CRITICAL READING STRATEGIES FOR DIGITAL TEXT 1

Morphing Critical Reading Strategies to Analyze Digital Text and Media for Student

Comprehension

A Review of the Literature

By

Ashli McDonald

Lamar University

02/21/24
CRITICAL READING STRATEGIES FOR DIGITAL TEXT 2

Morphing Critical Reading Strategies to Analyze Digital Text and Media for Student

Comprehension

Literacy and its issues continue to be a necessity for educational success. With the

development of online platforms, the textual world continues to migrate more towards digital

formats. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, students would occasionally be required to access

digital materials that were posted online or were asked to analyze pictures or graphics in order to

synthesize information using different media types. As a result of recommendations for social

distancing during the pandemic, the educational system had to transition to fully online while

navigating this unprecedented event. Educators and students now had to make a pivot.

Now, materials are provided predominantly online with the expectation for students to

read and master materials and skills using this new digital format. Children who are in the

foundational stages of learning to read were forced to shift their literacy development from print

materials to using online tools and navigating digital spaces. Students who were honing their

literacy skills to analyze text are currently matriculating into secondary and post-secondary

schools. These essential landmarks in the educational development of literacy and reading

comprehension were stunted. As a result, educators are now tasked with the need to identify the

gaps created in literacy development and create a plan on how to jumpstart the academic

progress and recovery of students’ comprehension. Meanwhile, academic materials and even

standardized testing continue to be converted to digital formats at an increasing rate.

Districts are changing to online textbooks to decrease the maintenance and replacement

costs of printed editions. They have invested in digital platforms such as Schoology, Canvas, and

the HUB for the housing of instructional materials both for teacher and student access. The state

of Texas has shifted the state-required standardized test, the State of Texas Assessments of
CRITICAL READING STRATEGIES FOR DIGITAL TEXT 3

Academic Readiness or STAAR, online while college readiness exams such as the SAT and

Advanced Placement exams have also now gone digital. This forces students to now be able to

transfer the critical reading strategies to the screen with the added pressure of high-stakes testing.

The focus of this review is to uncover how to insert critical reading strategies in a digital context

while also navigating the inherent challenges of digital distractions that come with the platform.

Review of the Literature

Definition of Digital Critical Reading

Whereas critical reading is comprehension of printed or physical text by interacting with it using

various strategies to engage critical thinking skills, digital critical reading encompasses this in

the realm of online reading. Digital critical reading is not confined to just digitally presented text

or hypertext but also visual and audio media (Citton, 2015).

DIGITAL READING COMPREHENSION

The prevalent target of available research has been how digital text and reading online

have affected students’ understanding and comprehension of the presented information. The

reading stamina of those reading a digital text were much lower than those of reading on paper.

Most of the research has included using short-answer responses to open-ended questions to

determine whether the readers comprehend the questions. Often it is thought that these types of

responses require a deeper understanding of the material to justify their answer or position versus

using multiple choice. However, multiple choice was used in one study, but the results still fell to

the same result in comprehension as the others (Sage et al., 2019).

For college students reading online, Singer & Alexander (2016) suggest that distractions

are affecting comprehension. With the materials being presented online, the availability of off-
CRITICAL READING STRATEGIES FOR DIGITAL TEXT 4

task opportunities contributes to the distraction of students such as web surfing, social media,

and multi-tasking which can affect the focus on the material.

DIGITAL VS TRADITIONAL TEXT

The discussion of how the presentation of text affects comprehension is a common topic

in the literature. In the available comparisons, the data often reflects that comprehension levels

are higher when traditional printed text is given. Readers also reported feeling fatigued when

having to engage with the digital text which in turn puts extra pressure on the cognitive load

(Jeong & Gweon, 2021).

EVOLVING LITERACY

One of the effects of the surge in digital reading is that learning standards are starting to

incorporate the import of digital literacy. Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills or TEKS, the

state learning standards, have started incorporating technology-based texts and other audio/visual

into the different standards as they have been recognized as a need.

Advantages of Using Digital Critical Reading

A vantage point of digital texts is the fluidity and dynamic nature. The layout of the

digital text with graphics, hyperlinks, and additional pages may change how readers consume the

information. Printed texts are considered “a little boring” by students and take more

concentration to get through (Baron, 2017). Since digital texts tend to be non-linear, this creates

a responsibility of the readers to follow a self-driven path of information therefore making the

learning more student-centered (Si et al, 2022). Traditional texts tend to be more static. The

digital texts also give the illusion to readers that materials may not be as long because there

aren’t physical pages for the students to look at but rather a scroll bar.

Barriers to Implementing Digital Critical Reading

CRITICAL READING STRATEGIES FOR DIGITAL TEXT 5

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the socio-economic gap in technology at home came

straight to the forefront. The digital divide, when first introduced, spoke directly to a household

having access to computer hardware and a connection for internet access. As society has

advanced in that more people have access to technology, the notion of a digital divide has

morphed. The phrase now refers more to the pedagogical use of “all of the conditions that

support uses of rigorous academic technology” (Joanna Goode, 2010) meaning that it more than

just having access but more so having a knowledge bank of how to use search engines and other

parts of the Internet and its interface. Research supports that those schools that service students

who are less likely to have access to higher quality internet services at home will also suffer

those same deficits at school. The level of academic expectation of how students interact with

technology and what they are required to achieve with its usage correlates with the affluence of

the socioeconomic backgrounds of the student population (Goode, 2010).

Students struggle with reading stamina with traditional printed text.

