Learning to Read in a Digital Age: Using E-Texts in the Academic Classroom Sara Nordstrand, in collaboration with Dr. Shireen Campbell and Emma Huelskoetter Davidson Research Initiative, Summer 2013 Background Research How do students’ note-taking strategies vary across print and electronic mediums? Studies of active reading have focused on a wide variety of texts, but not explicitly fiction. Background research included theoretical perspectives and limited professional studies on active reading practices. Theories of AR: AR includes manipulation, comprehension, and interpretation (Gervais 2007). The activities not only logically relate to each other, but also co-exist and overlap. Studies of AR: AR combines critical thinking and learning (Schilit 1998). Readers who annotate use these marks to organize their reading for later review/memorization and retrieval. AR questions new concepts, synthesizes findings, reworks ideas, and responds to authors (Nowak 2008). Studies of note-taking: Annotations are marks on (or attached to) reading matter, not collocated with the text to which they refer (Schilit 1998). Locations include: on the document content itself, in the margins, or on a separate medium (e.g. post-its, scrap paper) (Pearson, Buchanan, Thimbleby 2009). A sampling of literature professors at Davidson College define their expectations for AR and note-taking as: Engaging with the text via underlining, writing comments/questions in the margin, and never highlighting. Circling and defining unfamiliar words, using multiple colors to track themes, and linking form and content. Both theorists and professors agree that students need to mark up texts proactively as they read, but they share concern that students do not mark up digital texts. Project Background ENG 231 focuses on 19 th and 20 th Century fiction for and about adolescents and attracts students across all years and majors, making it a good site to study student note-taking practices. In spring 2013, 29 students read 12 young adult novels, 4 of which were in electronic form. Members were divided into 2 groups: the first group read the first 4 books of the semester in PDF form on an iPad using a note-taking application called iAnnotate PDF. The second group read 4 later books in e-book version on the iPad using the Kindle reading application. Sources of Information Information on students’ note-taking practices was collected in 3 ways: Preliminary anonymous survey about students’ reading and note-taking habits. Annotations from 5 novels: 4 electronic and 1 print Reflective posts about students’ reading attitudes and practices on the class page, Moodle, upon completion of each novel. Posts were hand-coded on a scale of 1 to 4, with 4 being a preference for iPads. Results Survey: Both in and outside of class, students initially preferred print annotation practices. Table 1- Student Survey Note-Taking Preferences Rubric for literary AR practices: Collected and analyzed anonymous student notes using a rubric based on Gervais’s definition of AR. Also, noted the total number of annotations per novel and marked the variety of tools used. In total, I analyzed 128 complete sets of notes. Analysis: Compared the ratio between students’ notes versus book length. Analyzed how the independent variables initial attitude, gender, and year in school impact the dependent variable, note taking practices. Students' notes decline when using iAnnotate, a robust note-taking application, but increase when using the simple E reader program. The ratio of notes to books increased over the four books in older students and female students. Posts: Counter to theorists’ and faculty expectations, students’ comments revealed that they annotate interesting and stimulating passages far more than track particular themes. Discussion Professors’ expectations of AR practices differ from students’ actual AR habits. While faculty may presume that students would favor iAnnotate due to its diverse capabilities, students preferred the Kindle reading application due to their preferences for preexisting habits Students are not fully digital natives in either reading or note taking practices. Most students underline in print, but highlight electronically. However, students may electronic highlighted passages for later use. Implications If faculty want students to apply more robust AR practices, they must foreground the advantages of using sophisticated electronic interfaces and rich note taking practices. If professors do not advocate, model, and reward students for implementing AR practices on programs such as iAnnotate, students will prefer the application that most closely mimics their note- taking practices in print. Medium# of Students Avg. Start Avg. Finish Avg. Change iAnnotate Kindle Table 3- Shifts in Attitude by Device Preferred Note- Taking Strategy In ClassOut of Class Computer/Tablet41 Highlighting/note-taking in book 220 In notebook194 Other: Sample Comments: 4 Audio recording 4 Hybrid Number of students per frequency Change in ratio of notes taken to book length across novels 1-4 Graph 1- Student Note-Taking Practices Over Time Table 2- P values for Ratio of Notes Taken to Book Length Across E Texts 1-4 Independent VariableP Value Initial Attitude0.356 Medium (iAnnotate PDF) 0.006*** Year in School 0.050** Gender 0.088* Constant0.340 *p<.10, **p<.05, ***p<.01