Search

The introduction and wide use of devices, especially mobile ones, has changed the way learners read and do research for a variety of reasons, and this trend has attracted a number of studies conducted regarding reading on screen and on paper in addition to those dealing with the students’ behavior in using online resources to print ones. This paper aims at identifying the major findings and trends in reading research by describing the current state of knowledge and practice in the studies comparing reading on screen and on paper and to provide guidance for practitioners by analyzing and summarizing the existing research. The current review adopted a systematic review as the research methodology as well as the article selection and screening process. The articles published between 2009 and 2017 were reviewed, and 37 articles were included in the analysis. The review revealed that the research on onscreen and paper-based reading focused on comparing the learners’ performances in reading activities in both contexts and sharing preliminary findings and students’ views. However, the findings are inconclusive as mixed findings were produced as to the effects of reading on screen and on paper. Moreover, the review also indicates that practitioners are also interested in examining the factors and affordances in reading on screen. As a result, there is still further research needed to establish the factors affecting reading and comprehension while reading on screen and on paper.

The bodily aspects of reading/writing practices are investigated in Finland.The paper is considered more adaptive to varied reading purposes than the screen.Handwriting is described as a more flexible and relaxed practice than typing.Skills determine less than materials and images the practices of reading/writing.Digital interfaces determine the ways we read and write less than suggested. This article investigates the different shapes in which reading and writing practices occur when paper/pen are compared with keyboard/screen. The focus is on the bodily aspects of these practices. Reading and writing are viewed as techniques of the body, which over the years have become increasingly mediated by technologies. The analysis is grounded in the theory of social practice. Research material consists of written essays collected from 25 students at the University of Jyvaskyla, Finland, in 2013. Results show that paper as material is considered suitable and adaptive to numerous reading purposes and bodily positions, while regarding the screen the places and positions of reading are viewed as more limited due to the material boundary conditions presented by devices. Students describe handwriting as a more flexible and relaxed bodily practice than typing, although the worsening skills of handwriting are recognized too. Skills and competences turned out to be less decisive factors than materials and images when trying to explain the differences in reading and writing practices when a paper/pen is compared with a keyboard/screen. Finally, the study argues that digital reading writing interfaces do not determine the ways we read and write as strongly as previously suggested.

Due to recent technological progress, maps have become more popular than ever before. This is especially true for young people, who interact with these technologies on a daily basis. Therefore, it is essential that these potential map users possess sufficient knowledge and skills to process the content of cartographic products. A user study was conducted during which pupils (aged 11-18years) and geography students (>18years) had to solve a number of cartography questions using topographic maps. The data were analyzed statistically, taking into account a number of potentially influencing factors (user characteristics) on the participants' results: age, gender, youth club membership, knowledge about the area, among others. The results show a rising trend in the pupils' scores with increasing age, which can be explained by education in cartography at school. Geography students perform much better, but no influence of any other user characteristics was detected. For pupils, knowledge about the area and gender might be considered as influencing factors. However, the detected influence of gender depends on the scoring system.

Bu çalışmanın amacı, GeoGebra ve Kağıt-Kalem gruplarında geometri soruları çözen ortaokul matematik öğretmen adaylarının argümantasyon yapılarının doğasını incelemektir. Bu çalışmada nitel durum çalışması deseni kullanılmış ve veriler 2013-2014 akademik yılının sonbahar döneminde 16 ortaokul matematik öğretmen adayından toplanmıştır. Veri kaynaklarını uygulamaların video kayıtları, odak grup görüşmeleri ve belgeler oluşturmaktadır.Bulgularda beş çeşit global argümantasyon yapısı ortaya çıkmıştır. Bunların ikisi Çizgi/Hat yapı ve Bağımsız-Argümanlar yapısı bu çalışmada ortaya çıkmıştır. Ayrıca katılımcılar 9 çeşit lokal argüman yapılarından üçünü çok sık kullanmayı tercih etmişlerdir. Son olarak, katılımcıların gerekçelendirmelerine odaklanarak lokal argümantasyonları incelenmiştir. Bu analiz, ortaokul matematik öğretmen adaylarının GeoGebra ve Kağıt-Kalem gruplarında geometri soruları çözerken kullandıkları lokal argümantasyonların niteliğini ortaya çıkarmıştır. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the nature of argumentation structures of prospective middle school mathematics teachers while solving geometry tasks within the GeoGebra and Paper-Pencil groups. The study employed qualitative case study design and the data of which were collected from 16 prospective middle school mathematics teachers during the fall semester of the 2013-2014 academic year. Data were based on the video recordings of the implementations, the focus group interviews and documents.The findings revealed five types of global argumentation structures, two of which emerged from the present study: Line-structure and Independent-Arguments structure. In addition, the participants employed 9 types of local arguments while three of them were most frequently preferred. Finally, the local argumentations were examined by focusing on the justifications of the participants. This analysis revealed the characteristics of the local argumentations that prospective middle school mathematics teachers use while solving geometry tasks in GeoGebra and Paper-Pencil groups. 318

CONSTRUCT: In this study, we examine the differences in test performance between the paper-based and the computer-based version of the Berlin formative Progress Test. In this context it is the first study that allows controlling for students' prior performance.Computer-based tests make possible a more efficient examination procedure for test administration and review. Although university staff will benefit largely from computer-based tests, the question arises if computer-based tests influence students' test performance.A total of 266 German students from the 9th and 10th semester of medicine (comparable with the 4th-year North American medical school schedule) participated in the study (paper = 132, computer = 134). The allocation of the test format was conducted as a randomized matched-pair design in which students were first sorted according to their prior test results. The organizational procedure, the examination conditions, the room, and seating arrangements, as well as the order of questions and answers, were identical in both groups.The sociodemographic variables and pretest scores of both groups were comparable. The test results from the paper and computer versions did not differ. The groups remained within the allotted time, but students using the computer version (particularly the high performers) needed significantly less time to complete the test. In addition, we found significant differences in guessing behavior. Low performers using the computer version guess significantly more than low-performing students in the paper-pencil version.Participants in computer-based tests are not at a disadvantage in terms of their test results. The computer-based test required less processing time. The reason for the longer processing time when using the paper-pencil version might be due to the time needed to write the answer down, controlling for transferring the answer correctly. It is still not known why students using the computer version (particularly low-performing students) guess at a higher rate. Further studies are necessary to understand this finding.

This qualitative study explored characteristics of a record-keeping log that students would find appealing and be receptive to using. A heterogeneous sample of undergraduate university students aged 18 to 25 years participated. An experienced moderator, using a semistructured interview guide, conducted 13 focus groups (N = 65). All focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Inductive content analysis was conducted independently by two qualitative researchers. Measures were incorporated throughout the study to ensure data trustworthiness. Four themes illustrated students' suggestions for the log: layout, convenience, maximum distribution, and concerns. In particular, students discussed the use of a computer-based versus a paper-based log, hesitancies in using a log, and the need for: additional health information, multivenue distribution, and low to no cost. Students confirmed that a record-keeping log tailored to their needs and preferences would be attractive and appealing to students.