tommy.mcdonell@nyu.edu> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-TECHNOLOGY:2853] Re: unweaving print vs. web text X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; Status: O Content-Length: 6973 Lines: 182 I'm brain dead and I have now read the article twice but can't remember what age group you are talking about. I've pasted below info from my dissertation proposal. And will paste in the reference. I have other references about Internet and reading on the web. I'm sure you've read Reinking. (NIFL had him last year I think). The problem is that most of the studies are either qualitative (and not very good qualitative) or they are done with graduate students which are hardly, for the most part, low level. My study will be done with ESL (Gen 1.5), EFL (International) and US students. (80-100 college students). But I'm looking more at recall. Here is a brief bit of info from my proposal. If I can, I'll find more next week after Tuesday: The few studies that are useful to my work involve school children not college students. Horney and Anderson-Inman (1998) studied school children who found it easier to read on the Internet. Gillingham's (Gillingham, 1993) research showed just the opposite that hypertext slowed down searching for an answer. Kamil argues there are three separate situations in which hypertext may be seen: the literary version of hypertext where the reader tries to create his or her own unique material; hypertext which allows one to add information by providing readers the opportunity to explore the material in greater depth; and the hypertext which permits students to study. There is only a small body of research on hypertext and hypermedia and very few of the empirical studies which discuss "the cognitive consequences of reading this type of nontraditional text" (p. 773). Tommy B. McDonell Adjunct Instructor, Marymount Manhattan College Doctoral Candidate in TESOL-NYU tommy.mcdonell@nyu.edu 212-414-8513 home before 10PM 212-414-1293 fax ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christina Zarcadoolas" <Christina_Zarcadoolas@brown.edu> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <nifl-technology@literacy.nifl.gov> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 8:33 PM Subject: [NIFL-TECHNOLOGY:2852] Re: unweaving print vs. web text > At 06:00 PM 5/13/03 -0400, you wrote: > > > Fran, > I guess, without sounding overly dramatic, I'd say no - we don't have a > good sense of what makes websites readable based on what we know about > print texts. > Jacob Nielson, Spool and others have very good insights as to what makes a > website "good." However, I don't believe that this is the same thing as > what makes it readable/decodable. What we suggest in the article is that > these principles have yet to be ground truthed with low literate readers. > > To your point about what gets read, links, text, etc. You raise a question > I think about a lot - since we know individual readers use any number of > different strategies, one reader foregrounding something another reader > backgrounds until later, how do we design web information to account for > these inevitable and powerful differences in reading strategies and skills. > > Here's a mundane example: > I can read a sentence, > " Jane came to school as usual today." > If I'm an anticipatory reader, or if I'm a reader that relies lots > on schemas, then I might infer that Jane is a student. If I'm not > using the sentence as an advance organizer. Then Jane is Jane....until I read > "When she arrived the principal asked her to teach an > extra class." > > The same would be true for sentences like: > The king died. The queen died. > vs. > The king died and the queen died of grief. > > Or Chomsky's classic example, "Flying planes can be dangerous." > > I'd like to know if people know of research ( or are doing research) that > looks at what multiple ways can a web page or site be read and what types > of redundancy we should build into sites for low lit readers that will > improve their chances for getting to meaning? > > Thanks, > chris > > > > > > >Chris, are you saying we know how to make printed text simpler but don't > >have a clue yet with text on the Web? > > > >As for reading by following links, we found from interviews that > >learners with some Internet familiarity seemed to view links as optional > >information (the dominant Internet convention I think) and chose not to > >follow them. We hadn't anticipated this and had put some essential > >information in the linked text. We now have developed a very overt (and > >perhaps bossy) "Read Now" button link when we have a link to essential > >information on another page. (That seems to be working) > > > >Of course it's a very different thing to be building an online > >environment for adult learners and to be building activities or > >instruction around what's already there. > > > > > >Fran Keenan > >PBS Adult Learning Service > >fkeenan@pbs.org > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Christina Zarcadoolas [mailto:Christina_Zarcadoolas@brown.edu] > >Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 9:30 AM > >To: Multiple recipients of list > > > > Both NALS > >and the clear language movement have been important in putting literacy > >on > >the radar screen in some spheres. But the by-catch, if you will, has > >been > >a tenacious movement to simplify vocabulary and sentence structure. So > >we > >talk about easy to read materials highlighting these aspects of the > >content/message. And then we test these materials, and lo and behold, > >our > >patient focus group or cognitive testing participants demonstrate that, > >indeed, they can read the revised material with more comprehension. But > >then along comes this wonderful format - hypertext) that in some ways, > >more > >accurately mimics what real people do in real reading settings. They > >jump > >forward and loop back; they scan; they read on until things make sense. > >( > >Long established as fluent reading strategies among reading educators in > > > >the 60s and 70s. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >__________________________________________________________________ > > > >Give them words to grow by. > >Share a story with a child in your life today. > >pbskids.org/shareastory > >_________________________________________________________________ > > > >_________________________________________________________________ > > > >This email may contain material that is confidential or proprietary to PBS > >and is intended solely for use by the intended recipient. Any review, > >reliance or distribution of such material by others, or forwarding of such > >material without express permission, is strictly prohibited. If you are > >not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and destroy all copies. > >__________________________________________________________________ > > Christina Zarcadoolas PhD > Center for Environmental Studies > Director, Environmental Literacy Initiative > Brown University > Box 1943 > Providence, RI 02912 > 401-863-7347 > caz@brown.edu > www.envstudies.brown.edu > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 11 2004 - 12:17:31 EST