While the online text is essentially the same in format, how users access it whether through

e-readers, websites, or other electronic staging is a key variable. Deeper reading strategies

consist of the use of annotating key phrases, writing in the margins, and highlighting. Most

electronic text platforms also have tools for users to incorporate these strategies, but the tool

selections are unique to each platform therefore creating a lack of consistency for readers

(Schugar, Schugar, & Penny, 2011). If a student is required to read an e-textbook through

Amazon’s Kindle, the location and availability of tools will be different from that of an

embedded document in a website if any tools are even available. By not having a consistent

method of retrieving the tools needed for deep reading, it creates a need to constantly adapt the

strategies therefore readers are less likely to engage in the deeper reading.
CRITICAL READING STRATEGIES FOR DIGITAL TEXT 6

Summary

While there is quite a bit of available literature that explores the practice of digital

reading and its effects, there is an open venue for further research especially for the areas of best

practices for instruction using digital text. The current research tends to agree that overall,

without instruction and practice, students will continue to struggle for deeper digital reading

comprehension unless the skills are built. Less time will be spent on the information and

processing it when presented in its digital format (Baron, 2017) (Nielsen, 2008). From reading

stamina, conflicting annotation tools, lack of implicit training for teachers, and other factors;

digital literacy and comprehension is set to continue to be a focal point for the educational

system.

This Review and the Field of Education

With education continuing to move into a digital direction, this review helps to highlight

the considerations that primary and secondary teachers will need to adapt within their instruction.

The topic of digital reading comprehension has been appearing in educational discourse for

nearly twenty years. This will continue to become a more prevalent conversation as the world

continues to transition to digital. As educators consider how to teach these skills, it will likely

start becoming a needed professional development as it is not an explicit skill set that teachers

are trained on how to put into their pedagogy.

Strengths

As per the literature review, there is recognition that critical reading must extend and be

applied to digital text and media. The body of literature on this topic is not limited to the United

States, with extensive research on the need for digital reading comprehension being conducted

globally. This indicates that digital reading comprehension is a crucial educational topic
CRITICAL READING STRATEGIES FOR DIGITAL TEXT 7

worldwide and there will continue to be ongoing research on how to address this need. The

addressing of the cognitive loads of digital text versus hypertext, the low-cost factor of digital

text, and how it affects comprehension are some of the key issues being explored in this field.

With research reaching back to the early 2000s, there is a wealth of discussion on what the

effects are of reading online versus paper-based.

What was not as documented in the literature was how are the obstacles to be combated

within the education field. There is mention of how teachers must change their pedagogy to

purposefully add the skill set needed (Walsh et al 2007; Sage et al, 2019). Another weakness was

that while there is data on comparing the comprehension levels on the presentation of the text,

these studies are often limited to specific age groups and used the same type of informational

text. There was not any comparison data on how readers performed when it came to different

genres such as fantasy excerpts or poetry.

Focus of the Current Study

To equip my students with digital reading skills, I must first make sure that their

foundational skills are in place. If there are gaps, I must assess how to address those before I can

move them to a completely online experience. As a college readiness course, there is focused

instruction on reading strategies such as marking the text and other tried strategies. To best

service these students who will be matriculating to post-secondary institutions, intentionally

incorporating building digital reading competency will have to be included in my planning.

 CRITICAL READING STRATEGIES FOR DIGITAL TEXT 8

References

Baron, N. (2017, October 9). Reading in a digital age. Kappanonline.org.

https://kappanonline.org/reading-digital-age/

Citton, Y. (2015). Learning to read in the digital age: From reading texts to hacking codes.

PMLA/Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 130(3), 743–749.

https://doi.org/10.1632/pmla.2015.130.3.743

Goode, J. (2010). Mind the Gap: The Digital Dimension of College Access. The Journal of Higher

Education, 81(5), 583–618. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40835720

Jeong, Y. J., & Gweon, G. (2021). Advantages of Print Reading over Screen Reading: A

Comparison of Visual Patterns, Reading Performance, and Reading Attitudes across Paper,

Computers, and Tablets. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 37(17), 1–11.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1908668

Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Brønnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus

computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational

Research, 58(58), 61–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.12.002

Nielsen, J. (2008, May 6). How little do users read? Fremont, CA: Nielsen Norman Group.

www.nngroup.com/articles/how-little-do-users-read/

Overstreet, M. (2021). Networked Reading: How Digital Reading Experts Use Their Tools. College

English, 83(5), 357–378. https://doi.org/10.58680/ce202131293

Sage, K., Augustine, H., Shand, H., Bakner, K., & Rayne, S. (2019). Reading from print, computer,

and tablet: Equivalent learning in the digital age. Education and Information

Technologies, 24(4), 2477–2502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09887-2

Schugar, J., Schugar, H., & Penny, C. (2011). A nook or a book: Comparing college students’

reading comprehension level, critical reading, and study skills. International Journal of

Technology in Teaching and Learning, 7(2), 174–192. Retrieved from https://www.the-digital-

reader.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/IJTTLNook.pdf
 CRITICAL READING STRATEGIES FOR DIGITAL TEXT 9

Si, Hodges, T. S., & Coleman, J. M. (2022). Multimodal literacies classroom instruction for K-12

students: a review of research. Literacy Research and Instruction, 61(3), 276–297.

https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2021.2008555

Singer, L. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2016). Reading across mediums: Effects of reading Digital and

print texts on comprehension and calibration. The Journal of Experimental Education, 85(1),

155–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2016.1143794