"It's easier to read on the Internet-you just click on what you want to read.": Abilities and skills needed for reading on the Internet

Education and Information Technologies

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 401-419

  Rasmusson, Maria ^a   Eklund, Monica ^b  

^a MID SWEDEN UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b HALMSTAD UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Multimodality; On line reading; Reading; Text; The Internet

Indexed keywords

EID: 84879795932     PISSN: 13602357     EISSN: 15737608     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10639-012-9190-3     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Aarseth, E. J. (1997). Cybertext: Perspectives on ergodic literature. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
2. Adams, M. J. (1993). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge: MIT Press.
3. Alexandersson, M., Linderoth, J., & Lindö, R. (2001). Bland barnoch datorer: lärandets villkori mötetmed nyamedier. [Among children and computers: the demands of learning meets the new media] Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur.
4. Barton, D. (2007). Literacy: An introduction to the ecology of written language (2nd ed.). Malden: Blackwell.
5. Bereiter, C., & Bird, M. (1985). Use of thinking aloud in identification and teaching of reading comprehension strategies. Cognition and Instruction, 2(2), 131-156.
6. Bergman, M. (1999). På jaktefter högstadieeleversInternetanvändning: enstudie avhögstadieelevers Internetanvändningoch Internetsom kulturelltfenomen iskolan. [On a hunt for senior compulsory school students' Internet use] Licentiate thesis. Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala University.
7. Bolter, J. D., & Gromala, D. (2003). Windows and mirrors: Interaction design, digital art and the myth of transparency. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT.
8. Chan, E., & Unsworth, L. (2011). Image-language interaction in online reading environments: challenges for students' reading comprehension. The Australian Educational Researcher 38(2), 181-202. doi: 10. 1007/s13384-011-0023-y.
9. Coiro, J. (2003). Exploring literacy on the internet: reading comprehension on the internet: Expanding our understanding of reading comprehension to encompass new literacies. The Reading Teacher, 56(5), 458-464.
10. Coiro, J. (2011). Talking about reading as thinking, modelling the hidden complexities of online reading comprehension. Theory Into Practice, 50, 107-115.
11. 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, 24(2), 214-257.
12. Coiro, J., Knobel, M., Lankshear, C., & Leu, D. J. (2008). Central issues in new literacies and new literacies research. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear, & D. J. Leu (Eds.), Handbook of research in new literacies (pp. 1-21). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
13. Education Council. (2006). Recommendation ofthe EuropeanParliament andthe Councilof 18December 2006on keycompetencies forlifelong learning. Brussels: Official Journal of the European Union, 30. 12. 2006.
14. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87(3), 215-251.
15. Findahl, O., & Zimic, S. (2008). Unga svenskaroch Internet 2008 [Young Swedes and the Internet 2008]. World Internet Institute. URL: [http://www. wii. se/publicerat/doc_download/15-unga-svenskar-och-internet-2008. html]. Retrieved 5 August, 2010.
16. Gee, J. P. (2008). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
17. Gordon, C. (1999). Student as authentic researchers: a new prescription for the high school research assignment. School LibraryMedia ResearchOnline, 2. URL: [http://www. ala. org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/aaslpubsandjournals/slmrb/slmrcontents/volume21999/vol2gordon. cfm] Retrieved August 3, 2010.
18. Halliday, M., & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, context and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Geelong: Deakin University Press.
19. Hoover, W., & Gough, P. (1990). The simple view of reading. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 2, 127-160.
20. Internet World Stats. (2011). Internet usagein Europe. URL: [http://www. internetworldstats. com/]. Retrieved February 1, 2011.
21. Kamil, M. L., Mosenthal, P. B., Pearson, D., & Barr, R. (2000). Handbook of reading research, volume III. London: Routledge.
22. Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. New York: Routledge.
23. Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. London: Routledge.
24. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2003). New literacies. Buckingham: Open University Press.
25. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Leino, K. (2003). Computer usage and reading literacy. In S. Lie, P. Linnakylä, & A. Roe (Eds.), Northern lights on PISA (pp. 71-81). Oslo: University of Oslo.
28. Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., & Cammack, D. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the internet and other information and communication technologies. Theoretical Models and Process of Reading, 5, 1570-1613.
29. Leu, D. J., Zawilinski, L., Castek, J., Banerjee, M., Housand, B., Liu, Y., & O'Neil, M. (2007). What is New about the new literacies of online reading comprehension? In A. Berger, L. Rush, & J. Eakle (Eds.), Secondary school reading and writing: What research reveals for classroom practices. Chicago: NCTE/NCRLL.
30. Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. (2009). EUDICO LinguisticAnnotator. URL: [http://www. lat-mpi. eu/tools/elan/]. Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
31. McCarthy, J. D., Sasse, M. A., & Riegelsberger, J. (2004). Could I have the menu please? An eye tracking study of design conventions. People andcomputers XVII-Designing forsociety pp. 401-414. Springer-Verlag: London.
32. Nilsson, N. (2002). Skriv medegna ord: En studieav läroprocessernär eleveri grundskolanssenare årskriver "forskningsrapporter" [Write with your own words: A study of learning processes of students writing "research reports" in the late years of compulsury school](Diss.). Malmö, Sweden: Malmö högskola.
33. OECD (2011). PISA 2009results: Students on line: Digital technologies and performance (Volume VI). URL: [http://dx. doi. org/10. 1787/9789264112995-en].
34. Pressley, M. (2006). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Publications.
35. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.
36. Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In J. V. Wertsch, P. Del Río, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 139-164). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. Stanovich, K. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundations and new frontiers. NY: The Guilford Press.
38. Street, B. V. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
39. Strømsø, H. I., Bråten, I., & Samuelstuen, M. S. (2008). Dimensions of topic-specific epistemological beliefs as predictors of multiple text understanding. Learning and Instruction, 18, 513-527.
40. Walsh, M., Asha, J., & Sprainger, N. (2007). Reading digital texts. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 30(1), 40-53.