DEVELOPMENT OF THE ONLINE RESEARCH AND READING COMPREHENSION SKILLS SCALE FOR MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS

Year 2020, Volume: 9 Issue: 2, 288 - 301, 31.12.2020

Musa Çifci Süleyman Ünlü

Abstract

Nowadays, online research and reading comprehension skills are among the prominent concepts. It is not possible to deny the effects of the internet on students' daily and academic lives. In the study, a scale was developed to be used in order to reveal the level of internet use of middle school students in their research processes and to determine the level of online research and reading comprehension skills. In the development of the scale, the relevant literature and curriculum were examined, the findings obtained from the interviews and observations with the students were used, and the opinions of the field experts were taken. As a result of all these operations, an item pool and a draft scale form were created for the instrument. The prepared form was applied to middle school students and explanatory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted on the obtained data. As a result of the analyses, it was seen that the scale contains 30 items and the items of the scale were collected in five factors. It is thought that the instrument developed to determine the online research and reading comprehension skills levels of students has the potential to contribute to the related literature.

Keywords

Online research, reading comprehension, internet searching, middle school students.

References

• Afflerbach, P. (Ed.). (2015). Handbook of individual differences in reading: Reader, text, and context. Routledge.
• Altay, I. F., & Altay, A. (2017). The impact of online reading tasks and reading strategies on EFL learners' reading test scores. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13(2), 136-152.
• Askar, P., & Mazman, S. G. (2013). Adaptation of online information searching strategy inventory into Turkish. Education and Science, 38(168), 167-182
• Aydemir, Z., Sakız, G., & Doğan, M. C. (2019). İlkokul düzeyinde dijital okuryazarlık becerileri rubriğinin geliştirilmesi [Development of digital literacy skills rubric at primary school level]. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 48(1), 617-638.
• Bastug, M. (2015). Scale development study for prospective teachers of online reading strategies. The Anthropologist, 19(1), 101-109.
• Bråten, I., Britt, M. A., Strømsø, H. I., & Rouet, J. F. (2011). The role of epistemic beliefs in the comprehension of multiple expository texts: Toward an integrated model. Educational Psychologist, 46(1), 48-70.
• Cho, B. Y., & Afflerbach, P. (2015). Reading on the Internet: Realizing and constructing potential texts. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 58(6), 504-517.
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Mah-wah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Coiro, J. (2005). Making sense of the online text. Educational Leadership, 63(2), 30–35.
• Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 214–57.
• Coıro, J., & Putman, M. (2016). Teaching students to self-regulate during online inquiry. What's New in Literacy Teaching?: Weaving Together Time-Honored Practices with New Research.
• Coiro, J., & Kennedy, C. (2011). The online reading comprehension assessment (ORCA) project: Preparing students for common core standards and 21st century literacies. Geraadpleegd via http://coirorisenate2013. wikispaces. com/file/view/CCSS+ ORCA+ Alignment+ June.
• Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C., & Leu, D. J. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of research on new literacies. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• DeSchryver, M. D., & Yadav, A. (2015). Creative and computational thinking in the context of new literacies: Working with teachers to scaffold complex technology-mediated approaches to teaching and learning. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 23(3), 411-431.
• Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2008). Digital media and youth: Unparalleled opportunity and unprecedented responsibility (pp. 5-27). MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Initiative.
• Gambrell, L. B., Palmer, B. M., Codling, R. M., & Mazzoni, S. A. (1996). Assessing motivation to read. The Reading Teacher, 49, 518-533.
• Geçer, A., & İra, N. (2014). Web Ortamında Bilgi Arama ve Yorumlama Stratejileri Ölçeği’nin Türkçeye Uyarlanması [Adapting the scale for information searching and commitments strategies on the web into Turkish]. Buca Faculty of Education Journal, 38, 134-147.
• Goldman, S. R., Lawless, K., & Manning, F. (2012). Research and development of multiple source comprehension assessment. In Reading-from words to multiple texts (pp. 194-213). Routledge.
• Greene, J. A., Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2011). Self-regulation of learning with computer-based learning environments. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 126, 107-115. DOI: 10.1002/tl.449
• Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Response to comments: Research on learning and teaching with Web 2.0: Bridging conversations. Educational Researcher, 38(4), 280-283.
• Henkoğlu, H. Ş., Keser, H., & Mahiroğlu, A. (2017). Ortaokul Öğrencilerinin İnternette Bilgi Arama Stratejileri Ölçeği: Bir Ölçek Geliştirme Çalışması [A scale development study: the scale of middle school students’ information search strategies on the İnternet]. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 46(215), 145-166.
• Kiili, C., Coiro, J., & Hämäläinen, J. (2016). An online inquiry tool to support the exploration of controversial issues on the Internet. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 17(1-2), 31-52
• Kiili, C., Leu, D. J., Utriainen, J., Coiro, J., Kanniainen, L., Tolvanen, A., & Leppänen, P. H. (2018). Reading to learn from online information: Modeling the factor structure. Journal of Literacy Research, 50(3), 304-334.
• Kurudayıoğlu, M., & Tüzel, S. (2010). 21. yüzyıl okuryazarlık türleri, değişen metin algısı ve Türkçe eğitimi [The Types of Literacy of the 21st Century, Changing Text Comprehension and Turkish Teaching]. Journal of Turkology Research, 28, 283-298.
• Lawless, K.A., & Schrader, P. G. (2008). Where do we go now? Understanding research on navigation in complex digital environments. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 267-296). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Leu, D. J., Forzani, E., Burlingame, C., Kulikowich, J., Sedransk, N., Coiro, J., & Kennedy, C. (2013). The new literacies of online research and comprehension: Assessing and preparing students for the 21st century with Common Core State Standards. Quality reading instruction in the age of Common Core Standards, 219-236.
• Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J., Castek, J., & Henry, L. A. (2013). New literacies: A dual-level theory of the changing nature of literacy, instruction, and assessment. In D. Alvermann, N. J. Unrau, & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (6th ed., pp. 1150–1182). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
• Leu, D. J., McVerry, J. G., O’Byrne, W. I., Kiili, C., Zawilinski, L., Everett-Cacopardo, H., & Forzani, E. (2011). The new literacies of online reading comprehension: Expanding the literacy and learning curriculum. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 55(1), 5–14.
• Leu, D. J., Zawilinski, L., Forzani, E., & Timbrell, N. (2014). Best practices in teaching the new literacies of online research and comprehension. In L.B. Gambrell & L.M. Morrow (Ed.), Best practices in literacy instruction (5th ed., pp. 343–364). New York: Guilford.
• Lewis, C., & Fabos, B. (2005). Instant messaging, literacies, and social identities. Reading Research Quarterly, 40(4), 470-501.
• Li, J. (2020). Development and validation of second language online reading strategies inventory. Computers& Education, 145, 103733, 2-13.
• Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2008). Monitoring, planning, and self-efficacy during learning with hypermedia: The impact of conceptual scaffolds. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 1686–1706.
• Putman, S. M. (2014). Exploring dispositions toward online reading: Analyzing the survey of online reading attitudes and behaviors. Reading Psychology, 35(1), 1-31.
• Rouet, J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to web-based learning. Psychology Press.
• Seçer, İ. (2015). Psikolojik test geliştirme ve uyarlama süreci: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları [Psychological test development and adaptation process: SPSS and LISREL applications]. Ankara: Anı Publishing
• Spivey, N. N., & King, J. R. (1989). Readers as writers composing from sources. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(1), 7-26.
• Strømsø, H. I., Bråten, I., & Britt, M. A. (2010). Reading multiple texts about climate change: The relationship between memory for sources and text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 20(3), 192-204.
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). New York, NY: Harper Collins.
• Ulusoy, M., & Dedeoğlu, H. (2015). Öğretmen Adaylarının E-Okuma-Anlama Uygulamaları ve Gelecekteki Sınıfları ile ilgili Algıları [Pre-service teachers' online reading comprehension practices and beliefs about their future classrooms]. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 30(4), 67-79
• Wiley, J., Goldman, S. R., Graesser, A. C., Sanchez, C. A., Ash, I. K., & Hemmerich, J. A. (2009). Source evaluation, comprehension, and learning in Internet science inquiry tasks. American Educational Research Journal, 46(4), 1060-1106.
• Yamaç, A. (2018). Yeni okuryazarlığa genel bir bakış: Karar alıcılar, araştırmacılar ve öğretmenler için bazı öneriler [An overview of new literacy: Some recommendations for policy makers, researchers, and teachers]. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 11(3), 383-410
• Zawilinski, L., Carter, A., O’Byrne, I., McVerry, G., Nierlich, T., & Leu, D. J. (2007, November). “Toward a taxonomy of online reading comprehension strategies.” In 57rd Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference (Austin, TX).
• Zhang, S., & Duke, N. K. (2008). Strategies for Internet reading with different reading purposes: a descriptive study of twelve good Internet readers. Journal of Literacy Research, 40,128 162. doi:10.1080/10862960802070491